Adobe Workfront

Today, if you add a list of words in a Queue Topic Description each separated by a carriage return, when you hover over that queue topic on the Published Queue, the list of words are no longer separated by that carriage return, instead, the whole text appears similar to how it appears inside an Excel cell, without the ‘punctuation’. E.g.  Say the Queue Topic description says  First itemSecond itemThird itemFourth item Hovering over the Topic in the queue will read  First item Seconditem Third itemFourth item Being able to retain the structure is what I expected, and would like to see happen when hovering.

Our team has a need to make the filter selection in the My Approvals widget sticky. We have multiple team members that submit work to others for approval and receive work from others for approval. Having to reset the filter each time to show only “My Approvals” instead of “All” wastes a few clicks of time and makes it more difficult for us to work through time-sensitive approvals. 

This is pretty simple. There's currently no way to export a milestone report like there is with other report views. I would love the ability to take a report using the Milestone view and export it into Excel.

There should be a way to archive records that have a certain status, like Completed or Canceled, for example. Once an organization moves beyond test use cases, the records of a real enterprise start to add up. To my knowledge, Planning comes without a way to move/remove ‘archived’ records from record types, especially connectable record types. My solution for now is to just put ‘z_archive’ on the front of each records name. I could probably build an automation for this but I’d rather this be a feature of Planning.

We are looking for a product update that would allow for our authentication for the MCP server to be with persistent tokens -- rather than the expiration being at random and failing for our users. 

WorkFront has no ability to 'undo last action' - in some cases this can be very troublesome - as it is quite easy to make a change to basic project behaviour, critical path and end dates. An 'Undo' last change function would be very useful if the Project owner has in-advertantly made a change that has caused multiple activities to be impacted. Even a - revert to last saved version function might be useful - at least allowing the project owner to go back to a version that they have already reviewed and approved with their team.

When we open a record in full-screen mode or in a new tab, the Record Type “Features” is displayed at the top, as highlighted in red in Screenshot 1. However, when we open the record directly in the minimized view, as shown in Screenshot 2, the Record Type “Feature” is not displayed at the top. Could we also display the Record Type in the minimized view? This record is a connected record. 

Behavior (current)When a reviewer/approver opens a proof via the Proof HQ direct link, the decision buttons (e.g., approve / changes required) do not display. When the same proof is opened via the Workfront proof link, the decision buttons display correctly. Suggested feature ideaEnable the decision buttons in the Proof HQ direct link proof viewer whenever the user has decision permissions for that proof, so reviewers can complete approvals regardless of whether they access the proof from the Workfront link or the Proof HQ link.

The Mention widget should automatically prioritize active conversations by moving any existing thread with a newly added comment to the top of the widget. This would improve visibility and help users quickly identify and respond to recent activity.Currently, users must scroll through the widget to locate new comments if the original thread was created some time ago, since thread placement is based on the thread's start date rather than the most recent comment. Reordering threads based on the latest activity would create a more intuitive and efficient user experience.

When users select the Search icon, it is natural to expect all relevant results to be visible on the first page. Currently, when our users are “searching” in Programs, the results are either not showing on the first page, or one is showing on the first page with the remainder displaying on different tabs/pages.WF Support has said that currently, this is due to the existing pagination behavior and is a product limitation. Unfortunately, this is causing confusion among our users.Thank you for your consideration.

At present it is not possible to disable the 'Select All' function for checkbox fields. It would be very useful to be able to deselect/disable this functionality for each checkbox field in the Admin layer of the form builder.

A checkbox for "ALL" appears by default on custom forms when using the checkbox feature. It happens after a certain number of choices are listed. We don't want our clients to be able to click ALL as it will prevent the client from really thinking through what they need. We don't want our clients to be able to click ALL just because it's faster.

We would like the ability to limit users from being able to delete a task assigned to them. We don’t log hours we we are unable to remove that ability from them in the Project Preferences. The issue is when we try to remove the delete functionality from them, it also removes the ability for them to complete the work on the task. We tried going a layout template route as well suggested by support. According to support, Layout Templates only control the Delete action in the task Details view; there isn't a way to hide that same action in the project's task list (grid) view, since that's tied directly to the Delete permission on the Access Level. Because unchecking Delete at the Access Level can also block completing multi-assignee tasks, there isn't a configuration that fully satisfies both goals (deletion blocked everywhere, completion always working) at the same time today. 

Would love to have a button in WF that takes me to a text mode cheat code library vs. searching community or using AI. Any Workfront user could submit a cheat code and it gets added to a database behind the scenes. This would help all users be able to have quick access to effective text mode that works. This would speed up being able to implement solutions for reporting for businesses.

