FlexSim MCP Server

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

flexsim_collector_record

Diagnose a FlexSim collector's structure and validate its statistic mapping read-only, without sampling or writing configuration, to verify setup before recording.

Instructions

Diagnose a collector's structure, read-only: never samples nor writes (dual backend).

Tool de DIAGNOSTICO (no promete muestreo): NO escribe configuracion interna
del collector (semantica desconocida, bloque DB-bind). Reusa el helper
existente _chart_inspect_map (misma inspeccion de flexsim_chart_inspect)
para volcar data_nodes del collector si existe.

Args:
    collector: collector a inspeccionar (Model.find debe resolverlo).
    source_object: objeto que produciria el dato (Model.find debe resolverlo).
    statistic: Object.stats.<group>.<field>, validado contra ALLOWED_STATS
        (ver AGENTE_FLEXSIM.md sec 7); no bloquea, se reporta como
        statistic_validated true/false.
    event: evento nominal (default "OnReset"), solo informativo: no se
        conecta nada.

Returns JSON {recorded:false, collector, source_object, statistic, event,
statistic_validated, collector_structure:{kind, subnodes, variables,
data_nodes}, suggestion, note}. recorded siempre false. Si collector o
source_object no existen, error claro con recorded:false. No escribe nada.
Limite: de donde lee/muestrea cada collector solo se sabe viendo el modelo
real; lo no verificable queda como limite.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`params`	Yes

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Oct 5, 2026

TDQS

A3.7/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does so well: read-only, never writes, never samples, error behavior (recorded:false plus a clear error when collector/source_object are unresolved), and an explicit limitation about what can't be verified. It omits any permission/auth considerations, keeping it from a 5.

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 Args/Returns structure is helpful and the read-only constraint is front-loaded, but the text is bilingual and repetitive ('no escribe nada', 'recorded siempre false' restated), and it leaks internal implementation details (_chart_inspect_map, AGENTE_FLEXSIM.md sec 7) that waste space for an agent.

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?

An output schema exists, so explaining the return shape is not strictly required, yet the description still fully characterizes behavior, error cases, and known limitations. For a diagnostic tool with no annotations it is complete enough to invoke correctly, with only minor gaps around permissions.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema description coverage is 0% (property-level descriptions are absent), so the description must compensate — and it does, defining collector and source_object as Model.find-resolvable names, statistic as Object.stats.<group>.<field> validated against ALLOWED_STATS, and event as nominal/informative only with a default. This adds substantial semantics beyond the schema's patterns and length limits.

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?

States a specific verb+resource — 'Diagnose a collector's structure, read-only' — and immediately disambiguates from the name's misleading 'record' (it neither samples nor writes). This lets an agent separate it from flexsim_collector_create, though it does not explicitly contrast itself with sibling inspection tools like flexsim_chart_inspect.

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 implies usage (structural diagnosis of a collector, no writes, no sampling) and hints at reuse of an existing inspect helper, but never explicitly says when to pick this over flexsim_collector_create, flexsim_chart_inspect, or flexsim_chart_bind_stat. No clear when-not guidance or named alternative is given.

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

Deploy Server