FlexSim MCP Server

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

flexsim_save_model_as

Save the open FlexSim model to a new .fsm path and continue working there, making the copy the active model so later operations target the new file instead of the original.

Instructions

Save the window model under a NEW path and CONTINUE THERE (window backend only).

True Save-As (a filesystem copy alone would leave FlexSim showing the old file,
diverging bookkeeping from reality): saves the open window, copies the file to
dest_path, OPENS the copy in a new FlexSim window, waits for its title to appear,
then closes the old window (by its exact previous title) and repoints
_gui_model_path/_gui_model_name/_current_model to dest. The new window connects
by itself in ~20 s (On Model Open runs mcp_start()); check flexsim_gui_status.
If the new window never appears, nothing is closed or repointed (safe).
Unlike flexsim_save_model (snapshot copy, state stays), dest becomes active.
Bloquea dest == plantilla (GUI o bridge).

Args:
    dest_path: new .fsm file (must not exist, never the template).

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

A4.6/5.0

Behavior5/5

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 thoroughly: it enumerates the internal sequence (save, copy, open new window, wait for title, close old window, repoint _gui_model_path/_gui_model_name/_current_model), discloses the ~20s reconnect delay, the safe-failure mode ('nothing is closed or repointed'), and the blocked template destination. This is exactly the operational context an agent needs before triggering a side-effecting operation.

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 essential semantic ('NEW path and CONTINUE THERE'), then a parenthetical justification, then the mechanics. It is dense and slightly overpacked, but nearly every clause conveys distinct actionable information rather than restating the name.

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

Completeness5/5

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

An output schema exists, so return values need not be described; the description instead covers the side effects, the timing caveat, the verification path via flexsim_gui_status, and the failure/misuse cases. Nothing an agent needs to invoke this safely is missing.

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 coverage is 0% and the only param is an unconstrained string in the schema, so the description must compensate. It does: 'new .fsm file (must not exist, never the template)' supplies both the format expectation and two hard constraints absent from the schema.

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 precise verb+resource ('Save the window model under a NEW path and CONTINUE THERE') and explicitly scopes it to the window backend. It differentiates itself from the sibling flexsim_save_model by naming the behavioral difference ('snapshot copy, state stays' vs 'dest becomes active').

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?

Clearly names the alternative (flexsim_save_model) and the condition that selects this tool instead ('Continue there' semantics), and points the agent at flexsim_gui_status to verify the new window. It stops short of an explicit when-not-to-use rule beyond the template-path constraint.

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

Deploy Server