Yes, we just need the one table exposed... just one more table which has no real reason for not being exposed as it contains no critical information.

Within my own application, I can create a test user but most of my work is for customers. I can't ask every customer to create test users will imaginable custom fields.

I think we agree: these workarounds are no solution.

To make matters worse, in a copy of what seems to be the new SDK, both custom field methods have been dropped. It looks like API support for custom fields is a thing of the past.