Skip to main content
Glama
FelipeDiazAimar

FlexSim MCP Server

by FelipeDiazAimar
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

flexsim_chart_snapshot

Samples real simulation time series for specified objects and statistics, running the FlexSim model and returning five intermediate values to feed external charts.

Instructions

Sample real time series to feed a chart outside (window backend only).

"Binding" honesto y funcional que SI podemos verificar (ver bloque DB-bind):
NO toca el chart GUI (semantica de sus series no verificada); corre el
modelo (reset + run_to_time) y muestrea get_statistics (_collect_statistics,
Object.stats.<group>.<field> segun AGENTE_FLEXSIM.md sec 7) en N=5 instantes
intermedios (T/5, 2T/5...T).

Vecinas: metricas validadas contra ALLOWED_STATS (como flexsim_chart_bind_stat);
objetos verificados con Model.find (como flexsim_experimenter_status); corrida
con el patron de flexsim_run_to_time (Run Speed slider + stoptime + run +
espera getrunstate()==0).

Args:
    chart: nombre del chart destino (solo etiqueta de salida, no se toca).
    statistics: 1-8 metricas Object.stats.<group>.<field> en ALLOWED_STATS.
    objects: 1-10 nombres de objetos (Model.find debe resolverlos).
    run_to_time: segundos simulados totales T (default 300).
    run_speed: Run Speed slider (window only, default 1000).

Returns JSON {chart, series:{obj:{metric:[v x5]}}, times:[t x5], note}.
Si metricas u objetos fallan, error claro en JSON sin escribir ni correr nada.
Limite: serie real para graficar fuera; el chart GUI se alimenta a mano.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
paramsYes

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations this description carries the full burden and does disclose significant behavior: it runs the model (reset + run_to_time), samples at N=5 fixed instants, leaves the GUI chart untouched, and returns a clear JSON error 'sin escribir ni correr nada' on validation failure. The major side effect (model reset/run) is surfaced. Gaps remain: reversibility of reset and any state destruction of the current model are not stated, and internal references obscure some meaning.

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?

Structure is reasonable (purpose first, then mechanics, Args, Returns, Limite), but the body is verbose and references internal artifacts (DB-bind, AGENTE_FLEXSIM.md) that an agent cannot act on, plus repeated defaults. It could be halved without losing actionable content.

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

Completeness4/5

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

For a complex model-mutating sampling tool it covers purpose, mechanics, args, the JSON return shape, error behavior and the external-chart limit; an output schema exists so return explanation is bonus depth. The reset-reversibility question and the reliance on undocumented internal references keep it from being fully self-contained.

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 coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate and it does: it specifies the statistic format (Object.stats.<group>.<field>, validated against ALLOWED_STATS), the 1-8 / 1-10 cardinalities, that chart is an output label only, and that objects must resolve via Model.find. Defaults for run_to_time/run_speed merely repeat the schema, but the format/constraint detail is genuinely value-adding.

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 opening line states a specific verb and resource ('Sample real time series to feed a chart outside') and the body clarifies the crucial distinction that it does NOT touch the GUI chart, naming flexsim_chart_bind_stat as the contrast. This lets an agent separate it from the chart-binding siblings. The Spanish prose and internal-doc jargon (AGENTE_FLEXSIM.md sec 7) add friction, keeping it below a clean 5.

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?

It states the '(window backend only)' constraint and notes the GUI chart 'se alimenta a mano', which implies when this tool is appropriate. However, it never explicitly routes the agent (e.g. 'use this instead of flexsim_chart_bind_stat when the target chart is external'), and the 'Vecinas' list reads as implementation-reuse notes rather than usage alternatives.

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