I’ve been looking at browser automation templates and the pitch is appealing—instead of building from scratch, you start with something that’s 80% done and just customize the remaining 20%.
But I’m skeptical about that math. My experience with templates in other contexts is that they’re great for simple use cases but they become a burden when your needs diverge even slightly from the template’s assumptions.
Like, if there’s a template for web scraping that assumes a specific DOM structure, single-page layout, and English language content, how much do you actually need to change to make it work for your site with a different structure, multi-page flows, and different content?
Does the template give you a working foundation that’s easy to extend? Or does it force you to work around its assumptions, which ends up being slower than just building your own solution from scratch?
Has anyone actually shipped something using a template without gutting it first?
I’ve used templates as a starting point multiple times, and the key is picking the right template that matches your problem, not trying to force every template to work for your specific site.
There’s a template for form submission workflows, one for multi-page scraping, one for login-then-scrape patterns. If your task matches one of these, the template saves significant time. You’re talking 15 minutes of customization instead of 2 hours building it.
But if your task is a weird hybrid that doesn’t match any template closely, then yeah, building from scratch might be faster. The mistake people make is assuming templates are generic enough to cover everything.
What makes templates useful in the visual builder is that you can see exactly what each step does. You’re not stuck with someone else’s architecture. If the template assumes a single page and you need multi-page, you can just add steps or modify the loop logic.
I’ve shipped three automations off templates with minimal changes. The savings came from not having to design the overall flow structure and error handling.
Templates save the most time when they solve a 90% match for your problem. I used a login-then-scrape template for a project where I needed to authenticate first, then extract data from multiple pages. The template had the login flow and pagination logic already baked in. I just adjusted the selectors for my specific site and the data extraction logic.
Maybe 20 minutes of work total. Building that from scratch would’ve been an hour or two of figuring out the right approach to pagination and error handling.
But I’ve also tried forcing templates that were only a 60% fit, and that became frustrating. You end up removing as much as you add, which defeats the purpose.
The real value is that templates encode best practices for common scenarios. Error handling, retry logic, waits between requests. If you’re building from zero, you have to rediscover these patterns yourself.
I’ve had mixed results with templates. The ones that save time are highly specific—multi-page scraping, login flows, scheduled data collection. They nail the repetitive structural decisions.
However, when it comes to the actual data extraction logic—which selectors to use, how to parse the content—that’s always customization work. Templates can’t know your site’s specific structure.
So the honest answer is that templates save maybe 40-50% of development time by giving you the skeleton and orchestration logic. The other 50-60% is still custom work specific to your site and requirements.
Best if template matches your task 80%+. Otherwise, building custom might be faster. Depends on complexity fit.
Templates save time on flow architecture. Custom work handles site-specific logic. Best for close-fit scenarios.
This topic was automatically closed 24 hours after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.