The idea is:
Hello!
I have the following two requests:
Request 1
Resource: Record, Operation: Get & Search
To add an option whether to set the key: “returnFieldsByFieldId” in the request.
Request 2
Resource: Record, Operation: Create or Update
When using the Create or Update operation with “Map Automatically”, either let the user set the value for “Columns to Match On” (fieldsToMergeOn) in a text/expression field, and/or add a “Use Field IDs” option to allow passing field ids instead of of field names. Currently, if one selects “Field_1” and “Field_2” for columns to merge on, and the input data from the previous note has field ID as keys instead of the field name, the request will not work (given the fieldsToMergeOn key is being set as the field names based on the select options).
My use case:
I’ve always only used field ids when creating workflows since many people use our bases and using field ids makes sure that if someone changes the field name for whatever reason, it doesn’t break any associated workflows. As such, for nearly all circumstances, I can only use the HTTP request node to work with airtable requests. I really like the Airtable node, as using it would save myself a ton of time while creating workflows, but I am just too paranoid to use Field Names.
I think it would be beneficial to add this because:
I think for most use cases, using the field IDs would be considered best-practice, save perhaps for situations where you’d like for your workflow to work for multiple tables with the same Column names (though, even in this circumstance, there are easy ways to dynamically change the field IDs in n8n).
I am not sure how many others are die-hard field ID users, but certainly I image this feature making my life a lot easier, and easier for those who are less technical.
Any resources to support this?
N/A
Are you willing to work on this?
Yes, though I am not very experienced and would need a little guidance/direction to resources.
I would also be interested in a similar feature and would be open to giving a bounty of $300 for it. 
Specifically, I’d like to request an enhancement for the Airtable node in n8n. Currently, the node requires field names when creating or updating records, but Airtable’s API uses field IDs. This can cause issues, especially when field names change or contain special characters, breaking workflows.
A similar functionality for targeting tables by ID instead of table name has been discussed and implemented (see this thread), and having a similar feature for fields would be extremely useful. There was a similar feature request here, but it hasn’t received much traction.
Proposed Solution:
- Add an option for the Airtable node to accept field IDs instead of field names for creating and updating records.
- In the n8n UI, the fields should still display the field names for easy configuration, but the underlying logic should use the field IDs, making workflows more resilient to Airtable schema changes.
Functional Requirements
- The Airtable node should allow field IDs for both the “Create” and “Update” operations.
- The UI should display field names during configuration but use field IDs in API calls.
Compatibility & Documentation
- Ensure the feature supports all Airtable data types and includes proper error handling.
- Update documentation to explain how to use the feature and any toggle options for field name vs. field ID.
Testing
- Provide test cases showing the feature works with field name changes and special characters.
- Include a basic workflow test that demonstrates functionality for both single and batch records.
Review
- The feature is merged into the main branch and works
Bounty: I am offering $300 for this, but I am open to negotiation based on complexity and feedback. If you are interested or would like clarification, please reach out [email protected]
Hey folks, any chance to get this implemented or is it on the pipeline and haven’t been picked up yet? We’d appreciate some update and it would help our teams to have this in place if possible.
Thank you!