Workflows and automation · project planning pack

Workflows and automation · project planning pack

Plan a Workflows and automation project with a business brief, repository shortlist, proposed tasks, acceptance criteria and a recommended Orqestria team.

This planning pack creates a project containing documents and assigns the recommended agents with their existing skills. It contains no external application code or installer and does not start an application. The task lists are proposals in files; no board tasks are created automatically.

Distinguish visual automation, durable process execution and scheduled data processing. Select a foundation for the kind of work you need to coordinate.

First business scenario

Receive an event, validate it, call a test service, handle a failure and retry without duplicating the business action.

Records to model

Triggers, workflow definitions, runs, steps, credentials references, events and retry policies.

Recommended team

Orion, Radar, and Axel

Documents in this pack

Read the brief, adapt the proposed tasks to your business and agree on acceptance criteria before implementation. Add the selected tasks to your board when you are ready to begin.

• Project brief: planning/en/brief.md
• Proposed initial tasks: planning/en/proposed-tasks.md
• Acceptance criteria: planning/en/acceptance.md

Repositories to compare

Explore the category recommendations

• Activepieces · Recommendation and scope
• Node-RED · Recommendation and scope
• Temporal · Recommendation and scope
• Huginn · Recommendation and scope
• Apache Airflow · Recommendation and scope

Repository shortlist checked: Oct 25, 2026. Recheck current official sources before selecting a revision; inclusion is not a security audit or a guarantee of suitability.

Proposed initial tasks

These are suggested tasks to discuss and add to your board. Installation writes these documents into the project; it does not create work items, run external setup commands or contact the linked services.

Define scope and outcomes

Identify the users, the business outcome and what the first version excludes. Use this scenario as the initial acceptance journey: Receive an event, validate it, call a test service, handle a failure and retry without duplicating the business action.

Compare at least two foundations

Compare at least two linked repositories against the scenario and records. Separate shipped features from paid editions, add-ons and work you must build. Record a reasoned choice or why a custom build is preferable.

Verify the current upstream and dependencies

Review official source, licenses, edition terms, dependency requirements, maintenance activity and security advisories for the exact revision. Record unresolved findings and necessary changes before adopting it.

Model data and permissions

Define ownership, validation, relationships and allowed access for these records: Triggers, workflow definitions, runs, steps, credentials references, events and retry policies. Include at least two roles and explicit denied-access cases.

Prototype the smallest complete scenario

Use representative sample data in an isolated test environment. Demonstrate the full scenario, including one invalid input and one failure or correction, before expanding the product.

Plan restoration and upgrades

Test a backup and restore of the prototype, define an upgrade and rollback approach and estimate hosting, migration, integration and maintenance effort. Record owners for operation and acceptance.

Acceptance criteria

These criteria define the first prototype's review, not completed work. Attach evidence and unresolved issues when the team evaluates each item.

• The agreed scenario is demonstrated end to end with representative records: Receive an event, validate it, call a test service, handle a failure and retry without duplicating the business action.
• At least two candidates have been compared, and the chosen revision, license and edition constraints, dependency fit and security findings are recorded with official source links.
• At least two roles have verified allowed and denied actions, with no access to another user's or organization's restricted records.
• Invalid input, a failure and a correction are handled with visible results and without unintended duplicate records or business actions.
• A backup has been restored in a test environment and the expected records and access rules have been verified.
• The team has documented an upgrade and rollback plan, known gaps, operating responsibilities and the remaining implementation work.