I’m now doing product discovery on how to better chain scenarios.
Are you chaining your scenarios? Do you use Subscenarios? Are you still relying on HTTP+webhook+response combo? Let’s talk!
Reach out or schedule us a meeting here (no longer accepting call bookings)
I’m using subscenarios because I have variables in them that I want to control through several different runs and I want to reuse them across different scenarios.
I’m finding the flat list of scenarios and subscenarios a bit difficult to navigate - it would be nice if there was some kind of a folder structure to it that could just show the parent scenarios with an indented display of child scenarios.
Are there other improvements you’re thinking about?
Hi, I would like to replace http/webhook scenario chaining with subscenarios but it seems to be impossible for a sub scenario to return any data.
How did you manage to do that ?
Hello there, this is Vojtech, a product designer here at Make. I’m excited to announce that we’ve just released scenario outputs and synchronous subscenarios.
What’s new?
You can define scenario outputs in the ‘Scenario inputs and outputs’ panel
New ‘Return output’ module that allows you to return data from a scenario
New ‘Call a subscenario’ module with ‘Wait for subscenario output’ settings
New ‘Start a subscenario’ module for better scenario inputs mapping
Why is it important?
Synchronous subscenarios: you can break down large and complex scenarios into small and reusable pieces that return data back to the parent scenario
MCP tools: you can build scenarios that function as MCP tools along with the Make MCP server, allowing you to call Make scenarios from clients like Claude
AI Agent tools: you can build tools for the Make AI Agent that return structured data to help the agent understand context
If you have any feedback or questions, feel free to book some time with me though this scheduling link.