10098 results found

1. SEARCH BY TAG

   Bring back the options to seach by TAGs on the App.

   2 votes

   Vote Vote Vote Vote

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   Vote

   We’ll send you updates on this idea

   0 comments  ·  Box Apps  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
   How important is this to you?

   Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   Submit Rating

2. gggggggg

   gsdfgsg

   1 vote

   Vote Vote Vote Vote

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   Vote

   We’ll send you updates on this idea

   0 comments  ·  Governance  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
   How important is this to you?

   Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   Submit Rating

3. Please make sure that Box Drive automatically launches after every update.

   If an update occurs before Box Drive launches when I start up my PC, Box Drive will stop launching automatically. This is especially true for Box Drive versions based on the new architecture, where I might not even notice that it hasn't launched, so I'd like it to launch automatically.

   タイトル：
   Box Driveアップデート後に必ずBox Driveが起動するようにしてほしい
   本文：
   PCを起動した際、Box Driveが起動する前にアップデートされるとBox Driveが自動で起動しない。特に新しいアーキテクチャのBox Driveでは起動していないことに気づかない場合があるため、自動的に起動するようにしてほしい

   1 vote

   Vote Vote Vote Vote

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   Vote

   We’ll send you updates on this idea

   0 comments  ·  Box Drive  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
   How important is this to you?

   Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   Submit Rating

4. Box Forms – Add internal-only / scoped access controls for Form links (security & compliance)

   Customers need the ability to restrict Box Form links to internal, authenticated users (and ideally specific users/groups), instead of only “anyone with the link.” Current behavior conflicts with stricter security postures and makes Forms hard to adopt for internal project and regulated use cases.

   Background / Use Case
   Customer is using Box Relay + Box Forms as part of internal project workflows:

   Workflow trigger: Form submission (Relay)

   Outcome: e.g., DocGen or other internal automation

   They want to present Forms to internal project teams only and treat them as an internal front end to Box workflows.

   Today, the Form sharing model exposes a shared link that can be configured at admin level to allow “anyone with the link” or require a Box login, but there is no way to scope the Form link to:

   “People in your company” only, or

   A specific set of users / groups, similar to folder and file sharing.

   Customers need the ability to restrict Box Form links to internal, authenticated users (and ideally specific users/groups), instead of only “anyone with the link.” Current behavior conflicts with stricter security postures and makes Forms hard to adopt for internal project and regulated use cases.

   Background / Use Case
   Customer is using Box Relay + Box Forms as part of internal project workflows:

   Workflow trigger: Form submission (Relay)

   Outcome: e.g., DocGen or other internal automation

   They want to present Forms to internal project teams only and treat them as an internal front end to Box workflows.

   Today, the Form… more

   10 votes

   Vote Vote Vote Vote

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   Vote

   We’ll send you updates on this idea

   researching  ·  1 comment  ·  Box Forms & Doc Gen  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
   How important is this to you?

   Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   Submit Rating

5. Box Seamless Login Permission Dialog Control. /Boxシームレスログイン許可ダイアログ制御

   With the Box for Office co-authoring feature enabled for the entire tenant, users switch between co-authoring and individual editing depending on their use of macros or eco-solutions.
   However, following the introduction of the seamless login feature, a screen requesting Box access permission appears every time a file is edited, even for users utilizing individual editing.
   To prevent this display, administrators must individually disable the setting from the admin console for users who do not use co-authoring, which increases the burden on administrators.
   Therefore, we would like the ability to select whether to show or hide the Box access screen associated with the introduction of the seamless login feature.

