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...

D

Forum|Forum|2 years ago

22070

Update on the status of submitted ideas

Hi everyone! We’ve heard your questions about the status of submitted ideas in the Ideas forum.Internally, the Docusign team is actively reviewing you...

Forum|Forum|1 year ago

9188

Filter by Idea status

Filter by category

970 Ideas

Most Replies

Most Votes

Newest First

N

Nikoleta M.Newcomer

The email attachments exceed 5 MB.Duplicate

Increasing the email attachment limit beyond 5 MB would simplify communication and improve efficiency. Users could send larger files directly by email without relying on external file-sharing services, making the overall process faster, easier, and more convenient.

3

J

Forum|Forum|26 minutes ago

T

Tracey RaeNew Voice

increase the size of the documents from 5 MB limit.Parked

We would love to send a range of sized documents to our customers and partners. if we could increase the size of the documents from 5 MB limit.Having the documents go from an email attachment to a downloaded link if the size is reached is an extra step for both parties unfortunately.

5

J

Forum|Forum|29 minutes ago

J

JesseMNew Voice

Stop prioritizing “smart” automation over user controlIdea Submitted

DocuSign continues to introduce updates that appear designed to make workflows “easier,” but in practice they are making the platform less intuitive and more frustrating for experienced users.The recent change requiring users to drag documents by a small, greyed-out outline instead of the actual document itself is a perfect example. This is not an improvement to usability — it hides the function users are looking for and makes a simple task unnecessarily difficult.The same issue exists with automatic signer arrangement. DocuSign increasingly tries to make decisions on behalf of the user instead of allowing the user to control the workflow. When preparing legal documents for signature, users need predictable behavior and direct control, not automation that has to be corrected.Please prioritize:Clear, visible controls User-selected ordering instead of forced automation The ability to disable “helpful” automatic features Testing updates with real-world users before rolling them outA good user interface should reduce clicks and confusion, not require users to discover hidden tricks after an update breaks a workflow that previously worked.DocuSign is a critical business tool. Please focus on making it more reliable and user-friendly rather than adding changes that create unnecessary friction for the people who use it every day.

0

J

Forum|Forum|6 hours ago

B

bpm-energyNewcomer

Resize a signature field to tailer to your documentDuplicate

It would be an improvement from my point of view to be able to size the signature box freely, to tailor its shape to the document being signed, similar to BlueBeam etc.

1

M

Forum|Forum|6 hours ago

A

apersonaNew Voice

Resizing a Signature Field is impossible... WHY????Idea Submitted

I have been sent a document for me to sign and then to forward to a countersignee.The document already has dotted lines for signature name and date.The Docusign signature field is a tall rectangle, which does not permit resizing, only scaling. This means that it simply does not fit in the available space. This is ridiculous. Why on earth is it not possible for a user to resize their own signature field?

5

M

Forum|Forum|6 hours ago

D

daniel.krcmarDigital Collaborator

Add More Data Types for Envelope Custom FieldsDuplicate

Add More Data Types for Envelope Custom FieldsProblemCurrently, Envelope Custom Fields only support Text and List field types. This limits how metadata can be captured and validated for envelopes.Suggested EnhancementExpand Envelope Custom Fields to support additional data types, such as:Date Number Boolean (Yes/No) Email Phone Number Currency Decimal Date & TimeBenefitsImproves data quality through built-in validation. Reduces the need for custom integrations and manual formatting. Makes searching, filtering, and reporting on envelope metadata more reliable. Enables downstream systems to consume correctly typed data without additional parsing. Aligns Envelope Custom Fields with common business use cases such as contract renewal dates, invoice amounts, approval flags, and reference numbers. Example Use CaseA company uses an Envelope Custom Field to store a contract expiration date. Since only text fields are available, users must manually enter the date in a specific format, increasing the risk of inconsistent or invalid values. A native Date field would provide a date picker, enforce valid formatting, and improve data consistency across integrations and reporting. Requested EnhancementPlease extend Envelope Custom Fields to support additional data types beyond Text and List, starting with Date, while allowing future support for other commonly used field types such as Number, Boolean, Email, and Currency.

