rush

by jamesdsizemore

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Python

Local

rush_flaky

Import a local JUnit report or run duplicate test analysis to identify flaky tests in your codebase.

Instructions

Import a local JUnit report or run duplicate test analysis under --allow-slow.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`path`	Yes
`allow_slow`	No
`allow_build`	No
`report_path`	No
`allow_browser`	No
`allow_network`	No
`allow_download`	No
`allow_cache_write`	No
`allow_artifact_write`	No

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`raw`	No
`tool`	No
`engine`	No
`status`	No
`metrics`	No
`summary`	No
`findings`	No
`metadata`	No
`artifacts`	No
`duration_ms`	No
`review_kind`	No
`engine_version`	No
`review_provider`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedv0.2.2Sep 15, 2026

changedOutput schema / properties / metrics / anyOf

Previous value: -[
-  {
-    "additionalProperties": {
-      "anyOf": [
-        {
-          "type": "integer"
-        },
-        {
-          "type": "number"
-        },
-        {
-          "type": "string"
-        }
-      ]
-    },
-    "type": "object"
-  },
-  {
-    "type": "null"
-  }
-]New value: +[
+  {
+    "additionalProperties": {
+      "anyOf": [
+        {
+          "type": "integer"
+        },
+        {
+          "type": "number"
+        },
+        {
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        {
+          "type": "null"
+        }
+      ]
+    },
+    "type": "object"
+  },
+  {
+    "type": "null"
+  }
+]

First observedv0.3.0Aug 30, 2026

TDQS

C2.4/5.0

Behavior2/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the burden of disclosing behavioral characteristics. It only states the actions 'import' and 'run analysis'; it does not explain whether the operation writes state, requires an existing report, is read-only, or what slow mode implies beyond its name.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single sentence with no filler, and the primary action is front-loaded. However, it packs two disjoint operations into one clause and brevity sacrifices necessary detail.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness1/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

A 9-parameter tool with no annotations and only a one-sentence description leaves an agent unable to understand how to select parameters or anticipate side effects. The output schema may clarify return values, but the behavioral and operational context is far from complete.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters1/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0% and there are 9 parameters. The description alludes only to allow_slow via --allow-slow and provides no meaning for the required path, report_path, or the many allow_* boolean flags.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description names two concrete operations: importing a local JUnit report and running duplicate test analysis, with the --allow-slow condition attached to the latter. It does not explicitly differentiate it from sibling test-related tools, but the verb+resource framing is reasonably clear.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No guidance is given on when to prefer rush_flaky over rush_test, rush_test_heal, or other testing-related siblings. The only contextual hint is the --allow-slow flag, which signals a mode rather than a usage criterion.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Deploy Server