Struggling with aggregator and iterator to reassemble output

The MAKE documentation has been a huge source of frustration for me. For this particularly important tool set, it only gives a random GMail example instead of documenting how this works in principle. :grimacing:

Aggregator (
Iterator (

So I got a G sheet with a cell containing text and two <MARKER> tags:


I sucessfully retrieve the text, having it split into 3 pieces according to the markers. DeepL will then successfully translate all 3 strings separately.

So far, so good, but I have been utterly unable to recombine the iterated pieces back together, be it into an array or a text string.

The 3 operations always stay separate after the iterator. In the aggragator I only get to choose Translations, which in itself is a collection inside of an array inside of a collection.

What am I missing here?

Good morning,

you need to be aggregating the iterator, not the DeepL module. You can change it in the source module of the aggregator. This will get you back from 3 to 1 bundle and a single array.


Hi Stoyan,

thanks for the reply. Do I need to change the chain order? If I pulled the iterators values, won’t they still be untranslated?


You can still configure the aggregator to group by the DeepL translations.


The Aggregator’s Source Module field selection basically should be where the bundles are coming from, which is usually a Trigger, Search module, or Iterator (where the array is split into bundles).


I appreciate the time you guys are taking to help but would like to ask a favor:

For someone who is just trying to find their way around MAKE I am shocked at the discrepancy of how easy it looks at first glance and the devilish nature of the details. Normally AI can flatten any scripting learing curve easily, but Bard is no help here and even GPT-4 can’t get me out of this mess because of the lack of proper documentation to feed to it.

Either of those help me work out complex JavaScript functions or even Python based Streamlit apps with no clue prior to trying, but with MAKE/Integromat they become useless, as the best sources of information seem to be videos by well-meaning people with untranscribable accents :sweat_smile:

That being said, I am very glad to have found this community and my plea is this: I condensed my problem to the minimum elements, hoping someone might be able to help work this out start to finish. What is the best practice to order my modules and where exactly am I doing it wrong?

Or is each scenario so different, that trial and error is part of what makes MAKE MAKE?

Hi @neomagic, I recently joined Make too. Honestly the first thing anyone should do is complete the tutorials in the Make Academy, otherwise it’s like knowing that cars exist and how cars look like, but you’ve never driven one on the road before to get to a destination. Sure you can try driving a car without instruction, but it would be way less frustrating if you read more about it first.


OK, so between doing this course Introduction to Iterators and Array Aggregators (, as Sam suggested and what Stoyan said, I actually managed :grinning:

Don’t have the slightest clue how the grouping by a module further down the line did the trick, but I’m sure glad it did :smiley:

So thanks a bundle :wink:


Yeah you have to aggregate the module that is generating the extra bundles. In your case the DeepL module is only processing the incoming bundles and not generating additional ones. Its the Iterator module that is receiving 1 bundle as input and producing 3 bundles as output. You always want to aggregate a module that produces more bundles than it receives.

1 Like

Hello there @neomagic welcome to the community :wave:

I just wanted to say that it’s fantastic to see that you’ve successfully set things in motion with the assistance of @Stoyan_Vatov and @samliew.

The Academy is, indeed, a great starting point for all the Make newcomers. Additionally, I wanted to share this helpful video on getting started with iterators and array aggregators:

On another note, I am very sorry to hear that our documentation has been a source of frustration for you. Thanks a lot for sharing your valuable feedback with the community :pray: I will pass it on to the tech writers’ team so that they can review it and consider potential improvements.