1

N

Forum|Forum|9 hours ago

D

daniel.krcmarDigital Collaborator

Add More Data Types for Envelope Custom FieldsIdea Submitted

Add More Data Types for Envelope Custom FieldsProblemCurrently, Envelope Custom Fields only support Text and List field types. This limits how metadata can be captured and validated for envelopes.Suggested EnhancementExpand Envelope Custom Fields to support additional data types, such as:Date Number Boolean (Yes/No) Email Phone Number Currency Decimal Date & TimeBenefitsImproves data quality through built-in validation. Reduces the need for custom integrations and manual formatting. Makes searching, filtering, and reporting on envelope metadata more reliable. Enables downstream systems to consume correctly typed data without additional parsing. Aligns Envelope Custom Fields with common business use cases such as contract renewal dates, invoice amounts, approval flags, and reference numbers. Example Use CaseA company uses an Envelope Custom Field to store a contract expiration date. Since only text fields are available, users must manually enter the date in a specific format, increasing the risk of inconsistent or invalid values. A native Date field would provide a date picker, enforce valid formatting, and improve data consistency across integrations and reporting. Requested EnhancementPlease extend Envelope Custom Fields to support additional data types beyond Text and List, starting with Date, while allowing future support for other commonly used field types such as Number, Boolean, Email, and Currency.

1

N

Forum|Forum|9 hours ago

A

akosNewcomer

Ability to add custom attributes to partiesIdea Submitted

Currently using the Parties module is limited due to the low number of pre-defined fields and no option to create/ add custom ones.A great point about CLM is the level of customizability, but this module is completely against that as it does not provide any option to expand parties to a usable level.In our case: The limitation of party attributes stops us from properly moving supplier data into CLM, it also prevents us from abandoning the currently used solution for contract generation, as we cannot rely solely on CLM.

0

A

Forum|Forum|10 hours ago

S

saumyaNewcomer

Versioning of Docusign templatesIdea Submitted

Hi Team, Currently we have the capability to track who made edits in the docusign templates and when, however we currently dont have activity tracking history for the templates. This will help us to understand what change was made in the template also

0

S

Forum|Forum|15 hours ago

J

J.MahonNewcomer

Enhancement Request: Support for Multi‑Word First Names in Recipient FieldsDuplicate

Proposed Enhancement:Some recipients have multi‑word first names (for example, names like “Mary Anne” or “Jean Paul”). When these names are entered into a template, Docusign interprets the second word as a middle name and only transfers the first word into the “First Name” fields. This leads to incomplete or inaccurate recipient information in templates.It would be helpful to have a way to correctly capture multi‑word first names. This could be supported through a sender‑side function, an optional field setting, or another mechanism that ensures the full first name is preserved when mapping recipient data into template fields.

3

J

Forum|Forum|1 day ago

A

AP-EMDNew Voice

Behavior of Standard First & Last Name fieldsParked

Our company manages a couple hundred DocuSign accounts for our customers. Many of the forms used require “First Name” and “Last Name” & so we use the Standard name field & change it from Full Name to either First Name or Last Name, as needed. However, we have found that the expected behavior of those fields in DocuSign is to pull in the first word of each name rather than the full name. For example, if my first name is Mary Ann (not Mary), using the Standard First Name field only pulls in Mary, which is incorrect. If my last name is Smith Jones, the Standard Last Name field only pulls in Smith.We are using these fields for legal documents & the format happens to sometimes ask for First Name vs Last Name, which is why we can’t use the Standard Full Name field as a work-around. In addition, although Custom First & Last Name fields will also work, it’s extra clicks to go get those, they are harder to copy/paste, & it’s harder to educate users to select those when the Standard fields are the first thing you see.Please update the behavior of the Standard First & Last name fields to pull in the full text that a user identifies as the First or Last name.

