Share product ideas and upvotes with our product team
It would be great if the event of moving a conversation to WhatsApp could exist for workflows, so that we could set up the WhatsApp chat to be greeted with information from the conversation they moved, to keep things more organized and easier for them to find in the WhatsApp chat. Many of our customers migrate a large number of different cases to WhatsApp, making it difficult for them to know what they were referring to in previous chats that were moved to WhatsApp.
Introduce the ability for companies to have multiple sites. Our customers are organisations which often have multiple sites, between 1-250 depending on their size. At present we have to treat each site as a company and create a company attribute for each one called ‘Customer Organisation’. This is OK, but it makes reporting at an organisational level difficult as all the good stuff when it comes to reporting and workflows is handled at a company level. I see multiple support solutions have this shortcoming, including Zendesk who we left recently and for which we also had to have this ‘hack’ of a solution.Surely we can’t be the only company in the world whose customers have multiple sites? 🤷
It would be great if users who have never been seen by an Intercom integration can still access their company’s tickets by “logging in” to the tickets portal in some way. Maybe email can be verified via magic link or something?
It’s very hard for customer to browse to the opened chats to find the one they are looking for. We need a feature that makes mandatory add subject to the chat so that it’s shown in the widget within the list of opened chats.
I'm reaching out with a feature request regarding the Fin AI Agent Guidance, which we've been actively using for our AI Agent, "Clicky." We're really impressed with its capabilities so far! As we build out more comprehensive rules, we're finding it a bit challenging to manage all the guidance related to a single topic since the rules live in different sections. For example, for a billing issue, we might set a rule under "Context and Clarification" to ask for an account ID, and then have a separate rule under "Handover Guidance" to route that same conversation to the human agent. Because these related rules are in separate sections, it's difficult to see the guidances topic at a glance. Our feature request is to explore a way to make the guidance section more interconnected, perhaps by allowing us to group rules by topic or use case. It would be fantastic if we could have a "Billing Issues" category, for instance, and see all guidances in one place—from the initial clarification questions all the way to the final handover instructions. We feel a more connected, topic-based view would make it much more intuitive to build, manage, and visualize the complete logic for our AI agent's behavior. Thanks for your time and for considering our feedback. We're really excited about the direction Fin is heading!
We have a request to update the data exported to reflect the “correct” owner of a conversation and not the initiator. We get conversations forwarded in from a distribution, which make the User always the same. Despite managing participants and removing the distro and adding the correct user, when we export the data, the User details default to the distro. We have a request to update the data exported to reflect the “correct” owner of a conversation and not the initiator.
Can we make the news center more customisable in the sense where we can add pages to it or layers you can drop down or arrange subheadings to it. also not require to send it to a news feed first and just send it to the news centre directly
Is there a way to edit the size of the tooltip icon, or upload your custom icon so that it better matches the branding of our application?
Currently, if a recipient bounces they get hard blocked by Intercom. This means even if you send them an email via the Inbox, it won’t be sent to them and they won’t receive it. There is no obvious visual indication in Intercom that this has happened, so we’ve had examples where support reps have struggled to communicate with customers as their messages aren’t being received, with the customers sending messages annoyed about a lack of response.After speaking with support, I’ve been advised to check the “Has hard bounced” user attribute in the sidebar. In reality, this is completely impractical to expect a support rep to check this field for every single chat they have, just in case the recipient has bounced.Instead, it would be preferable if Intercom showed a prominent warning in the chat, advising the support rep that the person they are messaging is blocked, and advising them how to rectify this.
We have multiple sources of knowledge for Fin, including confluence, websites, and articles hosted on Intercom. Occasionally, the sync will fail for confluence or a website. I’d like a notification to be sent to the admins of the account when this happens so that we can review and re-sync as needed.Fin relies entirely on these sources to be able to help our customers and agents, so it seems like a big oversight in Intercom that if the content fails to sync nobody is notified.
It would be good to allow teammates to set a default reply method.At this time, there is no way to for example make sure a Note is always the default when creating a comment in a conversation.Some teammates only add internal notes and don’t want to constantly pay attention they don’t add public comments.A configuration option in the teammates personal settings would be great.
At this time macros cannot be used for Back-office and Tracker tickets.These can only be created manually.Our Operations team created dozens of back-office tickets each week and it would save them a lot of time if they could do this with a macro. That would give them a template in which they can just fill in some data.
I'd love to see the option to enable advanced customization for the Help Center layout, allowing users to leverage HTML, CSS, or iFrames for deeper control.Additionally, implementing an optional sidebar navigation structure (both right and left) as a configurable layout element would give users more flexibility to tailor the Help Center for branding, usability, and navigation needs. Sidebars can also boost SEO, AEO, and GEO, benefiting content discovery and accessibility.
For example, we want to report on Fin AI Involvement based on conversation closed date but that is only possible via the API. All reporting for Fin Involvement is based on conversation started date. It seems critical for native reporting to be able to report on a metric by any date field available - whether it be started or closed date. That way we can report on things like MoM closed conversations alongside # with Fin involvement and have the two metrics be apples to apples.
Hello,Can you all please create a metric that will track how long an agent works on a ticket. Like it only counts when the ticket is actively open and being worked. Right now there is nothing like that and its very difficult to figure out average work effort per ticket.
I’ve seen a few posts on the forum regarding the ability to embed iframes or generic HTML into help center articles but they are all a bit dated so I would like to raise it once more for consideration.
We send our CSAT rating request 5 minutes after a conversation ends. Since they don't expect a rating to be sent, they often have already closed the chat window.As a result, the CSAT rating request usually remains unseen for over 3 minutes and is then forwarded to the client’s email without any conversation history, since it is the only part of the chat they haven’t viewed. There’s a chance clients could give a negative rating since the rating request appears in their email without any conversation history.I suggest that when Intercom forwards unseen conversation to emails if they’re unseen for 3 minutes, it should include a transcript of the entire conversation.
We are currently monitoring all customer conversations where Fin is involved to ensure an excellent customer experience. While a report already exists that pulls all conversations in which Fin has participated, there is no mechanism to leave the evaluation of the quality of Fin’s responses with real customers.I propose introducing a simple rating system within Intercom that allows us to assess Fin’s performance with three categories: Good, Acceptable, or Poor. This would work in a similar way to the evaluation logic currently used in the Test module.Implementing this functionality would enable us to: Track the accuracy and helpfulness of Fin’s contributions. Monitor Fin’s “health” over time. Compare Fin’s performance across different topics and contexts. This improvement would provide valuable insights into Fin’s effectiveness and ensure we continuously deliver a high-quality customer experience.
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.