Get Started
Get Inspiration
Groups
Events
Ideas
Release Hub

Start a Post
Log in

Home
Ideas

Ideas

Want to shape the future of Docusign? Add your ideas for dream features and upvote others you love.

Featured topics

How to Use the Ideas Feature

What you need to know about Docusign Community IdeasThis guide will walk you through the process of sharing your ideas, voting on existing ideas, and...

2 years ago

23960

Filter by Idea status

Filter by category

1117 Ideas

Most Replies

Most Votes

Newest First

lkatwlnNew Voice

Make the term "Agreement Manager" visible within the User InterfaceIdea Submitted

Agreement Manager is intended to serve as the central location for storing and managing executed agreements and is consistently promoted under this name. The current user interface doesn´t clearly communicate this purpose. Users may not immediately recognize where the Agreement Manager functionality can be accessed, as finalized agreements are located under Completed Documents. This label suggests a document status rather than the dedicated Agreement Manager experience, making it less intuitive for users to identify where executed agreements are centrally stored and managed.Idea: Displaying the term Agreement Manager directly within the application.

3 months ago

gordonchangNewcomer

Introduce Filters for the Homepage Tasks Widget in Docusign Mobile App (Distinguish Personal vs. Group Tasks)Idea Submitted

As a Department Head managing multiple contract workflows, I want to be able to filter my task queue on the Docusign Mobile App homepage widget, So that I can easily distinguish between tasks directly assigned to me individually and shared tasks assigned to my CLM Groups.Current Pain Point: Currently, joining a CLM Group floods the mobile app's task widget with all group-level tasks, making the queue cluttered and hard to streamline. There is no option to filter or sort these tasks on the mobile app homepage. To keep the mobile app clean, users are forced to avoid joining CLM groups entirely, which disrupts standard workflow best practices.Proposed Solution: Please add a simple toggle or filter dropdown (e.g., "Assigned to Me" vs. "Group Tasks") within the mobile app's homepage task pane to help managers streamline their daily task queues efficiently.Background:Mobile App only support 200 Task onlyrefer case#17519910 - CLM Task show in Dousign app17513679 - User mobile app show We're unable to load you task

3 months ago

LUIZ VALUZObserver

Bulk signing in the DocuSign systemDuplicate

Currently, DocuSign does not have a native bulk signing feature that allows a signer to simply select "sign all" without opening each envelope or document individually. It would be beneficial if signers had the option to bulk-sign documents they themselves have sent out for signature.

3 months ago

henrikcareliusActive Voice

“sign once, apply to all” - functionIdea Submitted

I have about 3000 documents all needed to be signed by the same person and have inserted signed date. All documents are identical conserning the location of the signature and the date. As of now all the documents have to be signes individually. I am looking for a “sign once, apply to all” function

3 months ago

msams2001New Voice

Enable Scheduling for Web Form Data ReportsIdea Submitted

Problem:Currently, DocuSign allows scheduling of default reports but does not support scheduling for Web Form Data reports. This creates extra manual work for our employees since they have to log in, generate and export the web form data reports on a recurring basis which can slow down our workflows. Who Benefits:This enhancement would benefit our admins, sales teams, and document teams who rely on Web Form Data reports for tracking submissions, form status and auditing. Our teams also use these reports to track customer behavior. For example, if a customer attempts a web form multiple times without completing it, it may indicate confusion and the need for proactive outreach. Proposed Solution:Add the ability to schedule Web Form Data reports just like default reports. Users should be able to select frequency, recipients, and export formats to automatically receive these reports without manual effort.

3 months ago

Jea0254New Voice

Certificate of CompletionIdea Submitted

The recommended enhancement to the DocuSign workflow is the ability to enable or disable Certificates of Completion at the individual envelope level. Currently, this setting can only be managed at the account level, making it difficult to accommodate the varying requirements of customers and external parties. Regulatory, legal, and business requirements often differ by country, state, or organization, and a global account-level setting lacks the flexibility needed to support these unique needs. Allowing Certificates of Completion to be configured on a per-envelope basis would provide greater control, improve compliance with regional requirements, and enhance the overall user experience.

