---
id: ADR-ACC-BKS-005
title: No custom-field capability in the examined configuration
product_area: accounting
module: books
revision: 1
status: proposed
design_intent: assumed
source_sha:
  services-accounting: f47cb263875bbc0c5640fba7dae6785ec32695f8
  react-console: baf6dae382d6f41dce976c7f848667ccc37e076f
decision: >-
  Books declares no custom-field capability. Unknown request properties are
  rejected, and department and project requests explicitly refuse custom-field
  values.
constrains:
  - DOM-ACC-BKS-001
  - DOM-ACC-BKS-002
  - DOM-ACC-BKS-003
  - DOM-ACC-BKS-004
  - DOM-ACC-BKS-006
  - SCR-ACC-BKS-001
  - SCR-ACC-BKS-003
origin: >-
  R2-ARCH-001 (custom-field capability standard, as cited by other corpus
  modules; not read in this job: FND-ACC-BKS-044)
alternatives:
  - option: Enable custom fields for units or accounts.
    why_not: >-
      A product need and an explicit capability declaration have not been
      established in the examined sources.
  - option: Add a private extension column.
    why_not: >-
      The cited standard favors shared definitions and value storage; its full
      text remains outside this examination.
consequences:
  - >-
    These configuration records do not currently expose Platform custom-field,
    form or layout features.
  - >-
    Adding customer-defined attributes requires an explicit capability decision
    and a compatible persistence contract.
supersedes: []
evidence:
  - >-
    services-accounting at f47cb263:
    modules/books/metadata/business-units.object.ts
  - >-
    services-accounting at f47cb263: modules/books/aws/api/schema-helpers.ts
    (strict schemas)
  - >-
    services-accounting at f47cb263:
    modules/books/tests/e2e/accounting-projects.e2e.spec.js#answers 400 to
    custom field values, which Accounting does not carry yet
---

# No custom-field capability in the examined configuration

## Context

The registered business-unit object omits the custom-field capability, and configuration requests use strict schemas. This is an implementation observation rather than approval of a permanent exclusion.

## Decision

Books declares no custom-field capability. Unknown request properties are rejected, and department and project requests explicitly refuse custom-field values.

## Alternatives Considered

Enable custom fields for units or accounts. A product need and an explicit capability declaration have not been established in the examined sources.

Add a private extension column. The cited standard favors shared definitions and value storage; its full text remains outside this examination.

## Consequences

These configuration records do not currently expose Platform custom-field, form or layout features.

Adding customer-defined attributes requires an explicit capability decision and a compatible persistence contract.