4

J

Forum|Forum|1 day ago

K

KellieNNewcomer

Enhancement Request - make webform fully available in language other than what Docusign account is set up asIdea Submitted

The request is to have a web form fully available in a language other than what the account is set up as for all recipients/signers.The language for non-configurable "system" labels and descriptions (these are error messages and other non-configurable text (for example, "Loading…", Finish Later, Next, Back, etc.) on the form as well text in the header/footer of invitation and completion emails) is determined when the web form is initially created based on the form creator's language settings in their Docusign account. Updating the web form configuration file as well as branding worked for the first recipient/signer to have their web form fully available in another language other than the account. However, this did not affect the experience of the second recipient/signer - their non-configurable "system" labels and descriptions were still only available in the language of the Docusign account.

0

K

Forum|Forum|1 day ago

D

DELDRIDGEFBBNewcomer

Enhancement Request - Recipient Authentication Skip OptionIdea Submitted

The account-wide "Recipient Authentication Skip Option" rules exclusively apply to the legacy KBA (ID Check) engine. Because the newer KBA on IDV platform is built on an entirely separate, high-security identity architecture, it enforces re-authentication on every single transaction. It deliberately does not support or inherit the 24-hour browser-caching or "remember this signer" settings.If an organization chooses to use Recipient Authentication Skip Option settings, it should apply to any authentication method used by the organization. Limiting it to a single form of authentication results in mixed client experiences when senders are using different forms of authentication. This is also not user friendly when Salesforce only uses legacy KBA while Docusign direct can use a variety of authentication methods. Organizations should be able to have modern authentication and consistency across system usage.

0

D

Forum|Forum|4 days ago

D

DELDRIDGEFBBNewcomer

Reporting for envelopes - creation to completionIdea Submitted

We need a single report that captures every activity from the time and envelope is created until it is completed to show a full history for researching. This includes templates used, authentication method changes, resend or corrections performed, and file name for each document in an envelope. Right now, multiple reports and the certificate of completion have to be pieced together to research. Ex. Fraud occurs and you want to know who sent the envelope, who it was sent to, all documents in the envelope, if a template was used, changes to the template authentication, pass/fail status of every authentication attempt, resend/correction steps, and any other activity that occurred in the process.

0

D

Forum|Forum|4 days ago

D

daniel.krcmarDigital Collaborator

CLM Report Exports: Export numeric columns as actual number values in Excel (not text)Idea Submitted

When exporting a CLM report to Excel, numeric columns (e.g. contract Value) are exported as text instead of numbers. Excel only recognizes the value as a number after manually double-clicking into each cell. This behavior also interacts poorly with regional settings (e.g. Dutch locale, where the decimal separator is a comma), making the values unusable without manual conversion.Customers use exported reports for downstream analysis — SUM, COUNT, pivot tables, financial reconciliation. With values exported as text, none of these Excel functions work out of the box. For reports with hundreds or thousands of rows, manually converting each cell is not workable. Support has confirmed this is currently expected behavior, but for business users the export is effectively broken for its main purpose: calculating on numeric data.Enhancement:Export numeric and currency columns with a proper Excel number data type (e.g. via native XLSX cell typing), not as text. Respect the user's locale/regional settings (decimal and thousands separators) so values parse correctly in Dutch/European Excel configurations. Optionally: allow the report designer to define the data type per column (text / number / currency / date) for exports.Workaround today: Manually double-click each cell, or use Excel's Text-to-Columns / VALUE() conversion — both impractical at scale.

0

D

Forum|Forum|5 days ago

S

sahil.shettyNewcomer

Add formatting control for [[Data:DocumentNames]] merge field (line-separated / list output)Idea Submitted