   [和訳]
   テナント全体にBox for Office共同編集機能を有効化している状態で、
   ユーザーごとにマクロ利用やエコソリューション利用に伴い、共同編集と個人編集を使い分けしている。
   しかし、シームレスログイン機能の導入に伴い、個人編集で利用しているユーザーに対してもファイル編集時に都度Boxへのアクセス許可を求める画面が表示される。
   この表示が出ないようにするには、管理者側にて管理コンソールから共同編集機能を利用しないユーザーに対して、
   都度無効に設定をする必要があるが、管理者側の負担が増えている。
   よって、シームレスログイン機能導入に伴うBoxへのアクセス画面表示の表示/非表示を選択できるようにしてほしい。

   With the Box for Office co-authoring feature enabled for the entire tenant, users switch between co-authoring and individual editing depending on their use of macros or eco-solutions.
   However, following the introduction of the seamless login feature, a screen requesting Box access permission appears every time a file is edited, even for users utilizing individual editing.
   To prevent this display, administrators must individually disable the setting from the admin console for users who do not use co-authoring, which increases the burden on administrators.
   Therefore, we would like the ability to select whether to show or hide the Box access screen associated… more

   7 votes

   Vote Vote Vote Vote

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   Vote

   We’ll send you updates on this idea

   0 comments  ·  Box for Office  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
   How important is this to you?

   Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   Submit Rating

6. List with optional Freeform

   Provide users with the ability to enter free-form text into a LIST/Dropdown selection field when reviewing AI-Extract Metadata and then having that entered Text become part of the drop-down selection. See attached picture from another web-based tool with this functionality where admin can toggle on/off if they want it applied or not.

   •  

   1 vote

   Vote Vote Vote Vote

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   Vote

   We’ll send you updates on this idea

   0 comments  ·  Metadata  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
   How important is this to you?

   Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   Submit Rating

7. Box AI on metadata

   Ability to leverage AI on metadata of a file/folder, document properties - not just the content of the file

   4 votes

   Vote Vote Vote Vote

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   Vote

   We’ll send you updates on this idea

   0 comments  ·  Box AI  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
   How important is this to you?

   Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   Submit Rating

8. Case #3631047 - Feature Request: Improve Folder Sorting Persistence and Save As Navigation in Box

   Hello Box Product Team,

   I recently provided feedback and requested an feature enhancement in the box support case "#3631047".

   Thank you for reviewing our feedback. We understand that the current behavior is working as designed and that there are currently no administrative settings or workarounds that fully address these concerns.

   We would like to formally submit the following feature requests for consideration, as these enhancements could significantly improve user productivity and overall user experience.

   1. Persistent Alphabetical Folder Sorting Preference

   Current Behavior: Users frequently need to manually reapply alphabetical sorting when navigating through folders. The system often reverts to previously used sorting methods, requiring additional clicks and page refreshes.

   Requested Enhancement: Provide a user-level or enterprise-level setting that allows users or administrators to define a default folder sorting preference, such as:

   Sort by Name (A-Z)
   Sort by Name (Z-A)
   Sort by Date Modified
   Sort by Size

   The selected preference should persist across:

   All Box web sessions
   Folder navigation
   Browser refreshes
   Future logins

   Business Impact: For users working in large and deeply nested folder structures, repeatedly applying sorting preferences creates unnecessary clicks, increases load times, and reduces efficiency during routine file searches.

   1. Intelligent "Save As" Folder Recognition

   Current Behavior: When performing a "Save As" operation on an existing document, users are often taken back to a higher-level parent folder or the last-used location rather than the folder where the current document is stored.

   Requested Enhancement: When a user opens an existing file from Box and selects Save As, Box should automatically suggest or navigate to the file's current folder location as the default save destination.

   Expected Experience: This would mirror the behavior users experience with other cloud storage platforms, where the most logical save destination is the folder containing the source document.

   Business Impact: Users working within complex folder hierarchies currently need to manually navigate through multiple folder levels each time they perform a Save As operation. This results in:

   Additional clicks
   Increased time spent locating folders
   Greater risk of saving files in incorrect locations
   Reduced overall productivity
   Summary

   These are not defects but usability enhancements that would provide meaningful efficiency gains for users who work extensively within structured folder environments. We believe both capabilities would improve the overall Box experience and reduce friction during common document management tasks.

