Fetch a full UberEats menu using its store UUID, including sections, items, descriptions, prices, and availability.
Get an UberEats store menu. Returns the full menu for an UberEats store: section titles, items, item descriptions, prices, and availability status.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| store_id | Yes | UberEats store UUID, as returned by the search endpoint's storeUuid field |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It does disclose the return payload (section titles, items, descriptions, prices, availability), which is useful behavioral context, but it says nothing about permissions, rate limits, or error behavior for an invalid/unknown store_id.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Two tight sentences, front-loaded with the action and immediately followed by the returned fields. Every clause earns its place, and the second sentence substitutes for an absent output schema.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
For a single-parameter read tool with no output schema, the description supplies the crucial missing piece: what the response contains. Only the lack of any usage/routing guidance keeps it from being fully complete.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema description coverage is 100%, so the single store_id parameter is already fully documented in the schema (including the storeUuid provenance). The description adds no syntax or format detail beyond that, so the baseline 3 applies.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
States a specific verb and resource ('Get an UberEats store menu') and clarifies the scope as the full menu rather than a subset. It implicitly reads differently from siblings like ubereats_store (store details) and ubereats_search, though it never names an alternative explicitly.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
There is no when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no exclusions. An agent must infer that this is the tool to call once it has a store_id, and gets no help distinguishing it from ubereats_store or ubereats_store_reviews.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.