Skip to main content
Glama

rush_load

Import a local load report to inspect findings, or execute load traffic against target URLs with network enabled to assess performance.

Instructions

Import a local load report or execute load traffic under --allow-network.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
vusNo
pathYes
scriptNo
optionsYes
allow_slowNo
target_urlNo
allow_buildNo
report_pathNo
allow_browserNo
allow_networkNo
allow_downloadNo
timeout_secondsNo
duration_secondsNo
allow_cache_writeNo
allow_artifact_writeNo

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. Changed6 schema fields changedv0.2.2
    • addedInput schema / properties / duration_seconds
      Added value: +{
      +  "anyOf": [
      +    {
      +      "type": "integer"
      +    },
      +    {
      +      "type": "null"
      +    }
      +  ],
      +  "default": null,
      +  "title": "Duration Seconds"
      +}
    • addedInput schema / properties / script
      Added value: +{
      +  "anyOf": [
      +    {
      +      "type": "string"
      +    },
      +    {
      +      "format": "path",
      +      "type": "string"
      +    },
      +    {
      +      "type": "null"
      +    }
      +  ],
      +  "default": null,
      +  "title": "Script"
      +}
    • addedInput schema / properties / target_url
      Added value: +{
      +  "anyOf": [
      +    {
      +      "type": "string"
      +    },
      +    {
      +      "type": "null"
      +    }
      +  ],
      +  "default": null,
      +  "title": "Target Url"
      +}
    • addedInput schema / properties / timeout_seconds
      Added value: +{
      +  "anyOf": [
      +    {
      +      "type": "integer"
      +    },
      +    {
      +      "type": "null"
      +    }
      +  ],
      +  "default": null,
      +  "title": "Timeout Seconds"
      +}
    • addedInput schema / properties / vus
      Added value: +{
      +  "anyOf": [
      +    {
      +      "type": "integer"
      +    },
      +    {
      +      "type": "null"
      +    }
      +  ],
      +  "default": null,
      +  "title": "Vus"
      +}
    • 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

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 carries the full burden. It mentions the --allow-network flag but does not disclose side effects, whether it executes arbitrary code, resource impact, or what the import does to existing state. A load-testing tool typically runs scripts and may be resource-intensive; none of that is disclosed.

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

Conciseness3/5

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

The description is a single sentence and is not verbose, so it is concise. However, it under-specifies the tool's behavior and offers no structure (e.g., bullets or sections) to organize the two modes. It is not over-wordy but is too thin to be considered well-structured.

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?

With 15 parameters, 2 required, and zero schema descriptions, the description is severely incomplete. It does not explain the required 'options' parameter, the meaning of the boolean flags, timeout/duration, or what the output schema contains. An agent cannot correctly invoke this tool without guessing.

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 the description does not explain any of the 15 parameters. It does not clarify what 'path', 'options', 'vus', 'duration_seconds', or the various allow_* flags mean. The description fails to compensate for the schema's lack of property descriptions.

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 states a clear action: import a local load report or execute load traffic, with the network gate mentioned. It is not a tautology and conveys the core function. However, it does not distinguish itself from rush_benchmark or other load-related siblings, and 'load report' vs 'load traffic' is slightly ambiguous without context.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention rush_benchmark or any other sibling, nor does it state prerequisites or typical use cases. The only hint is the network flag requirement, which is not a usage guideline.

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