This question, from a relatively inexperienced user, asked "Would you use this (homebrew) spell?"
Thomas Markov rightly identified this as opinion-based and bad-subjective, explained that the question type was not one we used, linked to stack policy on questions to be avoided, suggested that the question could successfully be reformatted as 'is this spell balanced at this level', linked to a list of homebrew balance questions, and linked to a meta question describing that format. All in all wonderful community support.
However, I wonder if we should also suggest a different direction. Perhaps when the OP wrote 'would you use', they meant, 'Is this a useful addition to the spells available, does it fill an unmet need or niche?' Even if they didn't mean that, that seems to me to be an objective question that invites a comparative review of the functionality existing spells and perhaps a good-subjective discussion on challenges, problems, and solutions.
For example, if someone suggested a homebrew spell that offered one day-long protection from the elements and asked whether it fulfilled a hole in the meta, answers might include that there are spells that protect one from elemental damage in combat, but not over an adventuring day, and there are actually design reasons for that.
Is this the type of question that the stack should support? If so, how and when should we encourage posters to ask these types of questions?