Reliability and bottleneck simulation for manufacturing lines; run experiments, sweep buffers.
Scored across 7 tools
The tools mostly target clearly distinct needs: chapter comparison, concept explanation, bottleneck analysis, structural facts, narrative, and two named experiments. The main overlap is between find_bottleneck and run_gain_loss, since both concern interrupt impact, but the descriptions distinguish current-state bottleneck analysis from counterfactual gain/loss sweeps.
All tool names follow a consistent snake_case verb_noun pattern: compare_chapters, explain_concept, find_bottleneck, get_chapter_facts, get_chapter_narrative, run_buffer_tradeoff, run_gain_loss. The verbs are predictable and the nouns identify the target resource or experiment.
Seven tools is well-scoped for a simulation analysis server. Each tool maps to a distinct user question type, and there are no redundant or filler tools.
The surface covers concept explanation, chapter metadata, comparison, bottleneck diagnosis, and two key experiment types, which is strong lifecycle coverage for this domain. Minor gaps remain: there is no tool to list or select chapters, and experiment availability is limited to specific chapters, so an agent may need to know state implicitly.
Side-by-side comparison of two chapters — tracks, topology, OEE, throughput, headline bottleneck. Output is sim-derived (no interpretation drift). Use for 'how does X compare to Y?' / 'what's the difference between Constraint-Level and LEDS-Level on the same model?' / 'what changes when we add buffers?' questions. ANTI-FABRICATION: per-chapter OEE/throughput numbers are real reference values; the side-by-side delta is computed from them, not estimated. Quote VERBATIM.
Inputs: chapter_a (required), chapter_b (required).
Definitional primer for ReliaSim's framework concepts — Constraint, Buffer, Interrupt, Converter, cascading losses, OEE, Gain/Loss methodology, Buffer Tradeoff. Returns bundled theory content, NOT interpretation of any specific simulation run. Use for 'what is X?' / 'how does X work?' / 'explain the framework' questions. For line-specific claims (throughput, availability, what-if), call the sim tools instead.
Inputs: concept (required).
Single Run bottleneck analysis for the selected chapter — which node has the worst availability, per-interrupt downtime split, throughput, OEE. All eight chapters return verified saved results. ANTI-FABRICATION: numbers in the response are canonical reference values from real ReliaSim engine runs. Quote them VERBATIM. Do not round, estimate, or recall from training data. For follow-ups about the same chapter, re-call this tool.
Inputs: chapter.
Structural facts of the selected chapter — topology, rate limits, interrupt distributions, expected efficiency. Use when the user asks about the line's configuration. ANTI-FABRICATION: rates and distributions are verified values from the model file. Quote VERBATIM; do not estimate or substitute training-data recall.
Inputs: chapter.
Long-form narrative for the selected chapter — what the chapter adds to the complexity ladder and the key teaching point. Use when the user asks 'walk me through this' or wants the conceptual primer. Pure prose, no numerical claims; safe to summarize.
Inputs: chapter.
Buffer Tradeoff experiment — sweep a buffer's capacity from 50 → 10,000 units, measure throughput gain. Shows the diminishing-returns elbow for buffer sizing. Only defined on bs4-ct and bs4-leds; each chapter has THREE inline buffers with different placements (pass buffer id to pick one). Compare CT vs LEDS on the same slot to see why interrupt-detail level changes buffer ROI math (e.g. b3: CT +23.7% vs LEDS +64.2%). Use when the user asks 'how big should the buffer be?' / 'do buffers help on this line?' / 'which buffer position gives the most gain?' / 'what's the diminishing-returns point?'. ANTI-FABRICATION (CRITICAL): the specific tradeoff numbers (e.g. CT +23.7% vs LEDS +64.2%) are sweep-derived reference values. Quote VERBATIM in your reply; do NOT recall similar percentages from training data — every buffer position has different math.
Inputs: buffer, chapter.
Gain/Loss experiment — disable each interrupt one at a time, measure production recovered. Reveals the ACTUAL impact of each failure mode (Gain ≠ Loss: removing one lets others fire more often). Available on bs1-leds, bs3-leds, bs4-ct, bs4-leds. Use when the user asks 'what if we fixed X?' / 'which interrupt matters most if we actually fixed it?' / 'show me the Pareto'. ANTI-FABRICATION: per-interrupt recovered-production numbers come from real ReliaSim engine runs. Quote VERBATIM; the Gain ≠ Loss interaction is exactly the kind of figure LLMs are prone to fabricate — don't.
Inputs: chapter.
Recent tool additions, removals, and schema changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Loading tool schema changelog…
Queueing simulation: M/M/c, staffing, Erlang C checks, and multi-step models built from nodes.
Healthcare staffing simulator — ED, walk-in clinic, and appointment office DES tools.
Supply-chain network design via simulation, optimization, and greenfield analysis.
Build, run and analyse block-diagram simulations: PID, Bode, FFT, optimisation and code export.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