   We kindly request that these ideas be reviewed by the Product Management team and considered for inclusion in the Box product roadmap.

   Thank you for your consideration.

   Please reach us at "james.baldwin@ogilvy.com & harish.andyala@kyndryl.com" for more information.

   Thanks & Regards,
   Harish A
   harish.andyala@kyndryl.com

   Hello Box Product Team,

   I recently provided feedback and requested an feature enhancement in the box support case "#3631047".

   Thank you for reviewing our feedback. We understand that the current behavior is working as designed and that there are currently no administrative settings or workarounds that fully address these concerns.

   We would like to formally submit the following feature requests for consideration, as these enhancements could significantly improve user productivity and overall user experience.

   1. Persistent Alphabetical Folder Sorting Preference

   Current Behavior: Users frequently need to manually reapply alphabetical sorting when navigating through folders. The system often reverts to previously used… more

   1 vote

   Vote Vote Vote Vote

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   Vote

   We’ll send you updates on this idea

   0 comments  ·  Web App  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
   How important is this to you?

   Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   Submit Rating

9. Content Manager collaborator visibility when folders hidden for collaborators

   As Administrators, we anticipate the visibility of all collaborators in every folder within the Box Content Manager.
   When a folder is configured to "Hide collaborators and their activity from non-owners," even Administrators utilizing the Content Manager are unable to view the collaborators (without notification), which complicates the troubleshooting process.
   For instance, a folder may contain numerous collaborators, yet it remains invisible under the Manage Collaborators menu. Administrators should have access to all collaborative information; this is an essential aspect of their responsibilities. Additionally, the majority of Administrators are unaware of this issue.
   Utilizing the login-as user feature is not a preferred approach and results in significant delays during troubleshooting.

   As Administrators, we anticipate the visibility of all collaborators in every folder within the Box Content Manager.
   When a folder is configured to "Hide collaborators and their activity from non-owners," even Administrators utilizing the Content Manager are unable to view the collaborators (without notification), which complicates the troubleshooting process.
   For instance, a folder may contain numerous collaborators, yet it remains invisible under the Manage Collaborators menu. Administrators should have access to all collaborative information; this is an essential aspect of their responsibilities. Additionally, the majority of Administrators are unaware of this issue.
   Utilizing the login-as user feature is not a… more

   1 vote

   Vote Vote Vote Vote

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   Vote

   We’ll send you updates on this idea

   0 comments  ·  Admin Console  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
   How important is this to you?

   Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   Submit Rating

10. Allow Metadata Updates While a File Is Being Edited or Locked

    Currently, file metadata cannot be updated when the file is being edited or locked by another user.

    This behavior interferes with background systems that automatically apply or update metadata in response to events such as webhooks. For example, even when a background process only needs to update metadata and does not modify the file content itself, the metadata update fails if the file is currently locked.

    We believe that restricting metadata updates simply because the file content is not writable is undesirable. Metadata updates should be treated independently from modifications to the file content.

    Please provide a way to update file metadata even when the file is being edited or locked by another user.

    Currently, file metadata cannot be updated when the file is being edited or locked by another user.

    This behavior interferes with background systems that automatically apply or update metadata in response to events such as webhooks. For example, even when a background process only needs to update metadata and does not modify the file content itself, the metadata update fails if the file is currently locked.

    We believe that restricting metadata updates simply because the file content is not writable is undesirable. Metadata updates should be treated independently from modifications to the file content.

    Please provide a way to update… more

    1 vote

    Vote Vote Vote Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    Vote

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    0 comments  ·  Metadata  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    Submit Rating

11. Ability for end users (non admins) to adjust metadata

    As Box is evolving more into metadata driven workflows for digital asset library use cases, we need the ability for end users (non admins) to be able to adjust metadata templates specific to their use case or business unit. For example, we'd like to have a champion from Marketing be able to adjust JUST the metadata templates specific to their group, not any metadata templates related to Legal or Sales.

