Why are automation traces so hard to read? or even not readable?

I find it really hard to understand what’s happening in an automation and why it stopped working. Sometimes its easy, but if you have more conditions its hard to understand and most of the trace information are useless … can we optimize that?

Example:

Trace Timeline:
What the hell is “Test Test if 2 conditions matches”
what is the outcome? Which condition are checked? What are the values? that’s stupid…

Automation Config:
Yeah, automation config, but in Yaml? a switch between both views whould be useful, or do you configure your automation in yaml?

Step Details:
Really not useful and could be thrown away, it doesn’t help you in any context…
What is for example the condition:

conditions/0/conditions/1/conditions/0/entity_id/0
Executed: 5. September 2024 um 08:33:01
Result:
result: true
state: 'off'
wanted_state: 'off'

i dont know what condition state here is “off” and why it is true… thats so useless.

Related logbook entries:
every time i have a look at this TAB its empty.

In short words, the Traces “could” be very helpful, but they aren’t. Maybe absolute HA pros can read them, or maybe guess what’s happening, but it doesn’t show me in seconds, what happened, which variables changed, why a condition failed, and there are so many view to use, that confuses where to find the information I am looking for.

Are there any plans to do this right?

If you can count you can interpret this. It is the exact same number as explained here: How to read Home Assistant Configuration Errors

Counting is not the problem. And from my perspective not a solution for the real problem.
The usability of this function is a nightmare.

Post a screenshot of all your conditions. Not just this bit and I will show you how easy it is.

2ccd08863a91f30eee1a12225e80e25425bb634e

I have used it since its inception to debug my automations as well as other people’s automations. I have found it to be an invaluable tool but, like all tools, it requires some practice to learn how to use it properly.

Complaints about its functionality won’t improve anything. If you have actionable suggestions to improve it, create a Feature Request.

1 Like

I just want to steer you in the right direction—I don’t need help in understanding the issue myself. So, please avoid offering assistance.

Please understand that any function requiring ‘training,’ ‘teaching,’ or ‘explanation’ indicates it’s not yet fully optimized. This might have been acceptable during HA’s early development stages, but in today’s context, I believe the ‘traces’ log is not up to the modern standard.

This topic was created to bring attention to a function within HA that, in my view, needs significant refinement.

Think of it this way: you choose to drive a new car because you’re familiar with how other cars work. If the new car demanded an extensive tutorial before you could operate it, no one would want to buy or use it.

It would be great if this topic reaches the right people involved in HA’s development, or perhaps leads to the creation of a ‘WTH’ topic to drive necessary changes.

Wrong.

Powerful tools like this require understanding on your part.

Did you instantly and instinctively drive a car well the first time you tried?

No.

It took a lot of practice.

As you have no desire to learn you are on your own.

Good luck.

Please avoid complaining about product functionality in a place where developers are unlikely to read or add to their todo list.

It would be great if you submitted a Feature Request containing details for improvement. The WTH campaign only occurs every second year or so. It may happen this October, it may not.

Traces has a steep learning curve, and I am still learning, but it has been very helpful to me.

Suggestion: Look at traces after running a working automation. Click on each step in the trace and you will see what the automation did at that step. When you see how a working automation looks, troubleshooting becomes a bit easier.