Small on purpose beats big and brittle

When a workflow gets too ambitious, it becomes hard to read, slow to run, and scary to edit. Smarter workflows are small on purpose: clear trigger, a few well‑named steps, and a crisp outcome. You can still automate big problems—just break them into two or three flows with a simple handoff. The payoff is speed: easier reviews, fewer surprises, and much faster iteration.

Start with the decision, not the canvas

Before dragging any nodes, write the decision you want in one sentence: “If tier ≥ Pro, notify sales; else, send onboarding tips.” That line is your north star. Every step should either gather the fact you need (tier) or produce the outcome you promised (notify or send). If a step doesn’t serve the decision, it’s probably a distraction—cut it or move it to a separate flow.

Keep triggers real and narrow

Good triggers reflect real events: a new signup, a change in plan, a failed step, a weekly schedule. Bad triggers are vague or too broad (“on any update”). Narrow triggers reduce noise and keep your run logs clean. If you need to catch multiple events, use two small flows instead of a giant one with a dozen guard clauses.

Name steps so logs read like a story

Use short, verb‑first names: “Enrich lead,” “Check tier ≥ Pro,” “Notify Slack #sales.” Avoid clever jokes; future you won’t laugh. Add a one‑line description when context matters, and link the run to a doc if there’s tribal knowledge. Clear names make logs scannable and help your teammates diagnose issues without a call.

Branching that doesn’t tangle

Success to the short lane, else around the outside. This simple layout rule prevents line crossings and keeps the happy path obvious. If an else branch spawns more logic, fork it into a separate flow and pass the minimum context needed. It’s better to have two tidy flows than one spaghetti monster that drifts out of date.

Retries, idempotency, and guardrails

External steps fail. Add bounded retries with backoff and make actions idempotent (so re‑runs don’t double‑post). Validate inputs early, and sanitize outputs before you pass them on. If something is risky (billing, deletes), require approval or route to a review channel. You’ll sleep better, and your run history won’t be a crime scene.

Versioning and change discipline

Edit in a draft, run test data, then publish. For teams, require approvals on production flows. Keep a brief changelog in the description (“v12: tightened tier check; v13: cache enrichment”). When a metric dips, you’ll know which version to blame—or celebrate. Rollbacks should be one click, not a scavenger hunt.

Measure the few things that matter

For each flow, pick one leading indicator (e.g., time‑to‑notify, success rate) and one outcome metric (e.g., response time to high‑fit leads). A weekly digest to Slack keeps attention honest. If a metric moves the wrong way, fix the slow step or prune the path before adding new features. Smaller, faster, and more reliable beats clever every time.

When to split a flow

Split when a branch grows its own branches, when a step needs a permission set that others don’t, or when owners are different. Use a clear handoff: write a comment in the first flow and link to the second, pass only the fields required, and keep names aligned. You’ll unstick reviews and make ownership obvious.

Ship it in a day

Pick one decision you care about, draft the steps, and build the happy path first. Add the else branch if it still matters, then layer in retries and alerts. Ask a teammate to review the canvas and try a sample run; if they can’t guess the story in 30 seconds, simplify labels or split the flow. Smarter means maintainable, and maintainable means it actually gets used.