🔔 New for Automation: nested if-else conditions, new delay action, & more 3rd party automations

[#1]

Hi all! We’re rolling out nested if-else conditions, a new delay action, plus new ways to fine-tune the way you bring 3rd-party tools into your rules. This includes:

• Nested if-else conditions: Stack up 2 layers of if-else conditions in your automation, enabling you to set up more complex condition logic within a single rule.
  Available on all Jira Service Management Cloud plans

• New action - delay until an alert event occurs: Add a pause to your rule, delaying until certain upstream conditions are met, like an alert entering a specific status or priority level.
  Available on Jira Service Management Cloud Premium and Cloud Enterprise plans

• New ways to configure the “Wait for response” capability: When using the “wait for response” capability on a supported 3rd-party action, specify the amount of time you want the rule to wait, and choose if you want it to continue even if there’s no response.
  Available on Jira Service Management Cloud Enterprise plans

• New Action - Create Microsoft Teams chat or meeting for an incident: Speed up collaboration by automating the creation of an MS Teams chat or meeting for an incident issue in JSM.
  Available on Jira Service Management Cloud Premium and Cloud Enterprise plans

Building on some of the new Automation functionalities we released earlier this year, these new capabilities will help your team better triage and manage alerts and issues using automation.

Nested if-else conditions for automation rules

Demo: Nested if-else conditions for Automation

First, we’re launching a new feature for conditions in Automation: nested if-else conditions. One of our most highly-requested features, nested if-else conditions, allows you to build more complex logic into your automation rules.

With it, you can now build up to two nested layers of conditions within your rules. You can also chain and/or conditions within those condition blocks to further refine the flow of your rule. Combined, this enables your team to cover more scenarios and branches within each individual rule.

→ Read more

New action: Delay until alert event occurs

Demo: Delay until alert event occurs

A few months ago, we launched the highly-requested delay action, which lets you pause your rule for up to 15 minutes before proceeding to the next step in your rule.

Now, we’re releasing a new delay action: delay until alert event occurs. Using this action, you’ll be able to delay your rule until a specific alert condition is met. Specifically, with this new feature, you can pause your rule until:

• An alert changes to a specific status

• An alert changes to a specific priority level

This gives your team even more ways to design your rule flows for alert remediation, letting you respond to, and resolve alerts faster.

→ Read more

Updates to actions for Azure, AWS, JEC, New Relic, and Ansible

Demo: Updates to "wait for response" for 3rd-party actions

The “wait for response” capability—which we launched earlier this year—allows you to pause your rules until receiving a response on the following 3rd-party actions:

• Restart Virtual Machine in Azure

• Start runbook in Azure

• Run AWS SSM document

• Run script using Jira Edge Connector

• Run a query in New Relic

• Launch job template in Ansible

Now, we’ve added new configuration options to let you fine-tune how you integrate those third-party actions into your remediation flows. With these new options, you can specify how long you want to wait for a response from the third-party connector before continuing to the next step in the rule. That lets you better control the pacing of your rule runs, like setting a short wait period when you want the rule to move on quickly if it can’t get the information you need.

We’re also launching a “Resume even on no response” option to help you refine this even further. When checked, this lets your rule proceed to the next step even if you don’t get a response from your 3rd-party tool.

→ Read more

New Action: Create Microsoft Teams chat or meeting for an incident

We now have an action to automate the creation and linking of MS Teams chat or meeting for an incident issue in JSM. This will help your team accelerate collaboration by:

1. Auto-creating and linking an MS Teams chat or meeting to an incident issue with all the appropriate details, like name, description, and members.

2. Leveraging the power of ChatOps by auto-updating issue fields from within chat, and getting all chat conversations captured into issue comments.

This gives your team even more ways to design your rule flows for incident resolution, letting you respond to, and resolve incidents faster.

→ Read more

---

We look forward to hearing your thoughts and feedback! If you have any questions as you try out these new features, feel free to drop them in the comments.

[Harrison Ponce]

Love these new features!! 😍

[Fabian Lim]

Very well done.  Thanks for sharing.

[Patrick van der Rijst]

Nice! Keep these improvements coming!

Please have the Create Object action have the created object returned, or an error object when it doesn't meet the requirements.

[Darryl Lee]

Duuuuude, how do I subscribe to a label (I guess like automation-for-jira might have done it)? I totally missed this.

Re: Nested if-else conditions, @Bill Sheboy this is huge, right?

[Bill Sheboy]

Hi @Darryl Lee !

Maybe, and...

I recall already seeing community posts with scoping / logic errors due to nested if / else blocks in rules where neither I nor the original poster could discern the behavior was working as expected.  We ended up sending them to Atlassian Support to figure out if there was a defect in this new feature...or if the existing if / else condition, audit log problems were the root cause.

Given the known problems of audit logs not clearly indicating what is happening when a condition passes / fails, I strongly encourage people using this feature to add writes to the audit log after each condition to indicate "hey, I made it to step #42", and so forth to see progress.  That, of course, will lead to a potential new problem: hitting the maximum rule size limit.

Kind regards,
Bill

[Ryan Bullock]

Love the feature to automatically create Teams meetings when an incident is created. I have been waiting for this for a while, and it has helped streamline our processes.

[Fanny Vachet]

Hi,

How about if/else in branches?

[Mariano Tallarico _Appricity_]

Excellent Post. I'm sharing this with my team right now. Adding IF/else inside IF/else is good news. Expands the possibility of cross-conditioning.