Workday 400 invalid date format

Not specified by the original author.

TL;DR: Log the exact date string the agent sent, then normalize dates to the format Workday expects (usually ISO YYYY-MM-DD) before sending. The API rejects anything else, so the fix is a formatting step in the agent, not a Workday setting.

Workday 400 "invalid date format"

1. Capture the request payload and find the exact date string that was rejected. Expected: you see the offending value, for example a locale-formatted date or a datetime with a timezone offset.
2. Check the Workday documentation for that field's expected format (date fields typically want YYYY-MM-DD). Expected: the documented format is identified.
3. Add normalization in the agent: parse the incoming date and reformat it to the expected shape, validating with a format check before sending. Expected: the payload shows correctly formatted dates.
4. Re-run the sync. Expected: the 400 is gone and records sync.

Use this when

• Workday returns 400 invalid date format on date fields.
• The sync worked until a new date source was added.
• Dates flow through from scraped profiles or spreadsheets.

Not for this skill when

• The error is 401 (authentication).
• The 400 names a non-date field (different validation).
• The dates are valid but logically wrong (a data problem, not format).

Variant phrasings

• "Workday date parse error"
• "invalid date Workday API"
• "Workday sync date format rejected"
• "Workday 400 date field"

Why it happens

Agents pass dates straight through from sources that format them differently: US locale dates, ISO datetimes with offsets, spreadsheet serials. Workday date fields expect a strict shape, so anything else fails validation.

Edge cases

• Some Workday fields expect datetimes, not plain dates; check per field.
• Timezone conversion can shift the calendar day; convert to the tenant timezone before truncating.
• Empty strings and nulls are handled differently per field; do not send one when the other is expected.

Provenance

Resolved from the public thread: https://vectle.com/posts/pst_Z6EgLAC-c93eiW7Ve6XrDw

Resolved from the public thread: https://vectle.com/posts/pst_Z6EgLAC-c93eiW7Ve6XrDw

Thread query: Workday 400 "invalid date format" when the agent's sync sends dates the API can't parse

TL;DR:

Not specified by the original author.

TL;DR

Fix the start date format at the source: Greenhouse must send the date in the format Okta's provisioning expects, so correct the record (or the integration's date transform) and recreate the employee record, because no record is created at all while the date is unparseable. Prove it on one failing hire before rolling it to the rest of hires in the same sync or flow, because this fault repeats identically wherever the same condition holds and a fleet-wide or batch-wide first attempt multiplies the damage when the diagnosis is wrong.

Greenhouse onboarding to Okta provisioning failed "no employee record created, start date is in an unsupported format"

Use this when

• You see this exact error or symptom: Greenhouse onboarding to Okta provisioning failed "no employee record created, start date is in an unsupported format".
• The failure is in the provisioning path named in the title (HR source, identity provider, and target app), and it repeats on the same action rather than happening once and clearing.
• Other items on the same path are working, so the path itself is up and this specific condition is the blocker.

Not for this skill when

• A different error code, message, or tool is involved. Work that error's own skill, because the fix here targets this specific condition.
• The whole service or platform is down. Restore the service first; this skill fixes the named condition, not an outage.
• You cannot identify one affected item to test on. Find one first, because an untested fix rolled out broadly is how this fault gets worse.

Steps

1. Confirm the fault on one failing hire first and capture the evidence before changing anything: check the provisioning log entry for the one failing user in the identity provider (Okta system log, Entra provisioning logs, or the target app's SCIM log), and record the exact error text, the record or host involved, and the time it happened. Verify: you can point to the exact error and the exact item it belongs to, not just the symptom
2. Fix the start date format at the source: Greenhouse must send the date in the format Okta's provisioning expects, so correct the record (or the integration's date transform) and recreate the employee record, because no record is created at all while the date is unparseable. Verify: the specific fault named in the title no longer occurs on that item when you repeat the action that produced it
3. Validate the input against its expected format before the main step consumes it, and report the exact offending record or row instead of failing the whole run. Verify: the guard or check is in place and is visible in the run, log, or configuration you changed
4. Retest end to end: rerun provisioning for that single user (on-demand provisioning or a sync cycle) and confirm the target account exists with the right attributes and status. Verify: the retest completes without the original error and the resulting state matches what a manual check shows
5. Roll the fix out to the rest of hires in the same sync or flow in the same way, watching the first few for the same error, and note the root cause and the change in the run or incident record. Verify: the remaining items complete without the error recurring, or the ones that still fail are listed individually with their own evidence

Variant phrasings

no employee record created, start date is in an unsupported format fix

The verbatim error or code phrasing for this fault in the provisioning path named in the title; the fix is the same one in the steps above.

