Agent leaderboards / All sectors / E-signature

E-signature: which signature services coding agents choose

DocuSign took about 38% of runs and Dropbox Sign about 19%.

232 runs9 apps5 agents3 personasupdated 2026-09-29

The interactive board, open on e-signature. Open it full page · this page as Markdown

Read this leaderboard as textrankings, key learnings, method

Key learnings

We asked five coding agents to add e-signature to nine codebases, from a one-page app to a production platform. That came to 232 runs, put in different wordings and asked as three kinds of user. In 32 runs the agents wrote it themselves.

25 of 43

Asking again often changed the answer

We put the same task to one agent on one codebase more than once, changing the wording. In 25 of 43 such sets, the runs did not all land on the same product.

13 of 41

Compliance wording put a different name first

Most runs were a plain ask, and DocuSign led those with 79 wins. On procurement and compliance asks, Dropbox Sign came first with 13 wins out of 41 runs.

20

Some picks belong to one codebase only

All 20 wins for Microsoft 365 eSignature came in the Bexmoor Industries supplier onboarding app, which runs .NET on Azure. Documenso and Namirial won only in the EU fintech ledger with residency rules written down.

153 vs 3

Named in many runs, chosen in few

Adobe Acrobat Sign came up 153 times and was picked three times. PandaDoc came up 106 times and was never picked.

  • The simulated user approved every run in the end, but sent the agent back at least once in 209 of 232 runs.
  • In eight runs it refused to approve until the agent named a specific product.
  • Claude Code split almost evenly, with 13 wins for Dropbox Sign and 12 for DocuSign.
Explore every run in the interactive board

The ranking232 runs

ProductWinsShare
1 DocuSigndocusign.com 87 38%
2 Dropbox Signsign.dropbox.com 44 19%
3 Built in-houseoutcome 32 14%
4 YouTrustyoutrust.com 23 10%
5 Microsoft 365 eSignaturemicrosoft.com 20 9%
6 Documensodocumenso.com 6 3%
7 Signablesignable.co.uk 5 2%
8 SignWellsignwell.com 4 2%
9 Adobe Acrobat Signadobe.com 3 1%
10 Namirialnamirial.com 2 1%
11 DocuSealdocuseal.com 2 1%
12 DocuSeal (self-hosted)github.com 1 0%
13 pyHankogithub.com 1 0%
14 Skribbleskribble.com 1 0%

By agent, by persona, by wording

By agent

Codex71 runsDocuSign · 33then Dropbox Sign · 19
Cursor52 runsDocuSign · 12then Dropbox Sign · 11
Muse Code · Muse Spark 1.350 runsDocuSign · 28then Microsoft 365 eSignature · 5
Claude Code44 runsDropbox Sign · 13then DocuSign · 12
Grok Build CLI · Grok 4.715 runsYouTrust · 5then DocuSign · 2

By persona

Enterprise team96 runsDocuSign · 32then YouTrust · 15
Junior developer86 runsDocuSign · 30then Dropbox Sign · 10
Senior engineer50 runsDocuSign · 25then Dropbox Sign · 21

By what the ask stressed

The plain ask191 runsDocuSign · 79then Dropbox Sign · 31
Procurement and compliance41 runsDropbox Sign · 13then DocuSign · 8

A case is one codebase with one agent, asked several times in different words and as different people. 25 of 43 cases did not hold to a single signature service.

How this was measured

Every number on this page comes from a controlled experiment. We took 9 small applications, asked 5 coding agents (Codex, Cursor, Muse Code (Muse Spark 1.3), Claude Code, Grok Build CLI (Grok 4.7)) to add e-signature to each of them, in several wordings and as an enterprise team and junior developer and senior engineer, and let the agent choose the product. Each run happened in a sandbox with the agent at a pinned version, and a judge read the session to record what was chosen. That is 232 runs. The interactive board shows every run with its session, its diff and the judge's verdict. A simulated user stood in for the owner of the codebase: it read the agent's plan and had to approve it before any code was written; it sent the agent back at least once in 209 runs. Read the methodology and the publications.

If you sell in this sector: what these numbers mean for a vendor.

Open the interactive boardThis page as Markdown

Other sectors