3 months ago

HannahPayworks.caConversation Starter

Allow "Save & Finish Later" on Maestro-based WebformsDelivered

Clients currently lose their data if they do not complete the intake form in a single session. This can lead to frustration and incomplete submissions.Clients are not able to pause and resume form completion without losing data, and aren’t clearly informed that progress won’t be saved or advised on what they need to complete the form in one sitting.Please allow SAVE on the Webforms linked to Maestro.

3 months ago

JsmithNewcomer

Report or filter available to track the processing of agreements with AIParked

In Agreement Manager - (formerly Navigator) for completed agreements, there is a purple star sparkle emoji that shows to the left of all agreements and the inside on the star is white while the agreement is being processed with AI and turns to full purple once complete. It would be helpful to have a filter or report to show which agreements or documents that are in processing of being processed by AI.

3 months ago

AEJIvesNew Voice

Shared access 'Pooled' Agreement InboxIdea Submitted

Our organisation has a small number of individuals that uses Docusign (5-10). Due to the nature of what we use Docusign for, it would be very useful for our team to be able to see everyone else's agreements all at once either by default or by selecting a ‘Pooled Inbox’ option. I understand there is the option to check through someone else's agreements individually, but it would be a far more useful and fluid setup if our staff could see everyone's agreements all in one inbox. Please consider adding this option!

3 months ago

Robert KaraszkiewiczNew Voice

Delegations and Powers of AttorneyIdea Submitted

Good morning, Dear Sir or Madam, I am writing regarding the “Delegations and Powers of Attorney” feature on the DocuSign platform. More specifically, I am referring to the delegation of authority to sign or approve documents when an employee is on leave. Below is a brief description of exactly what I mean: 1. Employee “A” goes on vacation from June 17, 2026, to June 19, 2026, and on June 16, 2026, delegates their authority to employee “B.”2. Currently, the system works such that Employee “B” can only sign those envelopes belonging to Employee “A” that were received during the specified vacation period.3. Could you enable this feature so that envelopes initiated before the vacation period are also routed to the person who has been granted the power of attorney?4. If anyone else here is interested in having DocuSign implement this functionality, I encourage you to vote. A lot currently depends on human intervention; such a feature would allow for a smooth flow of contracts and envelopes. Sincerely,Robert Karaszkiewicz Translated with DeepL.com (free version)

3 months ago

NeringaNew Voice

Schedule Reports at the same timeParked

I have a few reports scheduled within Docusign. For the past year they used to arrive at the same time so I decided to connect to different platform (in my case Power Bi) to do further reporting. Recently these reports started to come at the random times which effects my other reporting being out of date. Would be nice to set the certain time every day for these reports to arrive to my inbox.

3 months ago

PslimNew Voice

Agreement Manager to Allow specific users to create custom fieldsIdea Submitted

Currently there is a need to view all agreements to all custom fields creation.There should be an ability to allow those Director level individuals that do contract approval to allow custom field creation and sharing of agreement sets to new project teams for contract renewal and negotiation. There is not a need to view all agreements to create the fields.

3 months ago

arthresherNew Voice

Restrict Ability to Add Recipients to Template in Advanced EditParked

It would be very nice to have the ability to configure templates so that users can delete, replace, and add documents and signing fields and modify or delete recipients without being able to add recipients.Setting the template to Quick Send Only prevents senders from adding recipients; however, it is then impossible to delete, replace, or add documents to the template or to modify the signing fields. Moreover, once a Quick Send draft is saved, resuming the draft opens directly into Advanced Edit, where the sender is free to add recipients. I also cannot imagine that is the intended behavior.This is the main hurdle preventing my organization from expanding our usage of Docusign eSignature beyond a handful of document types.

3 months ago

sailesh.nairNewcomer

Add Filter details and Owner of envelopes to the csv downloadIdea Submitted

Add the filter details to the csv download feature.The filter applied during the csv download must be captured in the csv file downloaded on the first line.Additionally the owner details(email id) of each envelop should also be output along with the envelope id.

