GoHighLevel MCP

ghl_update_phone_number

Update a phone number's settings in GoHighLevel: change its display name and set call forwarding to another number.

Instructions

Update settings for a phone number (friendly name, call forwarding, etc.).

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "numberId": "<numberId>"
    },
    "name": "ghl_update_phone_number"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`numberId`	Yes	The phone number ID to update
`friendlyName`	No	Display label for the number
`callForwardingNumber`	No	Number to forward calls to in E.164 format

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.2.4Aug 2, 2026

TDQS

B3.3/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It says 'update settings' but does not specify whether updates are partial or full, whether the number must already be purchased/owned, or any side effects or response behavior. This is a significant gap for a mutation tool.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

A single, front-loaded sentence that efficiently conveys the tool's purpose with relevant examples. No filler or redundant content.

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

Completeness3/5

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

The description is minimally viable for a simple update tool with well-documented parameters, but it lacks details on update semantics, return values, and prerequisites. The absence of annotations and output schema increases the burden, making this lean but not severely incomplete.

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

Parameters3/5

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

Schema coverage is 100%, and the schema already provides descriptions for friendlyName and callForwardingNumber. The description merely echoes these examples without adding new meaning, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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

Purpose5/5

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

The description clearly states the action ('Update settings') and the target resource ('phone number'), with concrete examples ('friendly name, call forwarding') that match the schema. It distinguishes this from sibling phone number tools like purchase, release, and get by focusing on modification.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as ghl_get_phone_numbers or ghl_purchase_phone_number. The description only implies usage for updating an existing number, but lacks explicit context, prerequisites, or exclusions.

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

Deploy Server