Serious warnings 2 confirmed warnings. Checked: 500 reviews, the Android app’s code, the store listing and the privacy label.
From our automated analysis, 30 Oct 2026. Every label links to its evidence in the full report below.
This analysis describes version 1.26.12.1363 of the app (the version number recorded inside the package we inspected), analyzed 2026-10-30 .
The store currently lists version 1.26.12.1363, updated 2026-08-13.
Store screenshots supplied by the developer.
Welcome to Cooking Diner, the madness chef game, the fast-paced tapping Cooking Game, and the brand new Restaurant Game! Come and enjoy the kitchen craze, and experience the cooking fever. Travel to different cooking cities, and feel the craze and madness of a cooking games lover. Cook and Serve food like a crazy chef!
Dash from restaurant to restaurant on this magical map! On this cooking journey, you will discover and unlock many cities as you progress. Begin the cuisines discovery trip and enrich your gourmet food collection. TRY to attract more and more customers and make the restaurants popular again! Let this crazy cooking trip start now!
In this cooking game, you act as a popular master chef and star chef. With the craze for the cooking, you will prepare, cook and serve dishes for hungry customers.…
From the developer’s store description.
For developers and the curious
The evidence, sources, measurements and versions behind every label above.
Findings that met the published evidence standard.
Bundles 16 distinct ad networks / mediation SDKs: Amazon Publisher Services, AppLovin MAX, BidMachine, Chartboost and 12 more
The package embeds several distinct advertising or mediation SDKs — a stack built for ad volume, not for a single house ad.
Package artefact
Appworthy
sha256:455b18e0cab12bb677367f0fdca6d736c57495072adc2980a9a02742e896471dAggressive ad load: raised by 17 distinct reviewers (about 1 in 29 reviews we read)
Advertising volume or placement that interrupts normal use: ads between every action, unskippable or forced full-screen ads.
Specific evidence of a useful property, within the stated scope.
The developer's store data-safety disclosure states that data deletion can be requested; we have not seen a deletion control in the app's own text
The developer's data-safety disclosure on the store states that users can request deletion of their data, or the app's own text offers a way to delete the account. This restates what the developer declares; it is not a test of whether deletion works. Apple publishes no equivalent disclosure, so on an Apple-only listing only the app's own text can support it.
Open observations that have not cleared the evidence bar.
The app's own text says: "Thanks for your interest. We will share more once you're back online."
This observation has not cleared the required evidence standard.
The app's own screens offer a way past sign-up — guest access, skipping, or browsing before registering — rather than gating the product behind an account. The store's privacy disclosure is checked alongside it: that disclosure is self-reported, so it corroborates this credit rather than establishing it.
Package artefact
sha256:455b18e0cab12bb677367f0fdca6d736c57495072adc2980a9a02742e896471dThe app's own text says: "Thanks for your interest. We will share more once you're back online."
This observation has not cleared the required evidence standard.
The app's own copy describes working without a connection — offline mode, downloading for offline use, or content saved for later. Shown because readers filter on it; it is a feature, not a fairness property, and never counts for or against an app.
Package artefact
sha256:455b18e0cab12bb677367f0fdca6d736c57495072adc2980a9a02742e896471d500 reviews read for this analysis. Each observation keeps the sample and store it was based on.
Even though the game was updated on Aug 13th, the ADS are STILL there after every level and no way to purchase the ad free package. I am uninstalling again. I LOVE the game, but I HATE the ads. Where is the icon to pay to stop the ADS. I…
too many adds
Too much ads
A sampled review illustrates one person’s experience. It does not establish a finding on its own.
“Not assessed” means we could not measure it. It is never a zero and never a pass.
Android package 1.26.12.1363, scanned 24 Oct 2026. These describe that package, not the current store version.
Supporting measurements: not a complete list of possible harms or positives. Measurement vocabulary 1.4 · how these are measured
This analysis describes version 1.26.12.1363 of the app (the version number recorded inside the package we inspected), analyzed 2026-10-30 .
The store currently lists version 1.26.12.1363, updated 2026-08-13.
Each store’s release notes, as the developer wrote them. They are the developer’s words, not ours.
• More limited-time events online! • Bugs fixed & optimizations. If you encounter any issues in the game, please feel free to contact us!
No release notes were provided for this version.
cooking-diner-chef-gameAssessed 2026-10-30 from 500 user reviews, the app's package, the store listing and its privacy label.
What the stores publish. Store ratings are the stores’ numbers, not Appworthy’s, and are never averaged across stores.
From the store listing. Billing terms are read from each purchase’s name — the stores don’t publish them — so treat them as a strong hint, not a disclosure.
These are really on sale; we just can’t tell from the name whether they recur.
This assessment is produced automatically. Six independent signals are read — user reviews, SDKs in the app package, the app's own on-screen text, the app manifest, the store listing and the store privacy disclosure — and each candidate finding is filed under the sources that support it.
No charge stands on one kind of evidence — with one published exception. A finding is either a measured fact that anyone can reproduce (an ad SDK is in the package; every recurring plan the store lists is named as weekly, the term read from the purchase names, with a list cut off at the store’s 10-item maximum not assessed; the privacy label omits a tracker we can see), or it is an interpretation — and an interpretation needs independent sources to agree before it reaches the catch list. The exception is a harm only users can see: a charge may publish from reviews alone, as “Reported by N users”, once enough reviewers raise it to clear that charge’s own published bar. That agreement rule is what replaced the human reviewer, not a model’s confidence.
There is no overall score, on purpose. A 0–99 number was published here until 2026-09-15. It was withdrawn because it discriminated too weakly to be the instrument — 44.7% of every pair of apps tied — and because a single number is a verdict where a count is an observation. What publishes instead is a row of measurements, each of which says what was counted and, where we could not look, says that instead.
Findings under One source only are real reports we do not stand behind as findings. They are shown because withholding them entirely would hide a genuine complaint, and labelled because publishing them as charges would be an accusation off a single source.
Write to [email protected], or use the form. Name the finding, the app version and the evidence that needs correcting. Factual corrections are free and never depend on buying anything.