Changelog

Have something to say?

Tell us how we could make the product more useful to you.

Location-Based Team Member

I’ve encountered two potential clients who asked me if they could have one store manager with limited access to one specific location only. So far, the answer has been NO because all team members, at this point, have access to the allowed features across all locations in an organization. I’m wondering if this request can be considered, as this is related to internal data security/privacy within an organization. Many thanks for your consideration.

Kevin Huang 11 days ago

πŸ’‘ Feature Request

Tracking stats not showing in Analytics

My client has been using my service for two months. They’ve actively using QR code for review requests, and have generated over 100 reviews so far. However, every time I check the Analytics page, the numbers in the screenshot below remain zero. I’m assuming this is a bug rather than my misconception of the stats. Thank you for your attention on this.

Kevin Huang 11 days ago

πŸ› Bug Reports

Fix Duplicate Prevention Display - Show Actual Campaign Setting Instead of Default 14 Days

Problem Description: In the campaign settings, users can configure "Ignore duplicate requests" with a custom duration (e.g., 180 days). However, the contact activity timeline always displays the default hardcoded message "an invitation has already been sent within the past 14 days" regardless of the actual campaign setting. This creates confusion when users have set a different duplicate prevention window. The system should dynamically display the actual configured value (e.g., "within the past 180 days") instead of the hardcoded 14-day default. Expected behavior: Display message should reflect the actual campaign setting

Jean-Gabriel 12 days ago

1

πŸ› Bug Reports

Differentiate Active vs Resolved Errors in Contact Activity Timeline

Current Issue: The "View Errors" button remains red and visible even after errors are resolved, creating unnecessary anxiety. Users can't distinguish between active errors requiring action and past errors that have been fixed. Resolved Errors: Green "βœ“ Resolved" badge Strikethrough text styling Gray/neutral colors instead of red Dual timestamps showing error date + resolution date

Jean-Gabriel 12 days ago

πŸ“₯ Feedback

Planned

Incoming webhook middleware

As discussed here: https://www.skool.com/profit-with-white-label/receive-incoming-webhook-data?p=1128ffce Example from another app: Would obviously need an additional step for choosing the correct campaign for the webhook connection. This would make setting up simple automations (webhook β†’ add to campaign) 100x easier, without the hassle of third party automation tools.

Severi 13 days ago

πŸ’‘ Feature Request

GPT-5 fails due to unsupported max_tokens parameter

Description: I am receiving an error when trying to use the GPT-5-mini model. The system is attempting to use the legacy max_tokens parameter, but the GPT-5 API now requires max_completion_tokens instead. Error Message: Unsupported parameter: 'max_tokens' is not supported with this model. Use 'max_completion_tokens' instead. Technical Context: With the release of GPT-5, OpenAI has shifted to a reasoning-based architecture. This model requires max_completion_tokens to properly manage the combined budget of "reasoning tokens" (Chain of Thought) and "visible output tokens". Any API calls still utilizing the old max_tokens key are being rejected by the server. Requested Fix: Please update the model configuration to use max_completion_tokens whenever any GPT-5 model is selected to ensure compatibility with the new API requirements.

Leandro Teixeira 15 days ago

πŸ› Bug Reports

β€œReview Sentiment Analysis” Missing in Traditional Chinese Version of Reports (Sales Intelligence)

When generating a β€œFull Analysis” report in Sales Intelligence in Traditional Chinese, I noticed that the Review Sentiment Analysis part of the report is missing. I double-checked by generating another identical report in English, and it works fine. Thanks for your kind attention on this.

Kevin Huang 15 days ago

πŸ› Bug Reports

Higher Customer Retention (Stickiness) with Automated Social Posts

The Social Proof feature in EMR is very cool, with compelling templates for review images to be posted on socials. However, there’s a gap in the posting process β€” it needs to be done manually. For DIY clients, it’s an extra layer of hassle, so the feature may be underused. For DFY clients, we can’t use this feature because we don’t have clients’ social credentials. It would be extremely powerful if the following could be added to Social Proof: Ability to publish reviews directly to the connected social platforms (Facebook/Instagram). Use AI to pre-generate text content in addition to the review image. Scheduled posting. Many thanks for your consideration.

Kevin Huang 15 days ago

πŸ’‘ Feature Request

GBP Direct Editing/Publishing

As an agency offering DFY services, clients ask us if we can help improve their GBP content. It is often a difficult task for us because we don’t ask for their Google credentials. As this is becoming a common request, I’d like to know if it’s possible to perform the following directly from EMR: 1. GBP detail editing 2. Publishing new GBP posts Many thanks for your consideration.

Kevin Huang 15 days ago

πŸ’‘ Feature Request

Sales Agents

When using Sales Agents, in our case, we'd love to have the ability to enable/hide existing subscription plans for a specific sales agent. For example, in Custom Plans, I am able to hide/unhide any plans. However, it only works for the subscription page, not for sales agents. I want to be able to display plans to sales agents that are visible on the subscription page only. I have several free plans created for special demo/trial purposes, which should not be offered by my sales agents. An alternative would be, when creating a new sales agent account, I have the ability to check which plans I want to make available for this specific sales agent. Thanks for your consideration.

