lakehouse_list_shortcuts

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, covering the safety profile. The description adds that the operation lists 'all' shortcuts, indicating an unfiltered scope, but does not disclose return format, pagination, or potential performance traits. No contradiction with annotations.

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?

The description is a single seven-word sentence: 'List all OneLake shortcuts in a lakehouse.' It is front-loaded with the verb, concise, and every word contributes to meaning.

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?

For a simple, read-only, two-parameter list operation, the description provides enough context for selection and invocation. It does not describe return fields or pagination, but absent an output schema and given the straightforward nature of a list-all tool, this is a minor gap rather than a critical omission.

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%: both workspaceId and lakehouseId have descriptions already. The description only reinforces that the listing occurs within a lakehouse, adding no new parameter-level meaning.

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?

The description states a specific verb ('List'), a specific resource ('OneLake shortcuts'), and a scope ('in a lakehouse'). It clearly distinguishes itself from siblings like lakehouse_list_tables (tables) and lakehouse_get_shortcut (a single shortcut).

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?

The verb and resource imply usage: an agent should select this tool when it needs to enumerate shortcuts in a lakehouse. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it, leaving some inference required despite the suggestive sibling names.

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