Currently, the only time the pre-defined sorts in a view (ie: sorts specified and saved in a view) are utilized is in a report (ie: View = Report Default). a) If you change the view on the report - from Report Default to another view - and the newly selected view has its own sorts defined, the report uses the sorts from the Report Default view; the report does not use the sorts defined in the selected view. b) Pre-defined sorts in views are not utilized when using views in a project. All of the above was confirmed by Workfront Support. Would like the system to use the sorts defined in the selected view, both in reports and in the project. Thanks

Currently the Percent Complete roll up at the Program level only takes into account Projects that are in "Current" status. This does not make much sense as you are completely ignoring all projects that have been fully completed and marked as such. If all projects under a program have been marked as complete status, then the Percent Complete at the Program level should show 100%

I am very frustrated by the lack of sharing ability with the Approval Workflows. why is the functionality limited to either a specific person, or the entire company? so either i spend time selecting the exact users for over 400 different workflows. OR i share it with the entire instance and everyone has access to everything in a giant never ending list? We need to be able to share with specific groups and specific teams, Exactly the same way that all the other sharing permissions operate.   

Description - Have the ability to iterate (list method) in calculated fields, the same way it can be done in reports using text mode.Why is this feature important to you - This feature would be valuable as it enables users to reference Workfront objects that are directly related to the one they’re currently working on. It ultimately enhances efficiency and clarity when managing interconnected Workfront objects. How would you like the feature to work - the same it is currently working on reports. Current Behaviour - Is not feasible

Description—It would be ideal if we could Upload and Host an Image to be used in our Custom Forms. Currently, we only have the option to add images by adding the URL of an image hosted somewhere else. The images/documents inside Workfront do not work, as they expire after a few minutes. Why is this feature important to you - This would make the feature easier to use, and located all in one place (Workfront) How would you like the feature to work? If I choose to add an Image in the Custom Form, it would be helpful if I had the option to Upload a File to be used. That file will stay in Workfront and be connected to that Custom Form. Any User with access to the Custom form would also have access to the file. Current Behaviour—Currently, there is no option to upload an Image. We can only enter a URL. Images and documents hosted in Workfront can be added as part of the URL, but because those URLs expire after a few minutes, they generate an Error or broken link and a bad expe

Description - Did you know that Requesters cannot "Add Image" in an Update? I didn't, until a requester asked me why that was missing for them! Why?? Why is this feature important to you - Consistency of user experience, and there is no reason that a Requester should not be able to use this same functionality with UpdatesHow would you like the feature to work - Same as it works for every other access levelCurrent Behaviour - Requesters cannot use the "Add Image" when making an Update

In the past update notifications included the author as the from name in email notifications. Now the sender is simply Workfront. This makes it easy to overlook and difficult to identify/distinguish emails. Please reinstate the prior behavior with the updated format. 

Description - The limitation of 2,000 returns on the external look up field prevents us from being able to use master data for client names in WorkfrontWhy is this feature important to you - Using an external look up field to allow users to choose from a golden record for our client names would provide more  robust reports in Workfront.How would you like the feature to work - We would like Adobe to increase this threshold as 2,000 returns is very limiting. A query search allowing more options would support our use of golden records for robust filtering.Current Behaviour - the look up field returns the first 2,000 lines only and ignores anything after that. Our master data platform can return up over 16,000 records in 1.8 seconds but they cannot be accessed beyond the first 2,000.

Integration with Microsoft Word and Workfront. We would like to have tracked changes inside of WF or to have the ability to edit documents within the proofing tool.

FEATURE : As a light/contributor/standard user (Reviewer and/or Approver), I want to be able to tag in a comment another user who is not in the workflow. This person should then be able to comment the proof but not make any decision Currently, in Adobe Workfront Proofs, users can only tag (@mention) individuals who are already explicitly added to the workflow (as a Reviewer or Approver).If a project team member needs quick input, clarification, or a second opinion from a colleague who is not part of the pre-defined workflow, they cannot bring them into the proof directly via a comment. Instead, the user has to manually reach out via email/chat, export screenshots, or request an administrator to modify the workflow and assign permissions—all of which creates friction, delays feedback loops, and disrupts collaboration. Business Impact & BenefitsAccelerated Review Cycles: Eliminates bottlenecks caused by rigid workflows, allowing ad-hoc subject matter experts to weigh in quickly witho

Our users have been getting these marketing popups quite regularly in Workfront. A lot of these events are aimed at Admins or users who have very different roles in Workfront.  Is there a way we can disable these messages? If not, can a toggle be added?