Automation Rule condition statement error

[Ann Rumenapp]

I have 2 automation rules that were running successfully yesterday, today I get an error message 'Unable to run this component'.  Are automation rules this unpredictable?  What would cause a rule to quit working when it hasn't been changed?

Rule:

[Jack Brickey · Accepted solution]

Hi @Ann Rumenapp ,

I have found automation to be rather robust generally. I wonder if something has changed in your project configuration. What I recommend based on what I see in your image is too rebuild your automation, or at least the component that is erroring to see if you can get it to work. It is certainly possible that there may be some regression that has happened as a result of updating your instance, but I don't initially suspect that.

[Jack Brickey]

You might even just create a new manual rule for troubleshooting purposes that checks that CCR condition and has a log action to record the CCR. 

[Ann Rumenapp]

I deleted the rule and re-created it, The rule worked once (11:11:54), then second run quit working (11:19:37) with the same error.  The rule name is 'ECPMO Validation of Scope Change'

[Bill Sheboy]

Hi @Ann Rumenapp 

Adding to Jack's suggestions...

I do not see any errors in your rule's audit log; instead it shows conditions were not met and a transition did not occur (which could happen for various reasons).

And does that message "Unable to run this component" appear in the log or in the rule editor?

Please post an image of the complete rule in a single image file.  To do that, you may need to use a screen capture tool or browser addon for scrolling page capture.  Seeing the entire rule at once will provide better context to diagnose any symptoms you observe.

Kind regards,
Bill

[Ann Rumenapp]

The "Unable to run this component" appears in the audit log.  I don't have access to a tool that will screen capture and scroll - banks are highly regulated and limit our tools. 

I put in log action to capture the first if statement value before the error. The expected results is to take the ELSE of the Second If statement, but the first If statement doesn’t process.

The Second IF statement overlaps in the screen prints so you can see I didn't miss anything.

[Ann Rumenapp]

You are right Bill/Jack it might not be in the rule. Atlassian support pointed out that the workflow transition had a condition of being a member in the ECPMO CDL_CDM group.  I changed the rule actor to myself, a member of the group and now the issue transition will work.

In the audit log I'm getting an error 'The fields set during transition aren't available. Fields ignored: CCR BC Schedule Review Ready (customfield_12812).  Any thoughts on what a rookie like me would do to cause this? 

• The field is in the field configuration and on the screen.  I set the renderers to ‘Wiki style renderer’ to make sure it would take text.
• Added myself to the project as a 'Project Administrator' role so can edit fields

[Bill Sheboy]

Thank you for the additional information!  I completely understand the challenges of more-regulated environments and tool support.

As an aside: Argh! I am not a fan of the "improved" audit log format as it makes it much more difficult to diagnose rule problems quickly.  Definitely a step backwards in usability. (sigh)  Back to your questions...

With the log changes, we (the community) cannot see the issues impacted by this rule.  And so...

• What type of project is this: company-managed or team-managed?  You may find that info in the project list or at the bottom-left side of the page expanding area when in the project.
• What is the scope of this rule: single-project, multiple-project, or global?
• You note changing the rule actor to yourself.  For the issue (or one in the same project), what do you observe when you manually transition an issue outside the rule?  It appears that field CCR BC Schedule Review Ready (customfield_12812) may be set by the transition or on a transition screen.

[Ann Rumenapp]

Answers: Company-managed project, Rule scope is just the one project I'm working with (it might be made global in the future this is a prototype template.

One more thing, the CCR BC Schedule Review Ready field is defined as a 'Text Field (read only)' since I only wanted the field updated by an automation rule.  Could that cause the error: The fields set during transition aren't available. Fields ignored: CCR BC Schedule Review Ready (customfield_12812)?

[Bill Sheboy]

Yes, that might do it.  I seem to recall a rule cannot change / clear a read-only field without calling the REST API endpoint.  That may have been fixed for the Automation for Jira user, but you changed the actor to a different user to solve a different problem with the transition.

If your field is read-only, why is the rule trying to change it?

[Jack Brickey]

Sorry for my absence here, just catching up from a busy day. It seems you guys are on the right path here. Also curious about use case for automation changing read-only field but seems you want to restrict edit to only A4J. I would be interested in testing the theory of A4J being able to do this as Bill suggests.

[Ann Rumenapp]

Well, the field is read only so that it can be used in logic and prevent people from moving forward to a Business Council review status without populating several fields needed for the review.  The goal is to ensure a Budget, Schedule or Scope change has 2-3 fields populated depending on the change types selected, which took some workflow changes and flags.  I tried doing this in 1 automation rule but found the else logic didn't work and it was getting long - so I separated into 3 rules using review ready flags.  I only want the rule to be able to set the flags.

By separating the transition status from the flag set to 'No' in the 'Then" conditions, it works to update the field. 

THANK YOU BOTH for your support and helping me resolve this!