Another way to interpret this question is to realise that the Bell/CHSH inequalities are indeed a special instance of a much more general formalism, where one can consider the set of all possible behaviours, that is, the set of possible conditional probability distributions between two parties: $\{p(ab|xy): a,b,x,y\}$, where $a,b$ represent possible measurement outcomes, and $x,y$ corresponding choices of measurements. What and how many values $a,b,x,y$ can take depends on the context; in the simplest scenario, they're all binary variables.
Then the fundamental observation is that the set of local realistic theories is a convex set in this space of behaviours, hence its boundarycan be characterised by linear inequalities. That is precisely what the CHSH inequality you might have seen is all about. A good way to see it is to realise that the $S$ operator you see in that context can be equivalently written as a linear combination of probabilities of the form
$$S\equiv \sum_{abxy} (-1)^{ab+x+y}p(ab|xy).$$
See this other answer of mine for more details on this.
In other words, the CHSH inequality corresponds to a (hyper-)plane separation, in this space of possible behaviours, between the set of local realistic theories and the other behaviours. In scenarios with only two inputs and two outputs, one can see the CHSH boundary is also the only nontrivial such boundary, so it's indeed quite "general" in this sense. The situation gets much richer as soon as you consider different scenarios (more inputs and/or more outputs), and you can get a whole bunch of inequalities that describe the set of local realistic behaviours in those instances.
It's worth noting a crucial difference between what "general" means here vs the uncertainty principle you're referring to. The uncertainty principle is a statement you can make about variances of any pair of observables: $\operatorname{Var}(A)\operatorname{Var}(B)\ge|\langle AB\rangle-\langle A\rangle \langle B\rangle|^2$ for any pair of Hermitian operators $A,B$. On the other hand, Bell inequalities, at least from the point of view I'm referring to here, are statements about whole theories. You don't associate a Bell inequality with an operator or set of operators. You associate a Bell inequality (or set of such inequalities) to bound the set of possible correlations a theory can produce. Where "theory" means here a loosely defined set of possible physical explanations (i.e. local realistic theories, or nonlocal theories, etc).