uber-mcp

Reservation details

uber_reservation

Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve an Uber reservation by ID to view status, pickup time/zone, driver assignment, and trip ID; missing data does not prove cancellation.

Instructions

Read a reservation by reservation_id (from booking or uber_trips.upcoming). Returns Uber's status, pickup time/zone, driver assignment and trip ID. Missing data is not proof of cancellation.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "id": "<id>"
    },
    "name": "uber_reservation"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`id`	Yes

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Addedv0.4.1Oct 27, 2026

TDQS

A4.5/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare this read-only, idempotent, non-destructive and open-world, so the safety bar is low. The description adds genuine behavioral nuance with the caveat 'Missing data is not proof of cancellation', warning against a false negative inference an agent would otherwise likely make.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Three short clauses, front-loaded with the action and key parameter, then the return contents, then the caveat. No filler or restatement of the title.

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?

A single-parameter read tool with a full output schema and complete annotations; the description supplies the id provenance and the failure-mode caveat, which are the only things structured fields cannot convey. Nothing needed for correct invocation 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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must carry the parameter meaning — and it does, explaining that the id is a reservation identifier sourced from booking or uber_trips.upcoming. It also disambiguates the generic schema key 'id' as a reservation_id, though it doesn't restate the 36-character constraint.

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 and resource ('Read a reservation by reservation_id') and enumerates what comes back: status, pickup time/zone, driver assignment, trip ID. Naming uber_trips.upcoming as an id source also implicitly separates it from the trip-listing siblings.

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?

Gives clear usage context by specifying where the id originates (booking flow or uber_trips.upcoming), which is exactly the prerequisite an agent needs. It stops short of naming explicit alternatives or exclusions (e.g., use uber_cancel_reservation to cancel, uber_ride_status for in-progress rides).

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

Deploy Server