Skip to main content
Glama
fruggr

Zendesk MCP Server by Fruggr

by fruggr
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

Add Private Note

add_private_note

Add an internal note to a Zendesk ticket without showing it to the requester. Optionally attach files to the note for agent-only context.

Instructions

Add an internal note (not visible to requester) to a ticket, optionally with file attachments (uploaded via the Zendesk Uploads API and carried on the note). The note is appended to the ticket thread; use add_public_comment instead when the reply should be visible to the requester.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
bodyYesNote text (internal, agent-only). Plain text or HTML; not shown to the requester.
ticket_idYesTicket ID — the numeric id of the ticket to annotate. Obtain it from search_tickets or list_tickets.
attachmentsNoFiles to attach to this note (base64-encoded content).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv2.22.0
    • addedInput schema / properties / attachments / items / properties / file_base64 / contentEncoding
      Added value: +"base64"
  2. Changed2 schema fields changedv2.20.2
    • changedInput schema / properties / attachments / items / properties / file_base64 / description
      Previous value: -"File content encoded as base64."New value: +"File content encoded as base64. At most 10420224 characters (about 7.45 MB of file), and the attachments of one call must stay under that total; the HTTP transport additionally caps request bodies at 4 MB."
    • addedInput schema / properties / attachments / items / properties / file_base64 / maxLength
      Added value: +10420224
  3. Changed2 schema fields changedv2.6.0
    • changedInput schema / properties / body / description
      Previous value: -"Note content"New value: +"Note text (internal, agent-only). Plain text or HTML; not shown to the requester."
    • changedInput schema / properties / ticket_id / description
      Previous value: -"Ticket ID"New value: +"Ticket ID — the numeric id of the ticket to annotate. Obtain it from search_tickets or list_tickets."
  4. Changed1 schema field changedv2.4.1
    • addedInput schema / properties / attachments
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Files to attach to this note (base64-encoded content).",
+  "items": {
+    "properties": {
+      "content_type": {
+        "default": "application/octet-stream",
+        "description": "MIME type, e.g. \"text/plain\", \"image/png\", \"application/pdf\".",
+        "minLength": 1,
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "file_base64": {
+        "description": "File content encoded as base64.",
+        "format": "base64",
+        "minLength": 1,
+        "pattern": "^$|^(?:[0-9a-zA-Z+/]{4})*(?:(?:[0-9a-zA-Z+/]{2}==)|(?:[0-9a-zA-Z+/]{3}=))?$",
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "file_name": {
+        "description": "File name, e.g. \"app.log\" or \"screenshot.png\".",
+        "minLength": 1,
+        "type": "string"
+      }
+    },
+    "required": [
+      "file_name",
+      "file_base64"
+    ],
+    "type": "object"
+  },
+  "type": "array"
+}
  5. Changed1 schema field changedv2.3.1
    • addedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Added value: +false
  6. First observedv1.7.0

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior4/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations only indicate non-read-only, non-idempotent, open-world behavior. The description adds meaningful behavioral detail: the note is invisible to the requester, appended to the ticket thread, and attachments are carried via the Zendesk Uploads API. It does not cover permissions or failure behavior, but it goes beyond the annotations without contradicting them.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Two sentences with zero filler. The main purpose and privacy constraint are front-loaded, the attachment capability is summarized, and the alternative is named at the end. Every clause earns its place.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a mutation tool with three parameters and no output schema, the description plus rich schema covers the required inputs, visibility semantics, thread placement, and key alternative. A hint about the response value would improve it, but nothing essential for invoking the tool correctly is missing.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100%, and each parameter already has rich descriptions (body text semantics, ticket_id source, attachments base64 constraints). The tool description adds little param-level detail beyond the schema, so the baseline of 3 applies.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Add an internal note (not visible to requester) to a ticket.' It also explicitly names the sibling alternative add_public_comment, so an agent can distinguish this tool from the public-comment tool immediately.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description says exactly when to use this tool (internal, agent-only content) and explicitly points to add_public_comment when the content must be visible to the requester. This is clear routing guidance with no ambiguity.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Deploy Server

Other Tools