Not really, Italy would only honour the Triple Alliance if Austria would agree to border revisions.
True, promises of autonomy for Italian subjects of Vienna shall not be enough.
What is required for Italy to join in 1914 is Germany acting quickly and putting overwhelming pressure on Austria to cede at least some of its Italian claims to Rome. Trento and Gorizia-Gradisca, in addition to recognition of all Italian claims on French territory and colonies, shall do the trick.
Alternatively, a different sequence of WWI onset which would bind Italy to the defensive Triple Alliance more strongly. I.e. Germany does not adopt the Schliffen Plan, (and so does not need to beat France and Russia to the gun), Russia declares war to A-U first, Germany declares war to Russia in response, France declares war to Germany, Italy declares war to France.
I doubt the Italians would get transported to Germany to hold the left wing, as suggested by Schlieffen, rather they would probably be used in Nice and Savoy as intended by their general staff.
They can easily do both, since even after deploying their fully mobilized potential alongside the Alps French front (which was rather shorter and less well fortified than the OTL Austrian one), they are going to have a significant surplus, and the Triple Alliance protocols to send troops on the Alsace-Lorraine front have been standing for a long while. It's just optimal use of the CP resources, and Italy wants the defeat of France as much as Germany at this point.
However, other areas where they are going to need some troops is to defend their mainland and Sicily (Sardinia is undefensible in such a war, but losing it for the duration fo the war is not a great loss) from Anglo-French landings, sending an expeditionary corps from Albania to backstab Serbia (which ensures its total defeat when Bulgaria joins the CP, the Serbian army is completely encircled and surrenders, Greece shall stay fully neutral, so no Salonicco front). They may try and defend the colonies, but in all likelihood, they shall face problems as big as the Germans (OTOH, if they can get their act together with the Ottomans, Egypt amy be caught in a vise).
The combination of Italian, Austrian, and Ottoman navies may make the Mediterranean contested with the Anglo-French.
But would this make a difference in August 1914? Sure the French would be forced to leave their troops in the area that were used elsewhere, but the Germans will still have the fundamental weakness in their logistics which ultimately caused their invasion to fail. I don't know if the French military would give up so easy despite the heavy odds.
Well, the French just got their front enlarged by one-third. And the Battle of the Marna was a close affair. The Italo-Germans shall sure face many logistical problems, but CP Italy from the start makes it a rather more uphill struggle for survival in 1914.
However, in the long term, barring outstanding Entente military performance or abysmally bad CP one, a CP Italy dooms the Entente. The Anglo-French are facing an horribly overextended Western front and the French a increasingly crippling manpower gap, Austria is free to throw all its potential against Russia, Serbia shall go down very quickly, Greece shall be a true neutral, CP navies can contest the Mediterranean, so the RN shall have to divert resources here, weaking itself in the North Sea, or France shall have severe problems getting manpower from the colonies.
In all likelihood, CP Italy means a Russian collapse in 1915-1916, Germany sees victory in sight and is less exhausted, so uses no unrestricted submarine warfare, the USA stay neutral, and combined Italo-German-Austrian manpower overwhelms overstretched France in 1916-1917, Britain and Japan sue for a compromise peace after the collapse of France.