I Asked AI to Help Me Build a Kit Automation

Here’s where it went wrong.

Let me set the scene.

It’s a Friday afternoon. I’m building out a Kit visual automation as a portfolio piece, something to show prospective clients what a purchase-triggered onboarding sequence actually looks like under the hood. Straightforward enough. I know Kit well. I’ve built automations like this more times than I can count.

So I thought, why not use AI to help me document the steps as I go? Efficient, right?

It was not efficient!

Here’s what AI told me to do first:

"Step 1: Click the plus button and select Form Subscribe as your trigger."

Except Form Subscribe isn’t even a thing in Kit. The trigger is called Joins a Form. Different words, confident tone, completely wrong.

Now, if you don’t know Kit well, you might have spent a good ten minutes hunting through the trigger options for something called Form Subscribe before quietly concluding that you were somehow looking in the wrong place, or that Kit had changed, or that you were just bad at this. The AI didn’t hesitate. It didn’t say “I think it might be called this.” It just told you, with absolute authority, to select something that does not exist.

Even if we set the naming issue aside entirely, a Joins a Form trigger fires when someone fills in an opt-in form. A freebie download. A waitlist. A newsletter signup.

It has absolutely nothing to do with someone buying something through ThirveCart.

When a customer purchases through ThriveCart, ThriveCart talks to Kit via the native integration and applies a tag to that subscriber. That tag application is what should fire the automation. There’s no form anywhere near this scenario.

I caught it. I pushed back. The AI agreed, apologised, and we moved on.

Then it told me to add this as step three:

"Step 3: Add Tag: access granted."

Again, sounds logical. You’ve purchased, you should be tagged as having access. Except the trigger, the tag applied by ThriveCart on purchase, already does that job. Adding a second tag action directly after the trigger to confirm the thing the trigger just confirmed is like locking your front door and then also locking it again to make sure.

Redundant. Unnecessary. Completely Baffling.

I caught that one too.

Then came my personal favourite. At the end of the automation, AI told me to do a split path based on the level of access the customer had purchased, okay that one was logical. However, it then went on to tell me after both the yes and no paths has completed, the AI told me to add:

"A Goal Step, tagged as onboarding complete."

A Goal step. In Kit.

Kit does not have a Goal step. That’s ActiveCampaign. What Kit actually does is let you add a tag at the end of a sequence to mark completion, which is functionally the same thing but is an entirely different step in an entirely different place in the builder.

Three instructions. Three corrections. All from me.

Here’s the thing I want you to sit with for a moment.

The AI sounded completely confident every single time. There was no hesitation, no “I think this might be right” or “you may want to double check this.” It just told me what to do in a calm, authoritative tone, the same tone it uses whether it’s correct or not.

And if I hadn’t known Kit well enough to catch those mistakes, I would have followed every single one of those instructions and built something that either didn’t work at all or worked in a way that made absolutely no sense structurally.

Worse, I might have assumed I’d done something wrong when it didn’t work, because the instructions sounded so plausible.

That’s the bit that concerns me most when I think about my clients using AI to troubleshoot their own tech. Not that AI is useless, it isn’t. I use it constantly and it genuinely helps me work faster and clarify quicker (see above 😉). It’s that AI is confidently, fluently, very convincingly wrong sometimes, and if you don’t already know enough to spot the mistake, you won’t.

You'll just think you're bad at tech.

It’s likely you’re not bad at tech, I mean you built an online business didn’t you? You’re just being given bad instructions by something that sounds like it knows what it’s doing.

This is exactly why a second pair of eyes on your systems, a human pair, matters. Not because AI is the enemy. It absolutely isn’t. Knowing which instructions to trust, which steps to question, and which “Goal steps” definitely do not exist in the platform you’re using requires actual platform knowledge, an understanding of how these systems actually work, what they are doing and why.

So if you’ve ever followed an AI tutorial, hit a wall, and quietly assumed you were the problem?

You probably weren't.

As a side note to really drive the point home.

I did ask AI to write me this blog post. Yes it’s edited and read by me before posting. Here’s the thing. I had to push back again in the blog post, as it gave me three whole paragraphs, talking about the trigger – Form Subscribe.

Now I’ll be honest, I did read it once and then twice and for a moment couldn’t figure out what was wrong with it. This is where my experience comes in. I went into Kit to check. Yes I know you can too, but I knew exactly where to go to make sure the information was correct.

That there my dear is what they call expertise. Those minutes I took to check, are exactly the reason why you need a fresh set of eye on the automation that isn’t working, or the customer journey that breaks every time you think about a launch.

It’s not that you don’t know, just why waste time trying to find out if you know?

Book in now for a Quick Tech Check and get that problem solved and save yourself hours, if not days, by getting it fixed quick.