Describe roughly what you want. We check it against 3,565 real integration actions and show you the steps that would build it — including the ones that would not work.
Ask a general-purpose chatbot which integrations would build your idea and it will answer confidently, sometimes about integrations that do not exist. That is a pleasant conversation and a wasted fortnight.
Your description is scored against all 3,565 real actions before anything is written. Only the genuine matches go any further.
The shortlist is the only vocabulary available. Anything outside it must be reported as a gap rather than substituted with something that sounds close.
Every action named is verified against the catalogue again before it reaches you. Anything that fails is dropped, not displayed.
No, and that is the point of it. Before anything is generated, your description is matched against the real catalogue of 3,565 actions, and only those matches are considered. Any action named in the result is then checked against the catalogue again before you see it. If a step has no real action behind it, it is shown as reasoning Squidgy does itself — not dressed up as an integration.
It will say so. That is more useful than a plausible answer you would discover was wrong two weeks into building. You can then request the missing integration, or reach the tool another way — most APIs can be called with a custom HTTP tool, and MCP servers connect directly.
No. Describe the outcome — 'chase unpaid invoices', 'brief me before calls' — and it works backwards to the apps. If you do name an app, it will weight towards that one.
No. This tells you whether the idea holds up and what it would touch. Building it happens in the agent builder, where you describe the same thing and Squidgy wires the tools for real.
Browse the full catalogue · Build the agent · Not sure what to automate at all?
Describe the same thing in the agent builder and Squidgy wires the tools for real.