Missing workflow name in error message

[danthegoodman1]

[Error: Uncaught Error: Uncaught Error: Event not found: j575y290xt72sagm3na0v3km9h850ebx (undefined) in workflow undefined
    at getOrCreateEvent (../../node_modules/@convex-dev/workflow/src/component/event.ts:78:11)
    at async handler (../../node_modules/@convex-dev/workflow/src/component/event.ts:116:8)

    at async sendEvent [as sendEvent] (../../node_modules/@convex-dev/workflow/src/client/index.ts:404:6)
    at async handler (../../convex/workflow_utils/mutations.ts:84:38)
]

Becomes impossible to debug because we don't know which workflow this came from, and where in the workflow

[ianmacartney]

It looks like you aren't passing in the name of the workflow event - you're only passing in the ID to sendEvent - hence why there's (undefined) in the error message.

This is your code- could you pass the name here?

handler (../../convex/workflow_utils/mutations.ts:84:38

[danthegoodman1]

line 84 is the closing }) of sendEvent, so not sure if the line nums are accurate. Here's also the function below in case:

export const sendEvent = internalMutation({
  args: {
    workflowID: vWorkflowId,
    eventID: v.string(),
    payload: vResult,
  },
  handler: async (ctx, args) => {
    const { workflowID, eventID, payload } = args
    const sendResult = await AsyncThrowable(() =>
      workflow.sendEvent(ctx, {
        workflowId: workflowID,
        name: `${payload.fnName}-return`,
        id: eventID as EventId<`${string}-return`>,
        value: payload,
      })
    )
    if (sendResult.isErr) {
      if (isEventAlreadySentError(sendResult.Err)) {
        console.warn("Ignoring duplicate workflow event send", {
          workflowID,
          eventID,
          fnName: payload.fnName,
        })
        return Ok()
      }
      return Err(sendResult.Err, "Err in workflow.sendEvent")
    }
    return Ok()
  },
})

export const spawnSendBlankEvent = internalMutation({
  args: {
    eventID: v.optional(vEventId<string>()),
    workflowID: v.optional(vWorkflowId),
    name: v.optional(v.string()),
    timeoutMs: v.number(),
  },
  handler: async (ctx, args) => {
    const { timeoutMs, ...restArgs } = args
    await quickWorkpool.enqueueMutation(ctx, internal.workflow_utils.mutations.sendBlankEvent, restArgs, {
      runAfter: timeoutMs,
    })
    return Ok()
  },
})

[ianmacartney]

This would generally happen if you sendEvent on a different workflow instance than the one where you created it - components.workflowA vs. components.workflowB.
Since the DBs are isolated, we can't know where the original event came from.

Another possibility here is that when we are cleaning up Workflows, we delete their corresponding events. We don't currently keep around tombstones to identify when an event is from a previous workflow, but perhaps we should add an argument to cleanup({ keepEvents: true })

[danthegoodman1]

I think it might be the former, tbh it's super easy with this package to {wfA}.define in one name, then {wfB}.spawn() it

[danthegoodman1]

But we are passing the name of the event when we send

[ianmacartney]

That's confusing, since the code seems to thread it through to:

async function getOrCreateEvent(
  ctx: MutationCtx,
  workflowId: Id<"workflows"> | undefined,
  args: { eventId?: Id<"events">; name?: string },
  statuses: Doc<"events">["state"]["kind"][],
): Promise<Doc<"events">> {
  if (args.eventId) {
    const event = await ctx.db.get(args.eventId);
    if (!event) {
      throw new Error(
        `Event not found: ${args.eventId} (${args.name}) in workflow ${workflowId}`,
      );

[ianmacartney]

Actually I suspect the workflow was cleaned up, since the v.id("workflows") was already validated that the workflowId was correct (though I guess it could have been a false positive due to table numbers matching?)

[ianmacartney]

Did you figure out how both the workflowId and name ended up undefined even though your function seemed to be passing them both in? Have you patched the code or using a different version than what's on main? Adding logs in the node_modules/@convex-dev/workflow/dist code is available

[danthegoodman1]

No we've not patched the package, I'm not sure why they'd be undefined. Those deployments only use the code on main

[danthegoodman1]

I think it might be the former, tbh it's super easy with this package to {wfA}.define in one name, then {wfB}.spawn() it

Actually I can confirm it’s not this: in this project we only have one workflow component

[ianmacartney]

Another thought: deferring cleanup to later via a scheduled job may help debug

…

On Mon, Apr 20, 2026 at 5:20 AM Dan Goodman ***@***.***> wrote: *danthegoodman1* left a comment (get-convex/workflow#247) <#247 (comment)> I think it might be the former, tbh it's super easy with this package to {wfA}.define in one name, then {wfB}.spawn() it Actually I can confirm it’s not this: in this project we only have one workflow component — Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#247?email_source=notifications&email_token=AACZQW7TW2EF4HYPFLP7Y4D4WYIYJA5CNFSNUABFM5UWIORPF5TWS5BNNB2WEL2JONZXKZKDN5WW2ZLOOQXTIMRYGA3DGNRQGM3KM4TFMFZW63VHMNXW23LFNZ2KKZLWMVXHJLDGN5XXIZLSL5RWY2LDNM#issuecomment-4280636036>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AACZQWYAHAQJTBWFLUSDVGL4WYIYJAVCNFSM6AAAAACX5MUTEKVHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43OSLTON2WKQ3PNVWWK3TUHM2DEOBQGYZTMMBTGY> . You are receiving this because you commented.Message ID: ***@***.***>