MCP HeartbeatTHE MCP OBSERVATORY
Public workspace

Explore

Evidence for your next connection.

Independent measurements of remote MCP servers. Every observation has a timestamp.

Read-only probes

MCP server · Other

QueueSim

Queueing simulation: M/M/c, staffing, Erlang C checks, and multi-step models built from nodes.

Checks passed
13 / 22

1 failed · 8 not measured

Median response
691 ms

Median of successful probes over 7 days

30-day uptime
Not measured

Share of countable probes over 30 days, including daily rollups. Auth challenges are excluded.

Discovered tools
14

Tool definitions returned by this server

Independent monitoring

Health & checks

Status history

Responded

The server completed its last measured handshake. This is an observation, not a guarantee.

Last checked
Check summary by test group
Test areaPassedFailedUnmeasured
ConnectionCan a client connect and discover tools?
500
Reliability & speedDoes it respond consistently and quickly?
004
Access & authenticationWhat is required to use this server?
102
Tool qualityAre the tool definitions usable by an agent?
400
Publisher identityCan the publisher be traced to its source?
312

Unmeasured means there is not enough evidence to decide. How these checks work

Inspect individual checks 22 recorded

Core

  • Pass
    Reachable

    Latest probe returned HTTP 200 in 691 ms.

  • Pass
    Valid handshake

    protocolVersion 2025-06-18, serverInfo.name queuesim-v1.

  • Pass
    Lists tools

    tools/list returned 14 tools.

  • Pass
    Current protocol

    Negotiated 2025-06-18. The bar is 2025-06-18 or newer.

  • Pass
    HTTPS

    The endpoint URL is https.

Performance

  • Not measured
    Fast (p50)

    Median latency 691 ms over 1 samples in 7 days. The bar is 1000 ms. Need at least 5 samples.

  • Not measured
    Consistent (p95)

    95th percentile 691 ms over 1 samples in 7 days. The bar is 3000 ms. Need at least 20 samples.

  • Not measured
    Reliable (uptime)

    1 of 1 attempts returned a tool list in 30 days (100%). The bar is 99%. Need at least 30 samples.

  • Not measured
    Stable tool list

    Fewer than two successful probes in 30 days, so tool-list stability is not measured.

Access

  • Pass
    Open access

    tools/list succeeded with no credential, and the record declares none.

  • Not measured
    Standard auth

    Auth is not required, so the OAuth metadata check does not apply.

  • Not measured
    Free tier cited

    No publisher quote has been checked.

Tools

  • Pass
    Tools described

    Every tool description is at least 20 characters.

  • Pass
    Valid input schemas

    Every inputSchema is a JSON Schema object.

  • Pass
    Parameters documented

    48 of 58 parameters have a description (83%). The bar is 80%.

  • Pass
    Safety hints

    Every tool sets readOnlyHint or destructiveHint.

Publisher

  • Pass
    Verified namespace

    Listed in the Official MCP Registry.

  • Fail
    Website matches publisher

    The website host does not match the reverse-domain namespace.

  • Pass
    Source repo linked

    A repository URL is on file.

  • Not measured
    Repo owner matches

    This namespace is not an io.github login, so the owner comparison does not apply.

  • Pass
    Recently updated

    Updated 2026-11-10T02:25:36.538592Z, within 180 days.

  • Not measured
    Open-source licence

    The GitHub licence lookup has not returned an OSI result yet.

Start using QueueSim

Connect to this server

Choose your client, copy the configuration, then enable the server in your client’s MCP settings.

Run this command in your terminal, then restart Claude Code.

Claude Code

claude mcp add --transport http queuesim https://queuesim.com/mcp/v1

Capabilities

Tools 14

check_queue_model

Check a QueueSim Cloud model (a multi-step queueing system built from nodes and staff groups) without running it. Returns every problem found (missing links, a line that would grow without limit, plan limits) tied to the node it is about, and a link that opens the model in QueueSim Cloud. Free plan: up to 8 nodes, 3 staff groups, 30 days, 1 run.

