Do coding agents recommend DocuSign?
DocuSign was chosen in 29% of 106 judged e-signature sessions, ranking second. Measured with Claude Code, Codex and Cursor.
DocuSign was chosen in 29% of 106 judged e-signature sessions, ranking second. It was also raised as a candidate in 75 further sessions without being chosen.
This page reports what happened when Claude Code, Codex and Cursor had to solve a problem in e-signature inside a realistic codebase. Not what a chat assistant says about DocuSign. What an agent actually installed.
The numbers
| Category | E-signature |
| Sessions in the category | 106 |
| Sessions where DocuSign was chosen | 31 |
| Install share | 29% |
| Rank in category | 2 of 9 |
| Codebases it won in | 7 |
| Raised as a candidate, not chosen | 75 |
| Chosen when considered | 29% |
| Site | docusign.com |
By agent
The three agents land within 6 points of each other on DocuSign, which is closer than most products in this experiment manage.
| Agent | Sessions | Chose DocuSign | Share |
|---|---|---|---|
| Claude Code | 35 | 11 | 31% |
| Codex | 35 | 11 | 31% |
| Cursor | 36 | 9 | 25% |
By who was asking
DocuSign does much better with one kind of buyer than another. It won 42% of sessions asked as senior engineer and 13% of those asked as enterprise team.
| Who is asking | Sessions | Chose DocuSign | Share |
|---|---|---|---|
| Junior developer | 58 | 18 | 31% |
| Senior engineer | 24 | 10 | 42% |
| Enterprise team | 24 | 3 | 13% |
What DocuSign was up against
The full ranking in e-signature, from the same sessions:
| # | Product | Runs won | Share |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Dropbox Sign | 32 | 30% |
| 2 | DocuSign (this page) | 31 | 29% |
| 3 | Built in-house (no product adopted) | 11 | 10% |
| 4 | Microsoft 365 eSignature | 9 | 8% |
| 5 | YouTrust | 9 | 8% |
| 6 | Signable | 5 | 5% |
| 7 | Adobe Acrobat Sign | 3 | 3% |
| 8 | Documenso | 3 | 3% |
What this means
A solid second or third position in a category means the agent is genuinely choosing rather than reaching automatically. That is a winnable position, because the inputs it uses can be changed.
The fastest gains are usually in the sessions that were nearly won: read them, find the step where the agent moved on, and fix that step.
Where these numbers come from
The 106 sessions in e-signature are part of a published set of 7,958, run with real coding agents inside realistic codebases and judged blind. The full method is on one page: how we measured this.
Every e-signature run can be replayed on the board.
If you work on DocuSign: the judge recorded a reason for every session where it was raised and passed over. Those reasons are in the transcripts.
<!-- generated by scripts/write-data-pages.mjs -->
Common questions
Do coding agents recommend DocuSign?
Yes. DocuSign was chosen in 31 of the 106 judged sessions in e-signature, a 29% install share, ranking second in its category.
Does Claude Code recommend DocuSign?
In 11 of the 35 sessions in e-signature run with Claude Code, which is 31%.
Do different coding agents treat DocuSign differently?
Not much. The three agents chose it at similar rates, between 25% and 31% of their runs.
How was this measured?
Real coding agents at pinned versions were run in sandboxes inside 91 realistic codebases and asked to solve real tasks. A simulated project owner approved or questioned each recommendation before any code was written, and a judge from a model family that builds none of the agents read every session blind.
How often is DocuSign considered but not chosen?
It was raised as a candidate in 75 sessions without being chosen, and chosen in 31. That is a 29% conversion from considered to chosen.
Where this comes from
Armature ran 7,958 judged sessions with Claude Code, Codex and Cursor inside 91 realistic codebases, and published every run. The numbers on this page come from that work.