UberSync MCP Server

Get Ride Options

get_ride_options

Read-onlyIdempotent

List real Uber ride types and current pickup ETAs at any location, optionally with a destination, to compare options before booking.

Instructions

List the real Uber products and current pickup ETAs available at a location.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

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

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`pickup`	No
`destination`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0Sep 2, 2026

TDQS

C2.9/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already mark it read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive, so no extra safety disclosure is required. The description adds useful 'real' and 'current' context—live products/ETAs, not estimates—but omits response shape and whether both pickup and destination are needed.

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?

Single sentence, no filler, and front-loaded with the verb and object. Every word earns its place, even though the description is minimal.

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

Completeness2/5

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

For a tool with two optional and complex location parameters, no output schema, and many nearby siblings, this one-sentence description is insufficient for reliable invocation. It leaves parameter semantics and when-to-use to be inferred, although the clear purpose and safe annotations keep it from being a total failure.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters1/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description needed to compensate, but it does not mention pickup or destination at all. The nested schema descriptions are helpful, yet the tool description leaves unclear why two optional locations exist and what happens with no arguments.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb ('List'), a concrete resource ('real Uber products and current pickup ETAs'), and a location scope. It is clear on its own, but does not explicitly name or contrast nearby siblings such as get_price_estimate or estimate_ride, so the differentiation is implied rather than stated.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No guidance about when to prefer this over get_price_estimate, estimate_ride, or get_fare_breakdown. The phrase 'pickup ETAs' hints at a use case, but the description does not state exclusions, prerequisites, or alternatives.

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