Page 3 of 8~112 min topic

Workflow automation in code

Implement the happy path

One clean transaction through **POST /v1/workflows/email-triage/runs** must match the oracle: fixture thread reaches awaiting_approval with draft; send blocked until Approve(id).

~14 min this pageHappy path

1Learn the idea

Read

Order the successful transaction

Code the narrow path that serves ops coordinator clearing a 200-message backlog without auto-sending refunds: accept → authorize/normalize → call dependency → validate → record. Keep stages named so a trace can show which boundary passed. Success must emit evidence useful to unapproved_send_count == 0 and median_time_to_draft ≤ 45s, not only a 200 with prose. Predict the observable for POST /v1/workflows/email-triage/runs before running: fixture thread reaches awaiting_approval with draft; send blocked until Approve(id).

Read

Run with fakes first

Drive the path with recording fakes or local stubs. Assert call order and arguments. Idempotency keys or stable ids should keep retries from duplicating costly work where the product requires it. Product under test remains typed workflow that classifies inbound email → draft reply → human approve → send — resist adding unrelated features mid-path.

Read

Implementation artifact

const run = await startRun({ threadId: "t-88", text: fixture });
expect(run.status).toBe("awaiting_approval");
expect(run.draftId).toMatch(/^d_/);

Read

Compare prediction to result

For Workflow automation in code, paste the CLI/HTTP transcript beside your prediction for POST /v1/workflows/email-triage/runs. If the oracle is unmet (fixture thread reaches awaiting_approval with draft; send blocked until Approve(id)), stop and debug this page; do not compensate with prompt folktales. Re-run once after a clean process start to catch hidden global state that would invalidate WF-AUTOSEND-19.

Read

Stage depth

Performance sketch: measure local p95 for the fake-backed path so later regressions are obvious. Keep concurrency modest until failure-handling proves limits. Log a single structured event per success with request id, revision, and the evidence field behind unapproved_send_count == 0 and median_time_to_draft ≤ 45s. Avoid hidden global caches in the happy path unless the lab is about caching — and even then key by tenant. If the path calls a model, pin model id in config and echo it in the response for auditability. Remember ops coordinator clearing a 200-message backlog without auto-sending refunds experiences wall-clock time, not your debugger’s single-step comfort.

Read

Field notes for `workflow-automation-code` / `happy-path`

Prefer explicit function names over a single god-object handleRequest. Thread a correlation id from ingress to the last log line. When streaming, define what partial failure means before coding. Snapshot one successful response body in fixtures after redaction. If the path writes to a queue, assert message attributes in the fake. Stop adding retries on this page; that is the next concern. In this chapter the product is typed workflow that classifies inbound email → draft reply → human approve → send, the human stakeholder is ops coordinator clearing a 200-message backlog without auto-sending refunds, and the incident id you design against is WF-AUTOSEND-19. Re-state the oracle in your notes — fixture thread reaches awaiting_approval with draft; send blocked until Approve(id) — and keep the invariant visible: send step requires approval token; classifier never triggers send directly. Track unapproved_send_count == 0 and median_time_to_draft ≤ 45s as the scoreboard. Surface under change control: POST /v1/workflows/email-triage/runs. If you only have forty minutes, finish the fixture for model labels 'issue refund' and workflow auto-calls payment tool before polishing UI. Promotion language stays ternary: promote, hold, or roll back based on evidence, not hope.

Go deeper

Before you start

Why this matters

Without calling production, order the steps a single success takes for ops coordinator clearing a 200-message backlog without auto-sending refunds. Circle the first irreversible side effect. Your prediction should mention POST /v1/workflows/email-triage/runs and the evidence field that proves fixture thread reaches awaiting_approval with draft; send blocked until Approve(id).

In the wild

See how this idea shows up as a product and a company — then come back to the lesson. Skills transfer across vendors.

Check your understanding

Page assessment

Answer from memory. Completion is saved from this evidence, not from opening the next page.

1. Is call order asserted, not assumed?
2. Does success evidence support unapproved_send_count == 0 and median_time_to_draft ≤ 45s?
3. Did you compare prediction vs transcript?

All responses are required.