You can already do this with the "Another Herald Rule" condition.

Unfortunately the Another Herald Rule condition does not do what I want, if I understand it correctly.

The first rule adds a tag when there is none. The second rule sends an email if that tag is present. I can't combine them because I want the email fired if someone manually adds that specific tag too.

There's three scenarios:

• Someone creates a task with no tags. Rule 1 fires and adds the triage tag. Rule 2 runs because the triage tag is there, and sends an email
• Someone create a task with the triage tag. Rule 2 runs because the triage tag is there, and sends an email
• Someone unassigns the tags from a task and re-assigns it to triage. Rule 2 runs because the triage tag is there, and sends an email.

The email never fires in the first scenario because each rule from what I can tell take the task state before any rules are applied.

If this feature request is closed because Nuance will handle triaging new tasks in this way, then I'm OK with that.

I was under the impression that Nuance was more only for client facing stuff, so it's not a perfect fit for this scenario.

You can also write your own HeraldAdapter.

Why doesn't this work?

When [any of] these conditions are met:
Tag is present: X
Another herald rule matches: Add tag X to tasks missing assignees/team tags
Take these actions only the first time this rule matches:
Send email to Y

I really hope I'm not missing something here... sincere apologies if I am...

Maybe I am misunderstanding how the "another herald rule matches" works, but I don't think it traverses 2 different actions (say task creation, then a task comment), so it makes the "Take these actions only the first time this rule matches" not work if both rules email. Tomorrow I will test it out to make sure I'm not out to lunch and wasting your time because now I'm worried I am.

Because when the task is created it will match Rule 1 (add the tag), and rule 1 will email me.
When someone does anything to the task, Rule 1 will not match, but Rule 2 (email once when tagged) will match, and email me again.

I will get 2 emails about this task.

Whereas if I can use a Execute Rule 2 (send the email) in the actions of Rule 1 (adding the tag), and only have Rule 2 do the emailing... then the "only match this rule once" will kick in and I will only ever get 1 email for the task.

I'd prefer you ask these questions in Ponder or Conpherence. It's not our expectation to provide this level of support to the community for free.

OK, I'll make my feature request there next time. I didn't ask for support, I made a feature request. I thought those were separate things.

I only listed my scenario to better illustrate why I thought this feature was useful and needed.

As I suspected, thought I had tested, and confirmed again with additional tests this morning, epriestley's "Another herald rule" condition does not solve the problem.

So as far as I'm concerned, being able to chain the evaluation of rules would be a nice feature to have upstream.

For now I have my workaround, even though it does result in an extra duplicate emails.

If Nuance could work on incoming tasks as well as email, it could also solve this problem. I'll make a post there to that effect since it doesn't seem to address this.

epriestley's "Another herald rule" condition does not solve the problem.

This is expected to solve the problem, so if it does not you can file a bug report with complete reproduction steps and we'll take a look at it.

In particular, this failure mode should not be possible:

Because when the task is created it will match Rule 1 (add the tag), and rule 1 will email me.
When someone does anything to the task, Rule 1 will not match, but Rule 2 (email once when tagged) will match, and email me again.
I will get 2 emails about this task.

Because I've suggested that you define rule 2 as an "when ANY of these conditions match" rule instead of a "when ALL of these conditions match" rule, it should be impossible for rule 1 to match without rule 2 also matching. If this can happen, it is a bug, and we'll fix it if you provide reproduction instructions.

(And when multiple rules say "send email" in response to the same action, we don't send 2 emails).

From your followup, it isn't clear if this is actually the failure mode you observed or not.

Thank you very much for your reply @epriestley, and I see what you were trying to say now, I wasn't understanding you before. You were right, I can indeed use your solution (with some modifications), I had not noticed the any of change compared to my own rules.

I had a Assignee does not exist in both rules which meant I could not use any of, however upon careful consideration I can remove it from the send email rule since that would be a very edge case scenario (has needs triage manually entered, is assigned). At that point your solution works.

It also occurs to me that if I needed multiple and conditions I could make a rule that did nothing but just matched those conditions, then used it using a Another herald rule matches to use any of.

This definitely wasn't meant to be a support request but a feature request, but I'll apologise that I hadn't thought of this way of structuring my code, or seen your point when you were nice enough to point it out.

Do you think it is worth outlining this solution in the documentation? Maybe everyone else doesn't need it spelled out, or this is too niche a scenario. I'm not sure.

It also occurs to me that if I needed multiple and conditions I could make a rule that did nothing but just matched those conditions,

Yeah, this is the primary purpose of the "Do Nothing" action.

I'll add a note about these patterns to T8644.