GoHighLevel MCP Server

get_opportunity

Retrieve details of a specific sales opportunity from GoHighLevel CRM by providing its opportunity ID.

Instructions

Get an opportunity

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": {
      "opportunity_id": "<opportunity_id>"
    },
    "name": "get_opportunity"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`opportunity_id`	Yes	Opportunity ID
`response_format`	No	Response format	markdown

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0Jul 14, 2026

TDQS

C2.9/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations exist, and the description gives no behavioral details such as side effects (likely none), authentication requirements, rate limits, or response characteristics. The simple 'get' operation implies read-only behavior, but this is not explicitly stated.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

The description is very concise at one sentence. However, it lacks structure such as bullet points or front-loading of critical details. It is still appropriately sized but could be improved.

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

Completeness2/5

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

Given the presence of two parameters and no output schema, the description does not explain what the tool returns or how to interpret the response. For a retrieval tool, this leaves an important gap in the agent's understanding.

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?

The input schema descriptions cover both parameters ('Opportunity ID' and 'Response format') at 100% coverage. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, so it meets the baseline for adequate parameter documentation.

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

Purpose4/5

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

The description 'Get an opportunity' clearly indicates the action (retrieve) and resource (opportunity). The required 'opportunity_id' parameter implies retrieval by ID, which distinguishes it from 'list_opportunities' which retrieves multiple. However, the description does not explicitly state that it retrieves a single record by ID.

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 usage guidelines are provided. There is no indication of when to use this tool versus 'list_opportunities' or other sibling tools, nor any prerequisites or exclusions.

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