The [[Data:DocumentNames]] merge field renders all document names as a single comma-separated string. Please add support for controlling how the list is formatted — at minimum a line-break/newline delimiter, ideally a bulleted or line-separated list option.Problem / use case:When an envelope contains several documents, a comma-separated string on a single line is hard to scan. Recipients skim the notification email quickly, and a run-on list makes it easy to miss that multiple documents are enclosed. This is especially relevant in regulated industries (e.g. financial services) where signers need to clearly see each form they are being asked to sign. Presenting each document name on its own line materially improves readability and reduces recipient confusion.Requested behavior:A supported option to output document names one per line (or as a bulleted list) instead of comma-separated — controllable within the email body / Email Resource file. For example, a delimiter parameter on the merge field, or a companion merge field that emits a formatted list.Current behavior (confirmed with DocuSign Support, Case #17666072):The merge field does not support any formatting options. Output is always comma-separated, the behavior is identical across signer/sender/CC notifications and within Email Resource files, and there is no alternative merge field, repeatable region, or formatting mechanism to display names on separate lines. Support advised submitting this as an enhancement request.Impact if delivered:Clearer, more readable signer notifications; fewer "which documents am I signing?" support questions; better experience for envelopes with multiple documents.

0

S

Forum|Forum|6 days ago

C

CFranzkeNewcomer

Change colour of 'message from the admin'Idea Submitted

As account admin one can set a custom message that shows as banner at the top of screen (https://support.docusign.com/s/document-item?language=en_US&bundleId=pik1583277475390&topicId=zzj1584562722803.html&_LANG=enus)It would improve the user experience (not only for the admin but more importantly of end users) if the color of banner could be set/changed for different messages. For example, set it to green for regular tips/info but to red for critical messages that users should observe.

0

C

Forum|Forum|6 days ago

M

momathewsonNew Voice

Reporting for envelopes/agreements that include DocuSign PaymentsIdea Submitted

Reporting for envelopes/agreements that include DocuSign Payments

0

M

Forum|Forum|7 days ago

L

lkatwlnNew Voice

Searchable Party HierachiesIdea Submitted

When multiple hierarchies are assigned to a single party, finding the right one becomes difficult. Adding a search function at hierarchy level would significantly improve navigation and efficiency.

0

L

Forum|Forum|7 days ago

P

PslimNew Voice

Agreement Manager - Use Folder-Level Path as Categorization Metadata on Bulk UploadIdea Submitted

When bulk uploading agreements into Agreement Manager, categorization currently relies on AI content analysis after ingest, or manual assignment to agreement types/categories/sets. There's no way to leverage the folder structure of the files being uploaded (e.g., from a mapped drive or cloud storage) as a source of categorization metadata.Many organizations already store historical agreements in a meaningful folder hierarchy, such as:/Sales/MSAs/2026//Procurement/Vendor Agreements/2026/Today, this structure is lost on upload — every file lands in Agreement Manager as an individual record, categorized only by what the AI infers from the document content, or by tags applied manually afterward.Request: When uploading a folder (or nested folders) of agreements, allow the folder path to be captured and mapped to categorization fields, for example:Auto-populate or suggest an agreement type, category, department, or custom field based on the folder name(s) in the path Let admins define a mapping between folder structure and metadata fields before or during upload (e.g., top-level folder → Department, second-level folder → Agreement Type) Preserve the original folder path as a searchable attribute on the agreement record, even if the user doesn't set up a mappingWhy it matters: Migrating agreements from network drives, SharePoint, or other DMS tools into Agreement Manager means re-doing categorization work that already exists in the folder structure. Using folder-level information would speed up migration, reduce manual tagging, and give AI categorization a stronger starting signal instead of relying on content inference alone.

0

P

Forum|Forum|7 days ago

P

PslimNew Voice

Agreement Manager - Party Hierarchy / Grouping in Agreement Manager (distinct from Merge)Idea Submitted

Today, Agreement Manager only supports two party actions: Merge and Set As Internal Party. There's no way to represent a parent-subsidiary or affiliate relationship between two distinct parties without collapsing them into a single record via Merge.This is a problem when parties are legally separate entities but organizationally related — e.g.:Company A └─ Subsidiary BMerging isn't appropriate here because Company A and Subsidiary B are separate legal entities, each with their own agreements, obligations, and signing authority. Merging would incorrectly consolidate their agreement history and identity.Request: Add a "Group" / hierarchy action alongside Merge and Set As Internal Party, allowing users to link parties as parent/child (or peer group) without merging their records. This would let users:Define a hierarchy (e.g., Company A as parent, Subsidiary B as child) Roll up or filter agreements by hierarchy, to see all agreements tied to a corporate family, not just one legal entity Keep each party's agreements, obligations, and identity intact and separateWhy it matters: Without this, users either merge parties incorrectly (losing entity separation) or have no way to see cross-entity agreement relationships at all, making it hard to assess total exposure/relationship with a corporate group.