    6 votes

    Vote Vote Vote Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    Vote

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    0 comments  ·  Metadata  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    Submit Rating

12. Automatically Transfer Content when Deleting a User

    Provide the ability to automatically transfer any owned content from a user, when deleting, to a consistent account (e.g., our Box Admin account), so that deprovisioning of licenses can be seamlessly done using AD groups. This will take out the scripting and automation on your customers side and ensure the security of the account.

    1 vote

    Vote Vote Vote Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    Vote

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    0 comments  ·  Users and Groups  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    Submit Rating

13. Native Google File Upload

    Allow users to easily upload content that lives in Google (e.g., Sheets, Docs, Slides) to Box through the UI. This would allow users to analyze, search, and expand on their Google content in Box Hubs and Box AI.

    1 vote

    Vote Vote Vote Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    Vote

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    0 comments  ·  Uploads  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    Submit Rating

14. I would like to add a [Block all integrations] option to the content read restrictions for integrations.

    Adding [Specify content read restrictions on integrations.] under [Integration Restriction] in Shield access policies is an excellent update from a data protection perspective.
    However, under the current specifications, it is not possible to block all integrations. Since the remaining risk that data may be read by even some integrations is unacceptable from a security standpoint, this ultimately hinders the enablement and adoption of AI. The download restrictions under the same [Integration Restriction] include a [Block all integrations] option, so it is puzzling that the read restrictions do not.
    I would like to request the addition of a [Block all integrations] option to the read restrictions as well.

    （日本語）
    Shieldのアクセスポリシーの [統合の制限] で [統合のコンテンツ読み取り制限を指定します。] が追加されたことは、データ保護の観点で非常に素晴らしいアップデートです。
    一方で、現在の仕様では、すべての統合をブロックすることができません。一部の統合からでも読み取られるリスクが残ることはセキュリティ上許容できないため、結果としてAIの有効化や活用推進にブレーキがかかってしまっています。同じ [統合の制限] のダウンロード制限では、[すべての統合をブロックする] オプションがあるのに、読み取り制限にないのは不可解です。
    読み取り制限にも、[すべての統合をブロックする] オプションの追加を希望します。

    Adding [Specify content read restrictions on integrations.] under [Integration Restriction] in Shield access policies is an excellent update from a data protection perspective.
    However, under the current specifications, it is not possible to block all integrations. Since the remaining risk that data may be read by even some integrations is unacceptable from a security standpoint, this ultimately hinders the enablement and adoption of AI. The download restrictions under the same [Integration Restriction] include a [Block all integrations] option, so it is puzzling that the read restrictions do not.
    I would like to request the addition of a [Block all integrations]… more

    1 vote

    Vote Vote Vote Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    Vote

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    0 comments  ·  Shield  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    Submit Rating

15. "RemoveMake Primary"　should be "Remove/Make Primary"

    When I tried to change my billing credit card, I fould the word "RemoveMake Primary" which is linked in blue. In clicking on the word several times, I found out that there are two links one is the link to remove and the other is to make primary. I think the word should be "Remove/Make Primary" in order to make those two functions distinct.

    1 vote

    Vote Vote Vote Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    Vote

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    0 comments  ·  Admin Console  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    Submit Rating

16. Delete developer app authorization in the Admin Console

    It would be helpful to add the ability to delete (server) App Authorization without being required to contact support. Currently when in the Admin Console > Integrations > Platform Apps Manager > View > Delete App, it will pull up a message requiring Box Support to be contacted to remove the App Authorization. It would be nice to be able to do this without all the extra steps.

    •  

    3 votes

    Vote Vote Vote Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    Vote

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    0 comments  ·  Admin Console  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    Submit Rating

17. Do not send notifications to group members when inviting a group to Hubs, as is the case when inviting a group to a folder.