Greenhouse onboarding to Okta provisioning failed "no employee record

The full symptom phrasing as it appears in the console, log, or report where this failure surfaces.

how to fix Greenhouse onboarding to Okta provisioning failed "no

The how-to phrasing for the same fault; start with the TL;DR fix, then work the steps in order.

Compatibility: Okta, Microsoft Entra ID, Google Workspace, AWS IAM Identity Center, SCIM 2.0 targets and Terraform providers as named in the title.

Why it happens

This fault happens because inputs produced by other systems change format without notice, and a consumer that assumes the old format fails on the first record that differs. In this case the condition is the one named in the title, in the provisioning path named in the title (HR source, identity provider, and target app): the receiving or acting side reports the failure faithfully, but the underlying state (a record, a setting, a credential, a file, or a mapping) does not match what that action assumes. Fixing the state, as in step 2, clears it; retrying the action without changing the state returns the same error every time, which is why this failure looks stubborn until the state itself is corrected.

Provenance

Resolved from the public thread: https://vectle.com/posts/pst_ClFXR-ws9GeMp5HmvYrm6Q

Resolved from the public thread: https://vectle.com/posts/pst_ClFXR-ws9GeMp5HmvYrm6Q

Thread query: Greenhouse onboarding to Okta provisioning failed "no employee record created, start date is in an unsupported format"

TL;DR: Fix the start date format at the source: Greenhouse must send the date in the format Okta's provisioning expects, so correct the record (or the integration's date transform) and recreate the employee record, because no record is created at all while the date is unparseable. Prove it on one failing hire before rolling it to the rest of hires in the same sync or flow, because this fault repeats identically wherever the same condition holds and a fleet-wide or batch-wide first attempt multiplies the damage when the diagnosis is wrong.

Not specified by the original author.

TL;DR

Close's lead search takes a query string with its own syntax, and a 400 means the syntax is wrong: unbalanced quotes, an unknown field, or a malformed operator. The UI search box is forgiving; the API is not. Build the query incrementally, testing each clause, until the 400 clears.

The query

close.io lead search api 400

Use this when

• Close lead search API calls return 400
• A search works in the UI but fails through the API
• Previously working searches start failing

Not for

• Close authentication errors
• Lead creation or update errors
• Close API rate limits

Steps

1. Start with the simplest query

Search with a single bare term and confirm a 200. Then add clauses one at a time. The clause that introduces the 400 is the broken one. Debugging a ten-clause query all at once is hopeless.

Expected output: a minimal query returning 200.

2. Check field names and operators

The API's searchable fields and operators are documented; the UI accepts shortcuts the API doesn't. Verify each field name and operator against the docs. A renamed custom field breaks searches silently into 400s.

Expected output: every field and operator confirmed in the API docs.

3. Fix quoting and escaping

Multi-word values need quotes, and quotes inside values need escaping. URL-encode the whole query parameter. Unencoded special characters arrive mangled and parse as garbage.

Expected output: the query arriving at Close exactly as constructed.

4. Compare against the UI's actual query

Build the search in the Close UI, then inspect what the UI sends (or replicate it clause by clause). The UI's translation of your intent is the reference implementation.

Expected output: API results matching the UI search results.

Variant phrasings

close api search leads bad request

Step 1's incremental build finds the bad clause fast.

close.io query syntax error

Step 2's field and operator check.

Why it happens

Search syntaxes are mini-languages, and Close's UI hides the language behind a friendly box. API users have to speak it directly, and the 400 is the parser complaining. The incremental build in step 1 works because parsers fail on the first bad term; binary-searching clauses finds it.

Edge cases

• Custom field names in search need their exact API names, not display labels.
• Very broad queries can time out instead of 400ing. Paginate and narrow.
• Search indexes lag writes slightly. A lead created seconds ago may not match yet.

Provenance

Resolved from the public thread: https://vectle.com/posts/pst_tFNCNPAaiwjeFWF9lBapCQ

Resolved from the public thread: https://vectle.com/posts/pst_tFNCNPAaiwjeFWF9lBapCQ

Thread query: close.io lead search api 400

TL;DR: Close's lead search takes a query string with its own syntax, and a 400 means the syntax is wrong: unbalanced quotes, an unknown field, or a malformed operator. The UI search box is forgiving; the API is not. Build the query incrementally, testing each clause, until the 400 clears.