lakehouse_create

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

The description adds useful behavioral context beyond the annotations by disclosing that this is a long-running operation and that schemas are enabled by default (preview). It does not explain how to track completion, but the annotations already indicate a mutating, non-destructive operation, and there is no contradiction.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Two tightly written sentences with no wasted words. The core action and long-running caveat are front-loaded, followed by the important schema-default behavior.

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

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

The description adequately covers purpose, workspace scope, long-running behavior, and schema defaults. However, for a long-running operation with no output schema, it lacks guidance on what to do after invocation—such as operation tracking, polling, or how to confirm successful creation.

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

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

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents all four parameters. The description's mention of schemas being enabled by default echoes the enableSchemas parameter but adds no new semantic detail beyond what the schema provides. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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

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

Clearly states the verb 'Create', the resource ('new lakehouse'), and the scope ('in a workspace'). It also flags that this is a long-running operation, which helps distinguish it from lakehouse_get, lakehouse_update, lakehouse_delete, and lakehouse_create_shortcut without inspecting schemas.

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

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

Usage is implied: use this when creating a new lakehouse. However, there is no explicit guidance about when not to use it or how it compares to related alternatives like lakehouse_update or lakehouse_create_shortcut.

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