Skip to main content
Glama
FelipeDiazAimar

FlexSim MCP Server

by FelipeDiazAimar
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

flexsim_save_model

Save the current FlexSim model to its original file, or copy it to an additional path when specified.

Instructions

Save the current model (needs the bridge).

Saves to the file the model was opened from; with save_path, also copies it there.

Args:
    save_path: Optional extra destination for a copy of the saved model

Example:
    save_path="C:/Models/warehouse_v2.fsm"

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

A3.6/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It usefully discloses the bridge dependency and the exact save behavior (writes to the source file, and with save_path writes an additional copy), which is real behavioral value. It stops short of covering failure/permission conditions or overwrite semantics.

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-loads the purpose, then adds the destination behavior, Args, and an example. Sections are labeled and tight with no filler, though the Args/Example scaffolding is slightly formulaic for a single parameter.

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 save tool with an output schema (so return values need no explanation), the description covers purpose, dependency, behavior, and parameter meaning. The main remaining gap is the absent comparison to flexsim_save_model_as.

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%, so the description must compensate, and it does: save_path is described as an optional extra copy destination, with a concrete example path. It adds clear meaning beyond the bare "Save Path" property title. It could still note the expected file format/extension.

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 and resource ("Save the current model") and clarifies the destination semantics (saves to the opened file, optional copy elsewhere), which behaviorally contrasts with the sibling flexsim_save_model_as. However, it never names save_model_as explicitly, so the agent must infer the distinction.

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?

Usage is only implied by the save operation, and a prerequisite is noted ("needs the bridge"). It gives no explicit when-to-use / when-not-to-use guidance and does not point to the obvious alternative, flexsim_save_model_as, for choosing a different destination.

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