Will AI replace Cooks, Short Order?
Food Preparation and Serving Related · O*NET 35-2015.00
Task exposure index for this occupation
Averaged across the week, this work sits at the low end of the exposure scale — most of it is not the kind current systems do well. O*NET breaks Cooks, Short Order into 13 distinct work activities. Weighted by how much of the week each one takes, 6% of the job sits at or above the threshold where current systems can do the task end to end. The single largest contributor is "Cook foods", which scores 16 and takes roughly 22% of the week. That is the average for the job title. It is not a measurement of any particular person’s week, and the difference between the two is usually larger than the difference between job titles.
Model v1.2 · activity indices last updated 18 August 2026
What this occupation does
Prepare and cook to order a variety of foods that require only a short preparation time. May take orders from customers and serve patrons at counters or tables.
The most exposed parts of the job
Scored 0–100 on how completely a current system could perform the activity.
- Process customer bills or payments.70
About 2% of a typical week
- Take customer orders.70
About 4% of a typical week
- Maintain food, beverage, or equipment inventories.52
About 6% of a typical week
- Order materials, supplies, or equipment.52
About 3% of a typical week
- Coordinate timing of food production activities.26
About 9% of a typical week
The least exposed parts
The same scale. These are the activities current systems handle worst.
- Clean food preparation areas, facilities, or equipment.5
About 24% of a typical week
- Serve food or beverages.14
About 5% of a typical week
- Prepare breads or doughs.16
About 4% of a typical week
- Arrange food for serving.16
About 5% of a typical week
- Cook foods.16
About 22% of a typical week
How far off the rest is
Of those 13 activities, 2 can be performed by systems available today and 9 are outside what current approaches do at all. The remaining 2 sit in between — demonstrated in research or in narrow products, but not something you can hand over whole. We do not put dates on that middle group, because nobody can.
Compared with similar occupations
The nearest scoring roles in Food Preparation and Serving Related.
- Cooks, Short Order (this page)20
- Food Preparation Workers22
- Dining Room and Cafeteria Attendants and Bartender Helpers19
- Cooks, Fast Food23
Why your own number is different
Two people with the title "Cooks, Short Order" can spend their weeks on almost entirely different parts of this list, and the parts they choose move the number far more than the title does. Who signs off when the work is wrong, whether the job needs you physically present, and how fast you have picked up the tools all change it again — and none of that is in an occupation average.
The assessment asks you to divide your own week across these activities and answer fourteen questions about the parts of the job an occupation average cannot see. It takes six to nine minutes.
Score my own roleFree to take. The full report is a paid subscription — the price and its terms are on the pricing section, before you start.
Questions
Will AI replace Cooks, Short Order?
We do not answer that, because nobody can. What is measurable is how much of the work is already doable by machine: for Cooks, Short Order, about 6% of a typical week, across 13 activities. The other 94% is not, and what happens to the job depends on things this index does not contain — cost, regulation, who carries the liability, and what the people doing it decide to do next.
What part of this job is most exposed?
"Process customer bills or payments" — it scores 70 out of 100 on task automatability and takes roughly 2% of the week.
What part is least exposed?
"Clean food preparation areas, facilities, or equipment", at 5 out of 100. Work like that is where the hours you protect tend to be worth the most.
Where do these numbers come from?
The activity list and the time weights come from O*NET 30.3, the US Department of Labor's occupational database. The exposure score for each activity is ours, from a published model — the weights, the priors and the limitations are all on the methodology page. No language model is involved in the arithmetic.
Does this apply to my job?
Only roughly. This is the average for the title, and the number that matters is the one for the week you actually work. The assessment asks you to divide your own time across these activities and answer fourteen questions about accountability, the parts of the job that need you specifically, and how fast you have adapted. That produces a different number, and usually a more useful one.
The full model — the weights, the priors and what it cannot see — is on the methodology page.