feat(litigation-legal): add Scope action-tier vendor dispatch

[jackgillen15-dev]

What this PR does

Adds Scope (bid.scope/legal on the official MCP Registry) to the
litigation-legal plugin's connector list. Scope is the action-tier
dispatch layer for legal-services vendors: court reporters, process
servers, records retrieval, IMEs, expert witnesses, e-discovery,
translation, mediators, trial graphics, foreign-jurisdiction counsel,
and additional legal-services vendor types.

Why

CONNECTORS.md publishes a "Wanted connectors" list whose recurring
theme is action-tier integration with hard irreversibility gates
(e-filing systems are called out explicitly). Scope's MCP server
matches that shape and is operational today.

The litigation-legal skills currently stop at "draft / outline /
framework" and defer execution to "future integration." Direct
quotes from the repo:

• legal-hold/SKILL.md: "Send the notice. Drafts .docx; user sends
  via email per house convention. (Future integration: Gmail/O365
  MCP could send directly after user review.)"
• litigation-legal/README.md: "Without [Gmail and scheduled-tasks
  integrations], outputs are written to files for manual sending"
• subpoena-triage/SKILL.md: "Produces the framework; the letter
  is drafted by user + outside counsel (future: a dedicated
  objections-draft skill)"

This PR closes one part of that gap by routing the vendor-dispatch
step through Scope. Booking, scheduling, and payment all remain
gated on explicit human approval, consistent with this repo's
existing guardrail principle.

Worked example

The deposition-prep skill produces a deposition outline. Today,
after the outline is approved, the user manually sources a court
reporter via phone or email. With Scope configured:

1. The skill (or the user) calls Scope with the deposition's
   jurisdiction, hours, exhibits expected, video flag, transcript
   turnaround.
2. Scope returns up to 5 verified court-reporter options with
   tier-appropriate contact paths and source attribution.
3. The user reviews and selects one (or asks the skill to refine
   the work spec).
4. Scope's award/book tools require explicit human approval before
   firing - the response envelope carries a gate descriptor that
   the client surfaces as a confirmation prompt.
5. On approval, booking confirms. Payment rails (Stripe Connect)
   are wired but do not fire without firm-side confirmation.

The same pattern applies to process serving, records retrieval,
IMEs, expert witnesses, e-discovery, and the other litigation-legal
vendor categories.

ABA Model Rule 7.2 and 5.4 alignment

Scope's design respects ABA Model Rule 7.2 (lawyer marketing /
referrals): vendor options are returned and quoted, not
characterized as preferred or otherwise ranked by the connector.
The commercial model is commission-only from vendor-side, which
is the structural answer to Rule 5.4 (no fee-sharing between
lawyers and non-lawyers). The litigation-legal plugin's existing
"draft for attorney review" framing carries through cleanly.

What's included

• litigation-legal/.mcp.json: add Scope entry; append
  vendor-dispatch to recommendedCategories.
• CONNECTORS.md: add Scope to the Current Connectors table
  under litigation-legal.
• litigation-legal/README.md: one paragraph under Integrations
  describing the connector.

3 files, +13 / -1 lines.

Verification

• Scope's MCP server is live: https://scope.bid/api/mcp/legal
• Registry entry (bid.scope/legal v0.2.2):
  https://registry.modelcontextprotocol.io/v0/servers?search=bid.scope
• npm package (first-published 2026-05-03, current 0.2.2):
  https://www.npmjs.com/package/@scope-bid/scope-mcp
• Public docs: https://scope.bid/mcp/legal

Notes for the reviewer

• The PR deliberately does not touch any skill file. Once Scope is
  in .mcp.json, every skill in the plugin can invoke it. Inline
  per-skill references can come in a follow-up PR if the
  maintainers prefer that pattern.
• The "Wanted connectors" line about court e-filing systems is
  left in place. Scope dispatches to vendors, not to e-filing
  systems, so that wanted-list entry remains open.
• Categories listed are the operational legal-services verticals
  Scope routes today; the list expands as the Scope network grows.

[github-actions]

All contributors have signed the CLA ✍️ ✅
_{Posted by the CLA Assistant Lite bot.}

[jackgillen15-dev]

I have read the CLA Document and I hereby sign the CLA