Discovered
compare_analytical_vs_simulated

Run the same M/M/c configuration through BOTH the closed-form Erlang-C formula AND the discrete-event simulator, returning a side-by-side comparison with deltas. Use this when the user is validating QueueSim's engine against textbook values, learning queueing theory by watching simulation converge on the formula, or auditing a result that 'feels off' — agreement within ~5% is the canonical sanity check for an M/M/c run. Pure-Exponential M/M/c only; the closed-form Erlang-C is undefined for other service distributions. Large deltas usually mean the simulation run was too short for steady-state — raise simulationDays. ANTI-FABRICATION: both sides come from real computation — closed-form is deterministic, simulation is stochastic but engine-backed. Quote both verbatim. Do not synthesize an 'average of the two' or recompute the formula from training-data recall.

Discovered
compare_separate_vs_pooled

Run the classic operations-research teaching demo: pooled queueing (one shared queue, c servers) vs separate queues (c independent queues, one server each, λ/c traffic to each). Both runs have identical total capacity (c × μ) and identical total arrivals (λ), so the offered load ρ is the same; the only structural difference is whether arrivals share a queue or split into c isolated streams. The pooled configuration ALWAYS produces shorter waits — that's the whole teaching point. Use this when the user asks 'should we pool our resources?' / 'should we cross-train?' / 'why do banks have one line instead of c?' / 'what's the cost of siloing my call center into specialist queues?'. Returns both runs side by side with the pooled-vs-separate wait delta. ANTI-FABRICATION: numbers come from two real DES runs. Quote them VERBATIM.

Discovered
describe_scenario

Return full details for one preset scenario: title, description, teaching note, peak parameters, and per-hour arrival + staffing arrays. Use this before simulate_scenario to understand the default shape and what overrides make sense.

Discovered
explain_advanced_patterns

Return a textbook-level description of six queueing complexity patterns beyond basic M/M/c: abandonment/reneging, priority tiers, overflow routing, skills-based routing, compound service, and server outages. Use this when the user describes real-world complexity (customers hanging up, VIP queues, specialist escalation, agent breaks, transfers) that plain M/M/c doesn't model. The tool frames each pattern conceptually and points users at ChiAha for custom modeling.

Discovered
explain_queueing_theory

Return a ~500-word educational explainer of M/M/c queueing theory: Little's Law, utilization, why averages mislead, how simulation relates to Erlang-C. No inputs. Use this when the user asks a conceptual 'why' or 'how does this work' question rather than asking for a number.

Discovered
interpret_result

Given an M/M/c configuration (arrivalRate, serviceRate, servers) and optionally an observed average wait, returns a queueing-theory framed interpretation: where you sit on the utilization curve, what ρ means in plain language, what one more or fewer server would qualitatively do, and which complexity factors (priority, abandonment, skills routing) might be hiding in real data the M/M/c model can't see. Use this to TEACH while answering — when the user wants context around a number, not just the number itself. Pure text computation, no simulation, no RNG — deterministic output.

Discovered
list_scenarios

List the four pre-built QueueSim scenarios. Returns key, title, and one-line description for each (Single Server, Coffee Shop, Grocery Checkout, Call Center). Call this when the user's problem matches one of the preset shapes — use describe_scenario for more detail and simulate_scenario to run one.

Discovered
queue_model_guide

How to build a QueueSim Cloud model: the node types (arrivals, service, delay, split, settype, bytype, exit), staff groups, distributions, plan limits and a worked example. Call this before check_queue_model or run_queue_model when the user's system has more than one step (several stations in a row, shared staff, routing by percent or customer type, priority customers, people who give up or are turned away). Text only, no simulation.