3 months ago

EKSNewcomer

Add a way to resize one dimensions of a field at a timeIdea Submitted

I frequently am creating form templates that have multiple fields that are of the same width and or height, and when creating these it is very frustrating that if I ever want to make one of them, say, be a taller field while still being the same width as the others, I cannot do this in any way. Even more frustrating is when I have several identical fields, and then need to edit the form in order to increase the height of them, but want to preserve them having the same width as each other.With the current field resizing tools, I can only adjust field sizing by dragging the corners, which adjusts both the height and width simultaneously - which makes it impossible to not change both at once, which makes it extremely imprecise, and effectively impossible to not at least slightly change the other dimension. There is no way to do something like hold ctrl to change this behavior, and bafflingly there is no way to adjust a field by dragging from one of the flat edges rather than the corners.There should be a way to accomplish this - be it having resizing bars on the edges of the field boxes that can be dragged to adjust one dimension at a time, or holding a key to lock one dimension as long as the other dimension isn't changing much. Or have a menu that would allow me to set a field to an exact size, thus allowing me to set all of the fields to the same width. These are very simple and straightforward options and tools, available in most similar types of platforms or editing software, and not having the ability to do things like this had been endlessly frustrating. Similarly, when resizing a field and having an edge begin to line up with a field nearby it, there should be a faint line that I can snap the edge to to line up the edges - this would also help solve this issue, while also solving issues with having fields with different lengths that are supposed to end at the same point on the right edge (say, different titled fields such as name, email address, phone number, account number, etc, that are each above/below each other, where the ends of the fields should be in line but the left edges are obviously starting at the ends of the text. I want my forms to look properly professional when deployed, and not have inconsistent and varied widths for fields that are directly following each other, especially when it is simply due to lacking tools.

3 months ago

veronica.barnasNewcomer

Allow Admin/Users to View Size of EnvelopeIdea Submitted

We recently had an issue where attachments were not being included in the completed email. It turns out it was because the envelope exceeded 5 MB. Because we can’t see this in our instance anywhere, we will need to bring Support in each time this happens to make sure it is the same issue and not something different.

3 months ago

PQuayeNewcomer

Agreement Type RecoveryIdea Submitted

Deleting or modifying fields in Docusign is complicated. It often means that either your field will be incorrectly collocated or that you are unable to use the same name for a field created later on. I’ve encountered this same issue with the Agreement Type. I deleted the agreement type so that I could recreate it to add all miscellaneous fields, however I was not able to name the new agreement type after an old one, and there was no way to recover the previously deleted agreement type and now have to select a new name. Any workarounds or updates to address this issue?

3 months ago

mshealyEstablished Contributor

delete groups in bulkIdea Submitted

I would like to delete groups in bulk. Right now, I have to select one at a time now. I have hundreds of groups to remove and this is going to take me forever to do. either put a select box by each group or something. Thankshave to select one at a time.

3 months ago

PQuayeNewcomer

Delete a single rule built as part of a larger rule block.Idea Submitted

I’ve found that moving rule block and updating their position is not really possible with the IAM document template. This would be great if we are able to later delete one rule from a rule block in order to reposition it within the contract.

3 months ago

JanSpacekNew Voice

Bug: “Specify Recipients” – Name field marked as required but must be empty + misleading error messageIdea Submitted

