Skip to main content
Glama
jamesdsizemore

rush

by jamesdsizemore
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

rush_lint

Lint Python, JavaScript, or TypeScript files at a given path using Ruff or ESLint to get status, findings, and a summary.

Instructions

Lint Python/JS/TS files at . Returns {status, findings[], summary}. Engines: ruff (Python), eslint (JS/TS). status='skipped' means engine not on PATH.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
pathYes
engine_argsNo

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
rawNo
toolNo
engineNo
statusNo
metricsNo
summaryNo
findingsNo
metadataNo
artifactsNo
duration_msNo
review_kindNo
engine_versionNo
review_providerNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv0.2.2
    • 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"
+  }
+]
  2. First observedv0.3.0

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the return contract ({status, findings[], summary}), the engine-per-language routing, and the 'skipped' condition. While not exhaustive, this is solid behavioral transparency for a lint operation.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

Three concise sentences with no filler. The action and target come first, followed by the return shape and the engine/status details. Every sentence adds distinct value.

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

Completeness3/5

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

For a low-complexity tool with an output schema, the core contract is adequately covered. However, engine_args semantics and whether path should be a file or directory are underspecified, leaving optional behavior unclear.

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

Parameters2/5

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

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It clarifies the path parameter by specifying supported languages and engine selection, but it never explains engine_args, the optional array parameter, leaving its behavior entirely to inference.

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

Purpose5/5

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

The description states a specific action ('Lint'), a specific resource ('Python/JS/TS files at <path>'), and engine mapping, which clearly distinguishes it from siblings like rush_format or rush_typecheck. An agent can immediately understand what the tool does.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The description implies when to use the tool: linting supported files at a path with available engines. It also explains the 'skipped' status when an engine is missing, but it does not explicitly contrast this with nearby alternatives or state when not to use it.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools