UberSync MCP Server

Remove Saved Place

remove_saved_place

DestructiveIdempotent

Remove a saved place by its ID. Uber's Rider API does not allow deletion, so this tool reports the limitation rather than deleting.

Instructions

Remove a saved place. Uber’s Rider API currently does not expose saved-place deletion, so this tool reports that limitation.

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": {
      "placeId": "<placeId>"
    },
    "name": "remove_saved_place"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`placeId`	Yes	Saved place ID

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0Sep 2, 2026

TDQS

C2.6/5.0

Behavior1/5

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=true, implying a mutating operation. The description states Uber's API does not expose saved-place deletion and the tool only reports that limitation, implying no mutation actually occurs. This directly contradicts the annotations.

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?

The description is two short sentences with no filler. The intended action is front-loaded and the critical limitation is stated immediately afterward, making it efficient and easy to parse.

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

Completeness3/5

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

The central caveat is present and the tool is low-complexity with one parameter. However, there is no output schema and no detail about how the limitation is reported, what the caller should do with that information, or whether this tool is effectively a stub. Some gap remains.

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

Parameters3/5

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

Schema description coverage is 100%: placeId is described as 'Saved place ID.' The tool description adds no additional meaning about the parameter, so the schema carries the full burden. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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

Purpose3/5

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

The first sentence, 'Remove a saved place,' names a clear action and resource. However, the second sentence reveals the tool cannot actually remove the place and instead reports an API limitation, so the actual purpose is ambiguous between performing removal and surfacing unsupported functionality.

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?

The description gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it state that it should only be used to inform users that deletion is unsupported. There is no mention of when not to call it or what to do instead.

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