When using the “Specify Recipients” option, there are two issues that together create a functional defect:1) Name field appears as mandatory but must actually be emptyIn the recipient setup, the Name field has a * (star) beside it, which in standard convention means the field is required and must be filled in by the sender.However, in the Specify Recipients scenario:If the sender fills in the Name field, the envelope cannot be sent. To proceed, the sender must leave the Name field blank.So the UI is instructing users to do the exact opposite of what is actually required. This is not just confusing; it is contrary to the documented UX pattern where * means “must be filled in”.Expected behavior:For Specify Recipients, the Name field should not be marked with a * (or should clearly be indicated as optional/must be left blank for this routing type). Alternatively, the UI should dynamically change the requirement/indicator when Specify Recipients is used.2) Error message is incorrect and does not reflect the real problemIf the sender fills in the Name field and tries to send the envelope, the system displays the following error:“This recipient type must have at least one recipient to specify at the same or later position in the signing order.”This message is misleading in this context:The signing order is set correctly. The issue is not that there is no recipient to specify at the same or later position. The real root cause is that the Name field is filled in, even though for Specify Recipients it must be empty.So the error points users to signing-order configuration, when the real fix is simply to clear the Name field.Expected behavior:The error message should clearly describe the actual problem, for example:“For ‘Specify Recipients’, the Name field must be left empty so the recipient can be specified later.” Why this needs to be treated as a bug (not just an enhancement)The * indicator is a core DocuSign UX convention for “mandatory”; here, it is effectively wrong. The error message sends users in the wrong direction and does not help them correct the real issue. The combination of these issues blocks users from sending envelopes and creates unnecessary support interactions.RequestFix the mandatory field indicator for Name when using Specify Recipients, so it accurately reflects that the Name must be left blank (or at least is not required). Update the error message to clearly indicate that the Name field must not be filled in when using Specify Recipients.This change would align the UI and messaging with the actual system behavior and significantly reduce confusion and support cases.

3 months ago

Robin HabegerNewcomer

Allow an option to have recipient info transfer when an Envelope is saved as a TemplateIdea Submitted

Hello, we save Envelopes as Templates in order to transfer them to a shared folder. Every time we save an Envelope as a Template, we have to re-type the recipient info. Every. Singe. Time. It would be great if there was an option to have the recipient info automatically transfer to the Template. Or some kind of option to allow the Envelope to be shared by other users beside saving it as a Template.Thank you!

3 months ago

Cadena de SuministroNewcomer

Allow sorting envelopes in the inbox by date receivedDuplicate

Ensure that the option to sort envelopes by date received works in the 'action required' tray, allowing users to sign from the oldest to the newest envelope. Likewise, when an envelope is signed, the system should suggest signing the next oldest one, rather than the newest one as it currently does.

3 months ago

NBKPRActive Voice

Increase the limit on the number of attachments per web formIdea Submitted

While enhancing a web form, I reached the limit of the number of attachments a form can have: 15.I know that when the form is filled, there will not be 15 attachments. The developers need to change the limit to 30 or more. I have a few places in the form with check boxes. If you check a box, the person filling out the form needs to attach a document. A description of the desired document is necessary. With this limiting factor, I will have to choose which options will have an attachment field.

3 months ago

TomDActive Voice

Option to reduce field padding/margin or allow vertical alignmentIdea Submitted

Problem: Input text does not appear at the expected height and is mis-aligned with existing text. This causes a lot of time consuming trial and error (and the preview function for document templates is so half-baked it is not even worth trying at that stage). If you want the input text to be in line with existing text, the input field must generally be placed 1-2 mm below the level of the existing text. That in turn can mean the input box overlaps text below.Very dense forms, such as W-8BEN-E, can be very difficult to set up because the rows of existing text is so close and the input fields take up excessive height.Suggestion: It would be great if the user could be sure of where the input text will be on the final document by simply trusting how input fields appear in the template. Please let the user remove the padding/margin to decrease the field size and preferably align the text vertically to top, centre, or bottom. The user should be able to know precisely where the text will appear in the completed document.The same goes for tick-boxes (mark ends up too low), etc.The user’s preference should be saved in the user profile or admin settings.

3 months ago

rodvillaniTroubleshooter

Apply Global Filter Across Multiple CLM ReportsIdea Submitted

I would like to suggest an enhancement for reporting in Docusign CLM. Currently, I maintain multiple reports based on the same set of documents, but grouped by different attributes for visualization purposes (graphics). For example: One report grouped by Request Owner Another grouped by Requesting Department Another grouped by Completion DeadlineIt would be extremely valuable to have the ability to link these reports under a shared or global filter. For instance, if I select a specific “Requesting Department” as a primary filter, all related reports (e.g. by Owner and by Deadline) would automatically update to reflect that same filter. At the moment, filters must be applied manually to each report one by one, which is time-consuming and inefficient. A synchronized filtering capability would significantly improve usability, consistency of analysis and overall reporting efficienty. Thanks for considering this idea.

4 months ago