Kevin Huang 15 days ago

πŸ’‘ Feature Request

Ability to Edit/Update Published Replies

Current State: Once a review has been replied to, EMR displays a static, non-clickable "Replied" badge. There is no option to modify the response within the interface. The Problem: UX Friction: If a user notices a typo or wants to improve a generic response, they are forced to leave EMR, log in to the native platform (e.g., GMB), search for the specific review, and edit it there. Missed Business Value: We cannot easily demonstrate the "Before vs. After" value of EMR. A key use case is taking a client with a history of poor/generic manual replies and clicking "Edit" > "Regenerate with AI" to instantly show them the upgrade in quality. Currently, this workflow is blocked. Proposed Solution: Complete or replace the static "Replied" badge with an "Edit Reply" button (or make the badge clickable). Expected Behavior: Clicking "Edit" loads the existing response into the text editor. The user can manually edit the text OR use the AI to regenerate a better version. Clicking "Update" sends the API request (PUT/PATCH) to the platform to overwrite the previous reply.

Seb Gardies 20 days ago

πŸ’‘ Feature Request

Global CSS access for easier customisation

As it stands, we can only modify the CSS code within each customer’s profile. If you want to apply the same CSS change to all customers, you currently have to update every single profile one by one, which is highly inefficient. There is also a significant risk that customers might accidentally disrupt the CSS code within their own profiles. It would be much more effective if we could apply CSS changes globally to all customers at once. This feature would have a significant positive impact on all of our businesses.

Evelina 21 days ago

1

πŸ’‘ Feature Request

Sales Intelligence

Hello, I have several observations and questions regarding the platform that I would like to bring to your attention: - System Health Bar: Can we hide the System Health bar from the Sales Agent view? I would prefer that they not see the balances for DataforSEO, OpenRouter, and other API providers. - Usage Limits: Is it possible to set monthly hard limits on the number of reports or searches each sales agent can perform? This would assist in managing API expenses. - Battle Card Consistency: The "Objections/Responses" tab available in the prospect search battle card is currently missing from the Strategy Room under the Prospect Reports tab. - Pricing Discrepancy: Why does the pricing for intelligence reports differ depending on whether they are generated via Prospect Search ($0.04/$0.02) versus the Prospects Reports tab ($0.06/$0.04)? - Customer Goals: Can we gain the ability to adjust the monthly new customer goals? I would like to increase or decrease this number from the static limit of 10 based on individual sales agent performance. I have recorded a video outlining these points here: https://www.loom.com/share/d3bd265c01294fb989419d357e4a8cb5

Review Pulse 360˚ 23 days ago

πŸ› Bug Reports

Reports - Is it possible to include metrics like call clicks, direction requests, website clicks, and impressions?

Reports - Is it possible to include metrics like call clicks, direction requests, website clicks, and impressions in EMR reports? I’ve read that those data points can be pulled via the Google Business Profile Performance API. Is it possible to include those numbers in EMR’s regular reports to show progress over time? If the API will be expensive for EMR, then it might be not make sense. Thank you.

Nalu Okimoto 24 days ago

2

πŸ’‘ Feature Request

AI Prompt Privacy (Secret Sauce)

Problem: AI prompts represent the intellectual property (IP) and the core value proposition of agencies or service providers. Currently, if an end-client has access to the settings, they can view and copy the prompt. This leads to two major issues: Churn Risk: Clients can extract the prompt engineering and use it on cheaper, third-party tools. Loss of Perceived Value: Exposing the "mechanics" destroys the premium service feel. Proposed Solution: Implement a selective visibility system for AI prompts: Admin/Agency Mode: Full access to view and edit prompts. Client/User Mode: The prompt text is masked (displaying a message like "Configured by your agency" or simply hidden). The client can see the result (the generated response) but cannot access the underlying source. Value Added: Protection of IP for agencies using EMR, increased client retention, and strengthening of the platform's white-label positioning.

Seb Gardies 25 days ago

5

πŸ’‘ Feature Request

Location-based AI Prompt Management

Problem: Currently, AI prompts used for generating review responses are global in an organzation across all locations. This is highly inefficient for business owners managing heterogeneous business portfolios (imagine a business owner with a restaurant, an hotel and car rental company….). The lack of segmentation compromises the relevance of the responses and undermines the credibility of the automation. Proposed Solution: Allow users to define and override AI prompts at multiple levels: Global Customer Level: Default prompt for the entire account. Organization Level: Specific prompts based on organization Location Level: Unique prompts for a specific establishment to reflect a local brand identity. Value Added: Immediate improvement in the quality of generated responses, better alignment with each business's tone of voice, better scalability and removal of friction for multi-activity accounts.

Seb Gardies 25 days ago

πŸ’‘ Feature Request