Do coding agents recommend Microsoft 365 eSignature?
Microsoft 365 eSignature was chosen in 8% of 106 judged e-signature sessions, ranking third. Measured with Claude Code, Codex and Cursor.
Microsoft 365 eSignature was chosen in 8% of 106 judged e-signature sessions, ranking third. It was also raised as a candidate in 10 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 Microsoft 365 eSignature. What an agent actually installed.
One thing to read first: every one of those wins came from a single codebase. That is a result about one repository rather than about e-signature in general, and the splits below cannot separate the two. Treat them as a description of that repository.
The numbers
| Category | E-signature |
| Sessions in the category | 106 |
| Sessions where Microsoft 365 eSignature was chosen | 9 |
| Install share | 8% |
| Rank in category | 3 of 9 |
| Codebases it won in | 1 |
| Raised as a candidate, not chosen | 10 |
| Chosen when considered | 47% |
| Site | microsoft.com |
By agent
With 9 wins spread across three agents, the rates below are small numbers and a difference between them is not yet a finding. They are here because the direction is worth knowing, not because the gap is established.
| Agent | Sessions | Chose Microsoft 365 eSignature | Share |
|---|---|---|---|
| Claude Code | 35 | 4 | 11% |
| Codex | 35 | 2 | 6% |
| Cursor | 36 | 3 | 8% |
By who was asking
Microsoft 365 eSignature does much better with one kind of buyer than another. It won 16% of sessions asked as junior developer and 0% of those asked as enterprise team.
| Who is asking | Sessions | Chose Microsoft 365 eSignature | Share |
|---|---|---|---|
| Junior developer | 58 | 9 | 16% |
| Senior engineer | 24 | 0 | 0% |
| Enterprise team | 24 | 0 | 0% |
What Microsoft 365 eSignature was up against
The full ranking in e-signature, from the same sessions:
| # | Product | Runs won | Share |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Dropbox Sign | 32 | 30% |
| 2 | DocuSign | 31 | 29% |
| 3 | Built in-house (no product adopted) | 11 | 10% |
| 4 | Microsoft 365 eSignature (this page) | 9 | 8% |
| 5 | YouTrust | 9 | 8% |
| 6 | Signable | 5 | 5% |
| 7 | Adobe Acrobat Sign | 3 | 3% |
| 8 | Documenso | 3 | 3% |
What this means
Microsoft 365 eSignature was raised in 10 sessions and chosen in 9. That ratio is balanced enough that the ceiling is presence rather than integration: the product converts reasonably when it is on the table, and it is not on the table often enough.
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 Microsoft 365 eSignature: 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 Microsoft 365 eSignature?
Yes. Microsoft 365 eSignature was chosen in 9 of the 106 judged sessions in e-signature, a 8% install share, ranking third in its category.
Does Claude Code recommend Microsoft 365 eSignature?
In 4 of the 35 sessions in e-signature run with Claude Code, which is 11%.
Do different coding agents treat Microsoft 365 eSignature differently?
Not much. The three agents chose it at similar rates, between 6% and 11% 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 Microsoft 365 eSignature considered but not chosen?
It was raised as a candidate in 10 sessions without being chosen, and chosen in 9. That is a 47% 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.