@GHLLeadsflex honestly the biggest lesson with n8n + GHL is pick one source of truth and push one direction only. real two-way sync between GHL and other platforms turns into update loops and race conditions under load, n8n as the orchestrator pushing into GHL keeps it sane.
concrete bits: the native HighLevel node covers most of it, but GET /contacts is deprecated so for lookups use HTTP Request to POST /contacts/search, and dedupe on email/phone before creating or you pile up duplicates on re-runs. GHL rate-limits ~100 req/10s, so wrap writes in retry + an error workflow, thats the reliable-performance piece.
biggest impact for clients has been AI qualification, score the lead in n8n then write the pipeline stage + a note back to GHL so sales only sees pre-qualified ones.
@GHLLeadsflex one thing that’s saved us a lot of headaches with GHL specifically:
Use the webhook trigger from GHL workflows (not polling) for capturing leads. GHL’s native workflow builder can fire a webhook on form submission or pipeline stage change, which is far more reliable and instant than polling the API on a schedule, and it doesn’t eat into your rate limit budget.
For SMS/email follow-ups, we found it works best to let n8n handle the decision logic (timing, personalization, conditions) but trigger the actual send through GHL’s own workflow/automation engine rather than the n8n node directly, keeps delivery tracking and opt-outs centralized in one place instead of split across two systems.
Biggest lesson for us: log every GHL write (success/fail) to a separate sheet or DB table. When duplicates or sync issues do happen, having an audit trail saves hours of guessing.
I’d keep one tiny lead-state record outside the happy path: source lead id, GHL contact id, dedupe key, last action, and whether the next write is allowed.
The AI scoring part is useful, but the messy bit is proving why a pipeline/SMS write happened when the same lead shows up twice. Are you treating GHL as the source of truth, or just the sales-facing view?