# Connections in workflows

**URL:** <https://developer.sailpoint.com/discuss/t/connections-in-workflows/168224>\
**Category:** Idea Discussions\
**Tags:** workflows, identity-security-cloud\
**Created:** [August 11, 2025, 9:36am UTC](https://developer.sailpoint.com/discuss/t/connections-in-workflows/168224 "2025-08-11T09:36:28Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 3\
**Page:** 1

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![cpatel](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/48db29/32.png) [@cpatel](https://developer.sailpoint.com/discuss/u/cpatel)\
**Post date:** [August 11, 2025, 9:36am UTC](https://developer.sailpoint.com/discuss/t/connections-in-workflows/168224/1 "2025-08-11T09:36:28Z")

</div>

I have a use case where I’m building a workflow that gets triggered on an interval. ⏱

The goal is:

- Fetch a list of identities that meet a specific identity attribute

- Loop through that list

- Disable an account from a specific **source** for each identity

* * *

To get the list of identities, I’m using the **“Get List of Identities”** action with a search query. This returns a list, so I naturally use a loop in the next step.

Now, inside that loop, I want to **get a specific account** for each identity. I don’t want to disable **all** accounts. If I use the **“Get Accounts”** action, it returns a list again, and I can’t use a loop inside a loop (limitation of the current workflow engine).

* * *

### My workaround:

I’m using an **HTTP Request** inside the loop to call the `v2024/accounts` API and fetch the specific account ID for that source. Then I simply call the **Disable Account** action using that ID.

* * *

### The problem:

While testing, I noticed that the **“Get List of Identities”** step is loading **all** identity data—even though I only need the identity **ID**. 😕 This is causing **performance issues** , even with just **152 identities** matching the condition.

It feels like I’m forced to use this action, even though it’s giving me way more data than I need.

* * *

### The simple solution 💡

Introduce a **“Connections”** concept in workflows:

- Let us connect to an endpoint (like IDN) **once**

- Reuse that connection throughout the workflow

This would drastically reduce dev effort AND avoid the need for half-baked or redundant actions that often don’t help much and sometimes complicate things.

Most low-code/no-code platforms have **Connections** as a fundamental building block. Why doesn’t SailPoint provide this?

👉 Would really appreciate if someone from the product team could chime in and help us understand the reasoning here.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![bcariaga](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/sailpoint/discuss/user_avatar/developer.sailpoint.com/bcariaga/32/1890_2.png) [@bcariaga](https://developer.sailpoint.com/discuss/u/bcariaga)\
**Post date:** [August 18, 2025, 2:01pm UTC](https://developer.sailpoint.com/discuss/t/connections-in-workflows/168224/2 "2025-08-18T14:01:51Z")

</div>

I love the idea and think this would be extremely beneficial for the platform!

As per your problem, instead of using the “Get List of Identities” you could use an HTTP Request node and query the Search API directly. This would allow you to modify the body of the request to only include the attributes relevant for the workflow.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![gmilunich](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/sailpoint/discuss/user_avatar/developer.sailpoint.com/gmilunich/32/8431_2.png) [@gmilunich](https://developer.sailpoint.com/discuss/u/gmilunich)\
**Post date:** [November 11, 2025, 4:47pm UTC](https://developer.sailpoint.com/discuss/t/connections-in-workflows/168224/3 "2025-11-11T16:47:51Z")

</div>

I like this idea. I know that they are working on loops currently, as Thomas Burt has mentioned in this idea: [https://ideas.sailpoint.com/ideas/GOV-I-3869](https://ideas.sailpoint.com/ideas/GOV-I-3869). He mentions a For Each loop in there, so hopefully they will be able to resolve some of your issue there.

I would post your idea over in the SailPoint Ideas Portal also (if you haven’t already) and link it back here. I think you have some good arguments for this, and if they are working on loops and workflows, now might be the time to put it there.

If you have posted it there, please link the Idea here.