← Back to LabDebora’s Lab / Publication

Before you publish a workflow, see what it would change.

An independent interaction experiment for reviewing an automation change against prior workflow executions.

Written from practice↓ Read the field note

An independent product exploration of a consequential moment in workflow automation: publishing a change without knowing which past cases would now behave differently.

The risky moment is before publish

A workflow can look valid on a canvas while a routing condition, tool permission or credential changes what happens to real work.

This prototype asks a smaller question: which representative past executions would take another path?

Compare outcomes, not node diagrams

The flow remains visible, but the emphasis shifts to behaviour. Each replay puts the current and proposed outcome side by side.

A difference is named as a route change, a new external side effect or a failure, so review does not require parsing the whole graph first.

Keep publish separate from approval

A safe refinement can proceed. A new external action or insufficient permission asks for review instead.

The demo is modelled and makes no claim to connect to n8n or replay customer data. The interaction, states and edge cases are the experiment.

Independent product exploration

See the effect of a workflow change before it goes live.

A replay model for automation builders. It separates a changed route from a new external side effect or a broken permission.

Support intake automation Replay only. No actions sent.
Proposed change

Six past runs would take a different path.

TriggerClassifyRouteAct

Historical replay

Current / proposed
Enterprise accessHuman reviewSend external replyNEW SIDE EFFECT
Refund requestDraft responseSend external replyNEW SIDE EFFECT
Account accessEscalateHuman reviewROUTE CHANGED
Review changed paths before publishing.
This is a product prototype, not a connection to n8n or customer workflow data.