Create GoHighLevel Custom Field

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

The description explicitly states 'Write operation,' which aligns with readOnlyHint=false. The warning about live data adds context beyond annotations. No details on idempotence or side effects are given.

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 concise sentences: the first defines the purpose, the second provides an important usage warning. No redundant information, every sentence adds value.

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?

With 12 parameters, no output schema, and several sibling tools (including v2 and folder variants), the description is too minimal. It omits what the tool returns, the models it applies to, and how it relates to similar create tools.

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 only 33%, meaning 8 out of 12 parameters lack descriptions. The description provides no parameter details or examples, failing to compensate for the low coverage.

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 clearly states 'Create a custom field for a GoHighLevel location,' providing a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like ghl_create_custom_field_v2 by name, but does not explicitly differentiate between them in the text.

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?

Includes a warning 'do not run against live data without explicit approval,' which offers some guidance. However, no information is provided about when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., update, v2), or prerequisites like location_id.

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