rush_ship_env

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. The verb 'Audit' implies a read-only inspection, which is useful, but the description does not explicitly state whether the tool modifies files, what side effects may occur, or how discrepancies are reported.

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

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

A single, front-loaded sentence that states the action and the comparison target with no wasted words. It is concise without sacrificing the core meaning.

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

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

The tool has no parameters and an output schema, so the description only needs to convey the tool's purpose and scope. 'Audit codebase environment variable usage against .env.example' is sufficient for a zero-parameter audit action, though it lacks richer detail about report format or failure behavior.

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

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

The tool has zero parameters, so the description does not need to explain parameter behavior. The baseline of 4 applies because there is no parameter semantics gap to fill.

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

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

The description uses a specific verb 'Audit' with a clear resource: 'codebase environment variable usage against .env.example'. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like rush_secrets or rush_ship_gate by its unique focus on environment variable consistency.

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

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

The description states only what the tool does, with no guidance on when to use it, when not to use it, or which sibling tool might be an alternative. An agent is left to infer the appropriate context from the tool name alone.

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