Skip to main content
Glama
fruggr

Zendesk MCP Server by Fruggr

by fruggr
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

Get Tickets In A View

get_view_tickets
Read-onlyIdempotent

Read tickets in a Zendesk view's own sort order to work queues like Unassigned or Breaching today. Accepts view by title or ID.

Instructions

Read the tickets inside a Zendesk view, in the view's own configured sort order — the same order the agent sees in the Zendesk UI — which is the natural way to work a named queue like "Unassigned tickets" or "Breaching today". Accepts the view by title or by numeric id (discover both with list_views); a title is matched case-insensitively against the agent's active views, and on no match the available titles are returned so you can retry in one step. Tickets come back with the same fields as list_tickets and are cursor-paginated; there is no live SLA block here (use search_tickets when you need per-ticket SLA state), and sort_by/sort_order override the view's order when you want a different cut.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
viewYesThe view to read: its exact title as shown in Zendesk (e.g. "Unassigned tickets") or its numeric id from list_views. A title is matched case-insensitively against your active views; on no match the tool returns the available titles instead of erroring, so you can retry with a correct one.
cursorNoPagination cursor from a previous response; omit for the first page.
sort_byNoOptional column to sort by, overriding the view's own sort. Must be one of the view's columns (e.g. "status", "priority", "updated_at", or a custom field id); "subject" and "submitter" are not sortable. Omit to keep the view's configured order.
page_sizeNoTickets per page (1-100, default 100).
sort_orderNoSort direction applied to sort_by: "asc" (oldest/lowest first) or "desc" (newest/highest first). Only meaningful together with sort_by; omit to keep the view's configured direction.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv2.24.0
    • changedInput schema / $schema
      Previous value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"New value: +"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"
  2. Addedv2.11.0

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/destructive=false, so safety is covered. The description adds real behavioral context beyond them: the no-match fallback returns available titles instead of erroring, results are cursor-paginated, and there is deliberately no SLA block. It stops short of describing auth requirements or any rate limits.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

Front-loaded with the core action and ordered intuition, with fallback behavior and pagination appended where they belong. Dense but nearly every clause carries information; the SLA/parenthetical aside and the sort override reminder are the only parts that could be trimmed.

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?

No output schema exists, so the description must carry the return contract, and it does reference the field shape via list_tickets and notes cursor pagination. It leaves the exact field list implicit through that sibling reference, which is adequate but not fully self-contained for a 5-parameter tool.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds cross-parameter meaning the schema states only in isolation: that title matching is case-insensitive against active views and that sort_by/sort_order operate as overrides of the view's configured order. It does not add format detail for cursor beyond what the schema says.

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?

Specific verb and resource ('Read the tickets inside a Zendesk view') plus scope (view's own configured sort order). It explicitly carves out territory against siblings: not list_tickets (same field shape but unfiltered), not search_tickets (no live SLA block). An agent can pick this tool without opening another schema.

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?

Names the conditions that select this tool ('the natural way to work a named queue') and routes to alternatives explicitly: list_views to discover ids/titles, search_tickets when per-ticket SLA state is needed, sort_by/sort_order when a different cut is wanted. Both when-to-use and when-not-to-use are present.

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