Share your ideas with us

We value your insights on AfterShip products and features. Let's innovate together!

Filter ideas

Customized returns notifications

Shane Fernandes
October 30, 2024 at 6:00 am
The current capability features a static returns approval notification. There are instances where the approval notification should be customized before being sent to the customer. Currently, the only way of doing this is to change the approval notification for all returns, save, go back to the RMA in question, approve it with the new notification, make sure no other returns are approved, go back to the nofication and amend it to how it was prior and save.   Use case: there may be a specific product that is available for exchange in store, this needs to be checked with the store first so cannot be a hard rule. If the approval notification could be amended on an adhoc basis, you could give the customer the option at the point of approval and avoid back and forth via email.
Submitted
0
0

Increase Bulk Search Limit

Michaela Kelly
April 2, 2025 at 10:41 am
Is it possible to increase the bulk search limit from 50? We often have to peform bulk search a number of times to retrieve the data that we're looking. 
Delivered
0
0

Support Returns API to create RMA Request

Maya Garcia
May 11, 2024 at 7:29 am
The background is that I sell my products on multiple marketplaces, and each has different return flows that the aftership Returns page cannot handle. It would be much easier if there is a Returns API that can meet my requirements below.   Need: - I need a Returns API to allow creating RMA/return requests without having to use the Returns Page to file it.  - I can call the API and pass the information regarding the Return Reason Resolution, etc in one go.  - Once I call this API, it will return creation in Pending or Auto-Approved Status.
Delivered
0
0

Warranty Flow Improvement - Label & No Label notification

Jason Ma
February 3, 2025 at 7:26 pm
When a warranty is approved, you can choose to include an label. In the “Warranty claim approved” email, there is no ability to account for this decision. We would need to add an ability to have wording around a label being included as well as a label not being included. Below is an example email we have now.   Two ways this could be addressed: 1. Split this notification into 2 notifications: “Warranty claim approved - with label” and “Warranty claim approved - no label”. 2. Add Flows to Warranties with Split functionality for generated labels.
Submitted
0
0

Send emails with tracking information

Thomas George
October 29, 2025 at 1:40 am
Instead of directly integrating Aftership with Gmail, I would like to send my emails with package information to an aftership email address associated with my account, for aftership to parse and automatically show tracking information. 
Accepted
0
0

Fix Direct Links to 'View On Carrier Website'

Oliver Mortimer
December 13, 2024 at 11:33 am
There's quite a few couriers where the 'View on Carrier Website' doesn't take you directly to the trracking page, and instead requires you to enter the tracking number.  These can be easily fixed by correcting the URL.   For example, for Cainiao the link takes you to; https://global.cainiao.com/   This needs correcting to; https://global.cainiao.com/newDetail.htm?mailNoList=   Please submit any further examples below.
Accepted
0
0

Eliminate Additional Fees for Carrier Integration – Improve Aftership for All Users

Mario Labault
March 3, 2025 at 10:20 pm
As a loyal Aftership customer, I am extremely disappointed to learn that integrating a new carrier requires an additional fee—a neither transparent nor customer-friendly policy. Carrier expansion should be a standard improvement to Aftership’s platform, not an extra cost passed onto paying customers. Why This Needs to Change: Improving Aftership Should Be Your Priority, Not an Upsell Adding new carriers benefits all Aftership users. Expanding carrier integrations should be part of Aftership’s ongoing development efforts, not a hidden fee imposed on individual customers. Hidden Costs Undermine Customer Trust Nowhere in Aftership’s pricing model is it clearly stated that carrier integration comes with additional fees. This lack of transparency frustrates users and creates an unexpected financial burden. Loyal Customers Deserve Better Customers who have trusted Aftership for their business operations should not have to pay extra to access a fundamental feature like carrier support. Proposed Solution: Aftership should eliminate extra fees for new carrier integrations and invest in expanding its platform instead of charging individual users. This would be part of its commitment to improving service for all customers. Clear, upfront disclosure of costs should be required if Aftership maintains this fee structure. If Aftership truly values its customers, this change must ensure a fair, transparent, and customer-centric experience.
Submitted
0
0

API Integration for Instagram Feed

Andrew Bird
August 14, 2025 at 12:47 pm
I'd like to log an enhancement request for the Tracking page editor. Currently the section where we add social media connectors is limited in connection options. Specifically for Instagram (which is a really cool feature) the only way to connect is using our own credentials (user name/password login). This is an unacceptable option as it exposes us to being hacked and is a security concern obviously. The better way to do this is via Instagram's API connection: https://developers.facebook.com/docs/instagram-platform. Can you please log that as a high priority enhancement request? Should we decided to stay with AfterShip, this will be a critical branding requirement.
Accepted
0
0

Saving Clients

Scott Williams
August 20, 2026 at 6:51 pm
We use this to ship to clients it would be nice if we could save clients within the system to send notifications to. 
Submitted
0
0

Publish Webhook Outgoing IPs as a Machine-Readable Plain-Text Endpoint

Martinho Dias
June 3, 2026 at 7:47 pm
Currently, AfterShip's webhook outgoing IP list is only available on an HTML documentation page (https://www.aftership.com/docs/tracking/webhook/webhook-outgoing-ips). This makes it impossible to automate IP allowlist management in infrastructure-as-code (IaC) workflows.   Problem: Teams that use IP-based firewalls to secure their webhook endpoints must manually monitor the documentation page for any IP changes and update their firewall rules accordingly. If a change is missed, it can cause webhook delivery failures and broken integrations.   Request: Please publish the webhook outgoing IP list as a dedicated plain-text endpoint — similar to how Cloudflare publishes theirs at https://www.cloudflare.com/ips-v4 — where each IP is returned on a separate line.   This would allow teams to: * Fetch the IP list programmatically as part of their CI/CD or IaC pipelines * Keep firewall allowlists automatically in sync without manual intervention * Avoid service disruptions caused by missed IP changes This is a standard practice among major API providers and would significantly improve the developer experience for customers who manage network security programmatically.
Delivered
0
0