FlexSim MCP Server

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

flexsim_processflow_inventory

List ProcessFlow activities read-only to inspect class and connection counts, enabling safe process analysis without creating or modifying objects.

Instructions

List ProcessFlow activities read-only (window backend only, never creates).

Solo lectura (a diferencia de flexsim_processflow_ping que puede crear):
lista subnodos del ProcessFlow + por cada actividad su clase y conteo de
conexiones (inObjects/outObjects length). Nunca crea nada.

Args:
    name: ProcessFlow object name (default ProcessFlow1).

Returns JSON {exists, activities: [{name, class, in_count, out_count}], note}.

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

A4.3/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden and does well: it repeatedly asserts read-only ('Solo lectura', 'Nunca crea nada', 'never creates') and flags the window-backend constraint. It does not cover permissions, rate limits, or failure behavior when the named ProcessFlow is absent.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

Front-loaded with the core read-only claim and the sibling contrast before the Args/Returns blocks, so the important information comes first. The bilingual duplication of the read-only message makes it longer than strictly necessary, though every sentence still carries meaning.

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 one-parameter read tool, the description covers what it reads, its safety profile, its parameter, and its return shape, and an output schema also exists so return values need not be spelled out further. The remaining gap is failure/absence handling for a nonexistent ProcessFlow name.

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?

The single 'name' parameter has 0% schema description coverage, so the description must compensate: it states the meaning ('ProcessFlow object name') and the default ('ProcessFlow1'), which the schema only encodes as a machine-readable default. It omits any note about the pattern/length constraints the schema enforces.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('List ProcessFlow activities read-only') with explicit scope: subnodes plus each activity's class and connection counts. It also names the sibling flexsim_processflow_ping and how this tool differs from it, so an agent can route without opening either schema.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

The description contrasts this tool against flexsim_processflow_ping ('a diferencia de ... que puede crear'), which is an explicit condition for choosing the read-only variant, and notes it is 'window backend only'. It stops short of a full when/when-not statement, but the routing cue is clear.

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

Deploy Server