Discovered
recommend_staffing

INVERSE of simulate_mmc — given an arrival rate, service rate, and a target average wait time, returns the SMALLEST number of servers needed to meet the target. Use this when the user asks 'how many servers do I need?' / 'what staffing keeps wait under N minutes?'. The tool runs a binary search over candidate server counts (up to maxServers, default 50), invoking the simulator for each candidate. Saves Claude from iterating simulate_mmc 3-5 times by hand. If even maxServers servers can't meet the target, the recommendation is null and the response includes the achieved wait so Claude can explain that the target is infeasible at the given load. ANTI-FABRICATION: `recommendedServers` and `achievedAvgWaitMinutes` come from real DES runs. Quote them VERBATIM. Do not propose a different number you think 'feels right'; this tool already binary-searches for the minimum that meets the target. If the user asks 'what if c=N?' for a specific N, call simulate_mmc with that c.

Discovered
run_queue_model

Run a QueueSim Cloud model (a multi-step queueing system built from nodes and staff groups) on the QueueSim Cloud discrete event engine. Returns, per service node: customers joined, served, gave up and turned away, mean and percentile waits in minutes and service levels; per staff group: utilization and busy staff; per exit: count and time in system. Also returns a link that opens the model in QueueSim Cloud to see it drawn and animated. Free plan: up to 8 nodes, 3 staff groups, 30 days, 1 run. Use simulate_mmc or simulate_schedule instead for a single line.

Discovered
simulate_mmc

Run a generic M/M/c queue simulation. Provide an arrival rate (λ, arrivals/hour), a service rate per server (μ, customers/hour each server can finish), and a server count (c). Optional: distribution shapes, service coefficient of variation, run length. Returns per-hour metrics and an overall summary (avg wait, queue length, offered load, throughput). This is the primary tool for 'how many servers do I need?' / 'what's my average wait?' style questions. ALSO preferred over simulate_scenario for what-if questions about scheduled scenarios (Coffee Shop) when the user wants flat uniform numbers — pull the peak params from describe_scenario and run them here. That usually matches user intent better than collapsing a schedule. ANTI-FABRICATION: the returned numbers come from a real discrete-event simulation run. Quote them VERBATIM in your reply. Do not round, estimate, or compute derived figures from training-data recall. If the user asks a follow-up about the same configuration, re-call this tool rather than recalling numbers from earlier in the conversation.

Discovered
simulate_scenario

Run one of the four preset scenarios (single, coffee, grocery, callcenter) with optional overrides. Overrides apply UNIFORMLY across open hours — e.g. setting servers=5 on 'coffee' replaces the 4/6/4 staffing pattern with a flat 5 during open hours (closed hours stay at zero). Use this for (a) faithful reproduction of a scenario's defaults, or (b) uniform scaling (everywhere it was open, use these new numbers). Do NOT use this when the user wants to keep a scheduled scenario's shape but tweak just one part — there's no per-hour override here, and collapsing a 4/6/4 pattern to 5 often isn't what the user meant. For flat what-if analysis on scheduled scenarios, prefer simulate_mmc using peak params from describe_scenario. ANTI-FABRICATION: returned numbers come from a real discrete-event simulation run. Quote them VERBATIM in your reply. Do not round, estimate, or compute derived figures from training-data recall. If the user asks a follow-up about the same scenario+overrides, re-call this tool rather than recalling numbers from earlier in the conversation.

Discovered
simulate_schedule

Run a queueing simulation against an arbitrary 24-hour staffing schedule. Take this when the user describes a custom day shape that doesn't match a preset (e.g., 'my coffee shop is open 6am–10pm with 4 baristas off-peak, 7 at the 8am rush, 5 at the 4pm rush'). Inputs: `arrivalRates` (24-element array of customers/hr per hour-of-day) and `staffing` (24-element array of servers/hr); optional uniform `serviceTimeMinutes`. Use 0 in both arrays for closed hours (terminating system). Returns the same per-hour metrics + summary shape as simulate_mmc / simulate_scenario. Stronger fit than simulate_scenario when the user's shape doesn't match the four presets; stronger fit than simulate_mmc when they need per-hour variation. ANTI-FABRICATION: numbers come from a real DES run. Quote them VERBATIM. Do not round, estimate, or derive from training-data recall.

Discovered

Recent measurements

Probe history

View status
Latest stored probes. Raw probe rows are kept for 14 days.
CheckedResultResponseTools
Connected691 ms14