Share product ideas and upvotes with our product team
Currently SLA’s support First Response Time and Next Response Time, but FRT counts down as soon as the conversation starts rather than counting as soon as it’s assigned to an agent. I’d like the ability to create an additional (not replacement) SLA, First Response Since Assignment. It will only start counting down when the ticket has been assigned to a human agent. This works well with the Balanced Assignment system, which supports SLA within prioritization rulesets.
When you pulling all articles, you are loosing the order they have within a certain (parent) section.https://developers.intercom.com/docs/references/rest-api/api.intercom.io/Articles/listArticles/ When you pull sections or collections, it is exporting the order (by exporting the order-value).See API for collections: https://developers.intercom.com/docs/references/rest-api/api.intercom.io/Help-Center/collection/(there is a misspelling in this one, it says “… The order of the section in relation to others sections within a collection. ...” )API for sections: https://developers.intercom.com/docs/references/2.7/rest-api/api.intercom.io/Help-Center/listAllSections/ Can you please implement the order-key for articles (in the webinterface it is possible to order them, but its not reflected in the exported data via API)
It would be very handy if when you went to re-snooze a conversation that the ‘Last Custom Snooze’ setting was remembered and available form the list of preset selections. ie a conversation is snoozed at a future check in/deadline date which won’t change but the customer replies with some thing like ‘Thanks, see you then’ a hour later so it reopens - you have to custom select that snooze date all over again
I wish I could set the order of Help Center articles via the API. Right now, one can only do it via the Intercom UI.
Problem: Hard to find mentions that I haven’t yet “done” or “handled”. I get like 5-8 mentions every day from team members with technical questions. When I’ve answered my team members in the conversation, the mention still stays in my list. Some mentions are quick to answer but some might take several days or even weeks to handle, so old unhandled mentions are relevant for me, but are very hard to find since I mostly see the latest mentions which might be handled already. Current workaround is to use “Mark as unread” after I’ve read it and not handled it yet. Then I can use the filter to show only “unread” mentions. This has obvious problems: as soon as I click on a mention, the system marks it as read. Requested feature:A separate "Mark as Done" or "Resolve Mention" button that removes the mention from my personal Mentions list without affecting the conversation status or other teammates' views.This is not the same as closing the conversation - the conversation might be about more things, and our team members still should answer the customer etc…
The warning message occupies almost half of the reply screen. Please allow to minimize or close the warning message as there is not enough space to work with especially when creating long responses.
The ability to clear out the Mentions view in Intercom, both in bulk and to individually check off items, would make using that view much easier. Currently, the view is difficult to manage as all Mentions remain in the view.
Currently managing large volumes of mentions (3,000+) requires opening each conversation individually to clear the unread count. There's no bulk functionality for mention management.Requested features:Bulk 'mark as read' option for mentions Bulk 'clear all mentions' functionality Mass selection tools for mention management (similar to conversation bulk editing)Current limitation: Only way to clear unread mentions is going to Inbox → Mentions → Unread mentions, then opening conversations one by one.This would significantly improve efficiency for users with high mention volumes who need streamlined inbox management.
Problem:Fin AI Agent tags individual conversations with a "Fin referenced memory" event when Fin draws on stored memory to respond. That event is visible at the conversation level, but it's not exposed anywhere in reporting. The Fin AI Agent Analyze dashboard shows resolution rate, CX score, and involvement rate, but there's no way to filter or segment any of those metrics by whether memory was used.What we'd like to see:Turn the existing "Fin referenced memory" event into a reportable attribute, similar to how other conversation-level tags already feed into Analyze. Since the tagging already happens at the conversation level, this would mainly be a matter of surfacing that field for filtering and segmentation rather than building new tracking from scratch.Why it matters:Without this, teams have no way to measure whether Fin Memory is actually helping resolution rates, hurting them, or making no difference. Right now the only way to check is opening conversations one at a time and looking at the event log, which doesn't scale for anyone trying to evaluate memory as a feature. Being able to compare memory vs. non-memory conversations on resolution rate and CX score would let teams make an informed call on whether to keep leaning into it.
