QueueSim

simulate_scenario

Read-only

Run one of the four preset scenarios (single, coffee, grocery, callcenter) with optional overrides. Overrides apply UNIFORMLY across open hours — e.g. setting servers=5 on 'coffee' replaces the 4/6/4 staffing pattern with a flat 5 during open hours (closed hours stay at zero). Use this for (a) faithful reproduction of a scenario's defaults, or (b) uniform scaling (everywhere it was open, use these new numbers). Do NOT use this when the user wants to keep a scheduled scenario's shape but tweak just one part — there's no per-hour override here, and collapsing a 4/6/4 pattern to 5 often isn't what the user meant. For flat what-if analysis on scheduled scenarios, prefer simulate_mmc using peak params from describe_scenario. ANTI-FABRICATION: returned numbers come from a real discrete-event simulation run. Quote them VERBATIM in your reply. Do not round, estimate, or compute derived figures from training-data recall. If the user asks a follow-up about the same scenario+overrides, re-call this tool rather than recalling numbers from earlier in the conversation.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`name`	Yes	Scenario key from list_scenarios.	coffee
`overrides`	No	Optional overrides applied uniformly across open hours (closed hours preserved at zero for scheduled scenarios). All fields optional — leave empty to run the scenario's published defaults.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`hourly`	Yes
`inputs`	Yes	Echo of the run's parameters.
`summary`	Yes

TDQS

A5/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Despite readOnlyHint=true annotations, the description adds crucial behavior: overrides apply uniformly, closed hours stay zero, and results come from a real simulation requiring verbatim quoting. No contradiction with annotations.

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?

Although lengthy, each section earns its place: purpose, usage boundaries, and anti-fabrication rules. Front-loaded with core function and scannable guidance.

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

Completeness5/5

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

Complete for a simulation tool with rich annotations and output schema. It covers behavioral semantics, alternative tool selection, and critical output fidelity instructions. No gaps.

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

Parameters5/5

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

Schema already covers all parameter fields, but description explains the overrides object's uniform application semantics, replacing patterns like 4/6/4 with flat values—something schema cannot capture. This adds meaningful value beyond field descriptions.

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?

Description opens with a specific verb ('Run') + resource ('preset scenarios') + enumerates the scenarios and overrides. It also distinguishes itself from simulate_mmc, clarifying its unique role.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Explicitly states when to use (faithful reproduction or uniform scaling) and when not to use (per-hour tweaks), and points to simulate_mmc as alternative. This is exemplary guidance.

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

All QueueSim tools Inspect

Try in Browser

RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A4.7/5.0

Disambiguation5/5

Each tool has a clearly distinct purpose: simulation (simulate_mmc, simulate_scenario, simulate_schedule), comparison (compare_analytical_vs_simulated, compare_separate_vs_pooled), inverse analysis (recommend_staffing), interpretation (interpret_result), education (explain_queueing_theory, explain_advanced_patterns), and scenario management (list_scenarios, describe_scenario). No two tools overlap significantly, and nuanced differences are explicitly documented (e.g., when to use simulate_mmc vs simulate_scenario).

Naming Consistency5/5

All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern in snake_case: compare_*, describe_*, explain_*, interpret_*, list_*, recommend_*, simulate_*. Even compound names like compare_analytical_vs_simulated are clearly structured and match the pattern. There are no mixed conventions or vague verbs.

Tool Count5/5

11 tools is well within the ideal 3-15 range and each tool earns its place. The set covers simulation, comparison, recommendation, interpretation, education, and scenario discovery without redundancy or bloat. The count feels right for a queueing theory teaching and simulation server.

Completeness5/5

The tool surface is complete for its stated domain: it offers multiple simulation modes (generic, preset, custom schedule), an inverse staffing finder, analytical-vs-simulation comparison, pooled-vs-separate comparison, interpretation, and educational explainers. There are no obvious dead ends—users can model, validate, understand, and optimize queueing scenarios. The intentional exclusion of advanced pattern simulation is addressed by explain_advanced_patterns pointing to ChiAha.

Resources

Need Help?