Automation does not trigger on both, inward and outward, issue link additions

[Thomas Schenkel]

Issue linking types are globally available, not per project. Since issues in my project must not use every link type offered, I set up an automation which removes unwanted links.

My problem: the trigger element "Issue linked" only takes one kind of type including both directions, e.g. "implements" and "is implemented by". 

• The "is ... by" types never trigger the automation

Any idea? The trigger elements "Issue updated" and "Field value changed" do not trigger the automation, too.

I work with the cloud version of Jira, premium plan.

[Bill Sheboy]

Hi @Thomas Schenkel 

For a question like this, context is important for the community to help.  Please post the following:

• what type of project is this (e.g., company-managed, team-managed, etc.), 
• an image of your complete automation rule,
• images of any relevant actions / conditions / branches,
• an image of the audit log details showing the rule execution, and
• explain what is not working as expected and why you believe that to be the case.

Until we see those...

Those link types are the ones used by Jira Product Discovery (JPD) connections to any "Delivery Tickets" in the software projects.  They will not trigger the Issue Linked trigger within a JPD project rule.  This appears to have been a design decision by the JPD team, and instead that trigger only fires within a JPD project for other types of links (e.g., "blocks").

That link type will fire the Issue Linked trigger for two other rule scopes:

• a single-project scope rule in a software project, although it will not be able to access the JPD idea fields
• a multiple (or global) scope rule which includes the software project and JPD project, and it will be able to access all issues within scope

Kind regards,
Bill

[Anahit Sukiasyan]

Hi @Thomas Schenkel

Here are a few suggestions to try to resolve it, hope they'll help:

1. Link Type Direction

The "Issue linked" trigger in Jira Automation is direction-agnostic. This means that the automation rule should fire for any type of link (both "implements" and "is implemented by"). However, it seems that in your case, the trigger is not firing for the reverse direction ("is implemented by").

Possible solution:

• You can try setting up two separate automation rules, one for each direction of the link type (e.g., one rule for "implements" and one for "is implemented by"). This way, you explicitly handle both directions of the link separately.

2. Automation Rules Not Firing with "Issue Updated" or "Field Value Changed"

If the "Issue updated" or "Field value changed" triggers aren't firing as expected, here are a couple of things to check:

• Ensure the triggers are correctly configured: Double-check that the conditions are set up correctly. For example, ensure that the field change or issue update you're expecting is being captured.
• Make sure the automation rule conditions are not too restrictive: If your rule has conditions (such as checking specific fields or statuses), verify that they aren't preventing the rule from firing in certain cases.
• Linking Activity: Sometimes, linking an issue (or removing a link) might not count as a full "update" on the issue. You might want to check whether your automation rule is configured to trigger only on specific field changes or all updates.

Possible workaround:

• Use a combination of triggers. For example, you can combine the "Issue linked" trigger with a "Field value changed" trigger for the specific field (like the linked issue status) that you're interested in.
• Another option could be using the Jira REST API to trigger automation based on more specific conditions, but this requires a technical setup.

[Thomas Schenkel]

Thank you Anahit!

Unfortunately, it does not help. My trial automation consist just of a trigger element and a log element. "Field Value Changed" takes the 'Link' parameter, and "Issue Updated" does not take any parameter.

None of them are firing.

And, since as you correctly state the issue linked trigger is direction-agnostic, I don't see a possibility with two separate rules.