    Currently, when you invite a group to Box Hubs, all group members receive a notification.
    However, if there are many group members, if all group members receive the email, it may violate some rules of Exchange Online.
    Therefore, I would like to see an improvement so that notifications are not sent to group members when inviting a group to Hubs, as is the case when inviting a group to a folder.
    ーーーーーー
    ＜フォルダへのグループ招待時のようにHubsへのグループ招待時もグループメンバーへの通知を送信しない＞
    現在Box Hubsでグループを招待すると、グループメンバー全員に通知が届きます。
    しかし、グループメンバーが多い場合、グループメンバー全員がメールを受信すると、受信するExchange Onlineの何らかのルールに抵触する可能性があります。
    そのため、フォルダへのグループ招待時のように、Hubsへのグループ招待時もグループメンバーへの通知が送信されないように改善してほしいです。

    34 votes

    Vote Vote Vote Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    Vote

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    under consideration  ·  2 comments  ·  Box Hubs  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    Submit Rating

18. Support for shared links in MCP

    Add a shared link resolution tool to the Box MCP server that accepts a Box shared link URL and returns the corresponding file or folder ID and metadata. Shared links are the primary way our users share content in Box, and without this capability, an agent cannot act on a shared link that a user provides directly. Users share links with colleagues as a natural part of their workflow; they should be able to share them with an AI agent the same way.

    4 votes

    Vote Vote Vote Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    Vote

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    0 comments  ·  Partner Integrations  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    Submit Rating
    on roadmap  ·  AdminKamil Kinastowski (Admin, Box) responded

    This is on the roadmap and is on track to release by September 25th 2026.

19. Support Copilot Integration with Multiple Box Environments under a Single Microsoft Tenant

    Many enterprises operate under a structure where a single Microsoft tenant is shared, while Box environments are separated by legal entity.
    With the current limitation that Copilot × Box integration is restricted to a 1:1 relationship, it is difficult to achieve both group-wide Copilot adoption and proper information governance.
    Enabling secure integration with multiple Box environments while maintaining a single Microsoft tenant would unlock significant value, including group-wide AI utilization, greater flexibility for M&A and organizational restructuring, and the avoidance of unnecessary Box environment consolidation or Microsoft tenant separation.

    ＜日本語＞
    Microsoft テナントが1つ、Box環境が法人ごとに分かれている企業構成は現実的に多く存在します。
    Copilot × Box 連携が 1:1 に限定されている現状では、グループ全体での Copilot 活用や情報ガバナンスの両立が困難です。
    Microsoft テナントは共通のまま、複数 Box 環境と安全に連携できるようになることで、グループ横断の AI 活用、M&A や組織再編への柔軟な対応、不要な Box 統合や Microsoft テナント分割の回避といった大きな価値が生まれます。

    Many enterprises operate under a structure where a single Microsoft tenant is shared, while Box environments are separated by legal entity.
    With the current limitation that Copilot × Box integration is restricted to a 1:1 relationship, it is difficult to achieve both group-wide Copilot adoption and proper information governance.
    Enabling secure integration with multiple Box environments while maintaining a single Microsoft tenant would unlock significant value, including group-wide AI utilization, greater flexibility for M&A and organizational restructuring, and the avoidance of unnecessary Box environment consolidation or Microsoft tenant separation.

    ＜日本語＞
    Microsoft テナントが1つ、Box環境が法人ごとに分かれている企業構成は現実的に多く存在します。
    Copilot × Box 連携が 1:1 に限定されている現状では、グループ全体での… more

    4 votes

    Vote Vote Vote Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    Vote

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    0 comments  ·  Partner Integrations  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    Submit Rating

20. Metadata-Triggered Folder Task via Automate

    Allow a metadata field on a folder to trigger a Box Automation task to Box Task Owner when a select metadata is changed. Currently we are only able to trigger on files.

    1 vote

    Vote Vote Vote Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    Vote

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    0 comments  ·  Box Automate  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    Submit Rating