0

P

Forum|Forum|7 days ago

C

crystalrataNewcomer

Broken ButtonsIdea Submitted

For the past 4-6 months there are a number of invisible buttonsFor a simple signing, once you’ve selected that you agree, there is a hidden button just to the right of the options dropdown.The image below isn’t the exact same screen you’ll be seeing, but it does show where the hidden button appears. Once you move your mouse over the area, the button should become light grey and clickable.We need this fixed or we will find another singing platfom solution. What to include in your feedback:Provide the following information to help us improve your experience: What you were doing: Sending Envelope or trying to sign inside a loggied-in platfrom account. Several buttons are invisible and can only be found if you know where they are an hover over them. I am using Chrome Version 149.0.7827.201 (Official Build) (arm64), but other users have also reported the issue What you expected to happen: That you can visibly see the buttons that you have to press What actually happened: The button hidden until rolled over.

0

C

Forum|Forum|7 days ago

J

JanSpacekNew Voice

Improve error message for DS EU Advanced access code character limitIdea Submitted

Description:When a DS EU Advanced recipient has an access code longer than 12 characters, the transaction fails with this error message:"The signature provider option value is not valid. Signature provider option: onetimepassword value is not valid."Problem: This error message is unclear and does not tell the user what actually went wrong. It does not mention that the access code exceeds the 12-character limit. Suggested improvements: Make the error message specific – for example: "Access code for DS EU Advanced recipient exceeds the maximum of 12 characters. Please shorten the access code and try again." This change would save customers time, reduce support tickets, and improve the overall user experience.This is raised based on the ticket - 17618536, as was suggested by the DS support as only way to improve the error message.

0

J

Forum|Forum|8 days ago

H

Hr.PIAautNewcomer

Option to Disable Email TrackingIdea Submitted

Dear DocuSign Product Management,We would like to submit a feature request regarding a significant email delivery issue that we are currently experiencing.A large number of DocuSign emails fail to reach our recipients because they are quarantined or blocked by our email security solutions. The root cause is the invisible tracking pixel and its associated tracking link embedded in DocuSign emails. Our security policies identify this URL as a tracking service, resulting in the email being blocked.The tracking pixel is automatically loaded when the recipient opens the email and is used to determine whether and when the email was opened, as well as the recipient's IP address, geographic region, and email client.According to DocuSign Support, it is currently not possible to disable this tracking functionality. We were advised to submit this request to the DocuSign Product Management team for consideration.We therefore request that DocuSign provide an optional administrator setting to completely disable email tracking. This would allow organizations with strict security and privacy requirements to receive DocuSign emails reliably without having to create exceptions for tracking domains or relax existing security policies.As this behavior directly affects the delivery of business-critical documents and can delay or even prevent signature workflows, we kindly ask that this feature request be treated with high priority and considered for a future product release.Thank you for your time and for considering this request.

1

N

Forum|Forum|8 days ago

L

lkatwlnNew Voice

Contract Type Configuration EnhancementsIdea Submitted

Contract details can become cluttered with standard fields that are not needed for a specific contract type. As a result, users may struggle to identify which fields are actually relevant, leading to a less intuitive experience and unnecessary follow-up questions. This limitation is especially apparent for DocuSign-provided contract types, where unused standard fields cannot currently be hidden.Two related enhancements could improve the user experience:1. Allow standard fields to be hidden for DocuSign contract typesAdministrators should be able to hide unused standard fields on a contract type level, including for DocuSign-provided contract types. This would reduce visual clutter, simplify manual data entry, and provide users with a clearer view of the fields that actually matter.2. Allow custom field ordering within categoriesAdministrators should be able to define the order of fields within a category. This would make it possible to arrange fields according to a logical workflow or business process, rather than a fixed system-defined order.

0

L

Forum|Forum|8 days ago