Allow First Name field when using AutoNudge so you don’t have to use generic / impersonal “Friend” or “there”
When Fin answers a question by drawing from a help article, it paraphrases and summarizes the article content well, but it strips out any hyperlinks that are embedded in that article. So if an article says something like "You can create one. Here's how" with "Here's how" linking to another resource, Fin reproduces the sentence in plain text with no link. The customer never sees it.We confirmed this is a documented limitation in Intercom's own support documentation. Specifically, the following two Intercom help articles both address it directly: Fin AI Agent FAQs (https://www.intercom.com/help/en/articles/7727118-fin-ai-agent-faqs), under "Customer Experience": "Currently, Fin AI Agent is not able to present links in consistently formatted hyperlinks. You can use Guidance to encourage Fin to hyperlink where possible, but this will still depend on which sources were initially retrieved by Fin when forming an AI answer." FAQs (https://fin.ai/help/en/articles/16257287-faqs), under "Fin Functionality": "Currently, Fin AI Agent is not able to consistently present links in formatted hyperlinks." We tried the Guidance approach referenced in the first article and tested it extensively. The result is that Fin does surface some URLs inline, but it does not carry through the actual hyperlinked text from the article body. The hyperlinks in our article content are simply dropped. Our customers never see them.The workaround we were pointed toward is writing out URLs as plain text in every article body rather than using formatted hyperlinks. For a help center of any meaningful size, that is not a realistic ask. Our articles are written the way any standard help center article would be, with descriptive anchor text linking to related resources, and the expectation that those links would carry through to Fin responses is a reasonable one.What we are hoping for is straightforward: when Fin references content from an article that contains a hyperlink, it should surface that link in its response rather than silently dropping it. This would make Fin significantly more useful for customers who need to take a next step or find related information, and it would eliminate the need to maintain two versions of article formatting.Thanks for considering this. Happy to share specific examples from our testing if that would be useful.
On the workflow “When customer visits a page” it is not possible to make the first step be a Branch. This prevents us from having one workflow that can detect a customer’s language and provide the Help Center articles in their respective languages. Since the Message step is static, any article that is added in that step will remain on the language it was selected in. This means that, even if the workflow auto-translates to the customer language, the articles will remain in whatever language they were set as. Currently, the only option to prevent this is by creating a workflow in each language, which is not ideal
We have hundreds of macros that are not organized in macro folders. Currently, there is no way to move an existing macro to a folder. Please add this feature
The new BO ticket auto-fill behavior appears to rename tickets and pre-populate fields in ways that are often unhelpful for manual support workflows.In this case, it filled fields that are usually left at defaults, but did not help with the fields the agent actually needed to complete.The bigger issue is that there seems to be no admin control to disable or limit the feature, which makes it hard to prevent confusing or noisy results. For our team, this would likely create confusion in most BO tickets rather than save time.Suggested ask: please add admin-level controls for this feature, ideally separate toggles for auto-renaming and auto-filling, plus the ability to scope it by ticket type or form. If full disable is not possible, a safer fallback would be to only suggest high-confidence values, rather than automatically applying changes to titles and default fields.
Our guides are used by both support agents and customers.It would be great for agents to be able to read notes on an article that only they can see when viewing an article within Intercom. That note then wouldn’t appear on a customer facing article.For example, if we require a note on an article to inform an agent what steps they need to take to further troubleshoot an issue that a customer isn’t able to do.
Emoji reactions and acknowledgement-only messages (e.g., "Thanks," "Thank you," "Got it") currently restart response SLAs even when no follow-up is required. This creates unnecessary SLA pressure, contributes to alert fatigue, and reduces confidence in SLA metrics. Please provide an option to prevent non-actionable customer responses from triggering a new SLA or allow administrators to configure which response types restart SLAs.This framing focuses on SLA quality, productivity, and reporting accuracy, which typically resonates more strongly with both customers and product teams than focusing solely on agent frustration.
Already have an account? Login
No account yet? Create an account
Enter your E-mail address. We'll send you an e-mail with instructions to reset your password.