Learning-augmented algorithms have emerged as a powerful paradigm to surpass traditional worst-case lower bounds by integrating potentially noisy predictions. While this framework has seen success in online scheduling, existing work primarily optimizes job latency while relying on frequent, ``blind'' preemptions. This ignores the fundamental trade-off between algorithmic performance and preemption complexity. We provide the first systematic study of learning-augmented scheduling that curbs preemption while optimizing latency. We establish that the gap between theoretical latency bounds and preemption overhead can be bridged with solid analytical foundations. Our results include $O(1)$-competitive algorithms for single and unrelated parallel machines with only $O(1)$ preemptions per job under accurate predictions, with overhead scaling logarithmically with the prediction error. By providing the first bounded-preemption guarantees for unrelated and malleable machines, we extend the theoretical reach of the learning-augmented framework to more constrained and realistic settings. Finally, our algorithms are validated through experiments.