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

ReliaSim

Reliability and bottleneck simulation for manufacturing lines; run experiments, sweep buffers.

Checks passed
12 / 22

2 failed · 8 not measured

Median response
471 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
7

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?
410
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 471 ms.

  • Pass
    Valid handshake

    protocolVersion 2024-11-05, serverInfo.name reliasim.

  • Pass
    Lists tools

    tools/list returned 7 tools.

  • Fail
    Current protocol

    Negotiated 2024-11-05. The bar is 2025-06-18 or newer.

  • Pass
    HTTPS

    The endpoint URL is https.

Performance

  • Not measured
    Fast (p50)

    Median latency 471 ms over 1 samples in 7 days. The bar is 1000 ms. Need at least 5 samples.

  • Not measured
    Consistent (p95)

    95th percentile 471 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

    9 of 9 parameters have a description (100%). 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 2026-05-27T15:24:49.206409Z, within 180 days.

  • Not measured
    Open-source licence

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

Start using ReliaSim

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 reliasim https://reliasim.com/mcp

Capabilities

Tools 7

compare_chapters

Side-by-side comparison of two chapters — tracks, topology, OEE, throughput, headline bottleneck. Output is sim-derived (no interpretation drift). Use for 'how does X compare to Y?' / 'what's the difference between Constraint-Level and LEDS-Level on the same model?' / 'what changes when we add buffers?' questions. ANTI-FABRICATION: per-chapter OEE/throughput numbers are real reference values; the side-by-side delta is computed from them, not estimated. Quote VERBATIM.

Discovered
explain_concept

Definitional primer for ReliaSim's framework concepts — Constraint, Buffer, Interrupt, Converter, cascading losses, OEE, Gain/Loss methodology, Buffer Tradeoff. Returns bundled theory content, NOT interpretation of any specific simulation run. Use for 'what is X?' / 'how does X work?' / 'explain the framework' questions. For line-specific claims (throughput, availability, what-if), call the sim tools instead.

Discovered
find_bottleneck

Single Run bottleneck analysis for the selected chapter — which node has the worst availability, per-interrupt downtime split, throughput, OEE. All eight chapters return verified saved results. ANTI-FABRICATION: numbers in the response are canonical reference values from real ReliaSim engine runs. Quote them VERBATIM. Do not round, estimate, or recall from training data. For follow-ups about the same chapter, re-call this tool.

Discovered
get_chapter_facts

Structural facts of the selected chapter — topology, rate limits, interrupt distributions, expected efficiency. Use when the user asks about the line's configuration. ANTI-FABRICATION: rates and distributions are verified values from the model file. Quote VERBATIM; do not estimate or substitute training-data recall.

Discovered
get_chapter_narrative

Long-form narrative for the selected chapter — what the chapter adds to the complexity ladder and the key teaching point. Use when the user asks 'walk me through this' or wants the conceptual primer. Pure prose, no numerical claims; safe to summarize.

Discovered
run_buffer_tradeoff

Buffer Tradeoff experiment — sweep a buffer's capacity from 50 → 10,000 units, measure throughput gain. Shows the diminishing-returns elbow for buffer sizing. Only defined on `bs4-ct` and `bs4-leds`; each chapter has THREE inline buffers with different placements (pass `buffer` id to pick one). Compare CT vs LEDS on the same slot to see why interrupt-detail level changes buffer ROI math (e.g. b3: CT +23.7% vs LEDS +64.2%). Use when the user asks 'how big should the buffer be?' / 'do buffers help on this line?' / 'which buffer position gives the most gain?' / 'what's the diminishing-returns point?'. ANTI-FABRICATION (CRITICAL): the specific tradeoff numbers (e.g. CT +23.7% vs LEDS +64.2%) are sweep-derived reference values. Quote VERBATIM in your reply; do NOT recall similar percentages from training data — every buffer position has different math.

Discovered
run_gain_loss

Gain/Loss experiment — disable each interrupt one at a time, measure production recovered. Reveals the ACTUAL impact of each failure mode (Gain ≠ Loss: removing one lets others fire more often). Available on `bs1-leds`, `bs3-leds`, `bs4-ct`, `bs4-leds`. Use when the user asks 'what if we fixed X?' / 'which interrupt matters most if we actually fixed it?' / 'show me the Pareto'. ANTI-FABRICATION: per-interrupt recovered-production numbers come from real ReliaSim engine runs. Quote VERBATIM; the Gain ≠ Loss interaction is exactly the kind of figure LLMs are prone to fabricate — don't.

Discovered

Recent measurements

Probe history

View status
Latest stored probes. Raw probe rows are kept for 14 days.
CheckedResultResponseTools
Connected471 ms7