Automation issues with updating a custom field

[Jeremy Jones]

Hi all,

I created some automation to amend a list of approvers, based off the type of work item. What I have noticed is that often the automation is failing and throwing an error in the audit log, but the reason does not make sense. 

This is the error from the audit log, however the field does definitely exist and is available within the project. I know this as it sometimes works and sometimes does not - for the same work item types and within the same project. It appears completely intermittent. Sometimes it throws the above error however the automation works ?!?!?! Occasionally the users will clone a working ticket, only to have the automation fail in the new ticket.

For reference, this is the audit log for the exact same type of work item within the same project.

This is 1 of 2 automation rules that perform a similar function (based on what type of work item)

The Delay and re-fetch items above were added in my attempts to fix this issue as I thought it may be caused by some sort of lag issue within Jira during the status transition. 

The field is a global field and is used in every project within the company - likewise with the work item. 

I have checked Solved: "Some of the set fields aren't available" error in... and How to Fix "Unknown Fields" Error in Jira Cloud Automation Rules | Jira and Jira Service Management | Atlassian Support but they dont appear to solve my issue as far as I can tell.

I am not very technical so I could be missing something quite simple but logically it doesn't make sense to me.

Anyone able to assist?

[Sebastian Quesada Ocampo]

Hi @Jeremy Jones 

From what can be seen in the rule flow and the audit logs, the automation is correctly configured and the condition is being met. The failure occurs specifically at the “Edit work item fields” step, where Jira reports:

“Edited work item successfully, however some of the set fields aren't available”
Fields ignored: Change And Deployment Approvers

The key point here is that the field does exist and is correctly configured, as evidenced by the fact that:

• I understand that in some cases (e.g. IS-12615) the rule runs successfully
• In other cases (e.g. IS-12609) it fails intermittently, within the same project and issue type

This effectively rules out:

• Permission issues
• Field context issues
• Basic configuration errors

What may be happening is a timing/synchronization issue in Jira Cloud Automation:

• The rule is triggered immediately after the transition to Pending Approval
• Even with Delay + Re-fetch, Jira does not always finish initializing complex fields in time
• Approvers / multi-user picker fields are particularly sensitive to this
• When the field is not yet fully “exposed” internally, Automation treats it as unavailable, even though it exists

This explains why:

• Sometimes the rule fails but the issue still transitions
• Sometimes it works without any problem
• Failures are more common on newly created or cloned issues
• The audit log message is misleading

The “field not available” message does not mean the field doesn’t exist; it means it wasn’t available at that exact execution moment.

Practical recommendations to reduce the issue:

• Increase the delay (e.g. 10–15 seconds)
• Split the logic into two rules:
  • Rule 1: detect the transition and mark the issue (label/flag)
  • Rule 2 (with delay): update the approvers field
• Add a pre-condition such as field value exists / is not empty before editing

[mruttan]

First thing I would check is that the field in question has been added to the screen of the issue type(s) you are dealing with.  

[Chris Rogers]

Hi @Jeremy Jones

Can you post a screenshot of how you have the rule configured in Automation, including the rule actor?  I've found that, often, depending on who the rule is running as and the state of the issue, automation can run into permissions issues.  Usually, I have the Actor of the rule set as Automation for Jira, as that account has special permissions that bypass some of these errors.

[Jeremy Jones]

Hi @Chris Rogers 

Thanks for responding!

Hopefully this is what you are asking for....