Skip to main content
Glama
fruggr

Zendesk MCP Server by Fruggr

by fruggr
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

Preview a Macro Diff on a Ticket

preview_macro_diff
Idempotent

Show the exact changes a macro would make to a specific ticket as a before → after diff, without saving. Returns only modified fields and the canned reply for review before applying.

Instructions

Preview the exact changes a macro would make to a specific ticket, as a before → after diff, WITHOUT saving anything. Orchestrates two reads — the ticket's current state and Zendesk's macro-apply preview (which returns the whole resulting ticket) — and returns only the fields the macro actually changes (status, priority, assignee, group, tags, custom fields) plus the canned reply with its public/internal flag; unchanged and identity fields are omitted. Nothing is committed: to apply it, follow up with update_ticket for the field changes and add_public_comment or add_private_note for the reply. This deliberate two-step keeps the mutation explicit and reviewable rather than hidden. Find macro ids via list_macros and the ticket id via search_tickets or list_tickets.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
macro_idYesMacro ID — the numeric id of the macro to preview. Obtain it from list_macros.
ticket_idYesTicket ID — the numeric id of the ticket to preview the macro against. Obtain it from search_tickets or list_tickets.

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. Addedv2.10.0

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Goes well beyond the annotations: it explains the two underlying reads (current ticket + macro-apply preview), that unchanged/identity fields are omitted, the exact returned shape (status, priority, assignee, group, tags, custom fields + reply with public/internal flag), and that nothing is persisted. The idempotentHint=true is consistent with a stateless preview.

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?

Dense and front-loaded: the no-save guarantee and returned-fields summary come first, followed by the follow-up path and id sourcing. The rationale sentence about the 'deliberate two-step' is mildly editorial but still earns its keep by justifying the design.

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

Completeness5/5

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

With no output schema, the description carries the burden of describing the return value, and it does so precisely (only changed fields, reply with its visibility flag, omissions noted). No annotation or schema gaps remain for an agent to call and interpret this tool correctly.

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%, so both integer parameters are already documented in the schema, including where to obtain them. The description repeats that sourcing guidance but adds no syntax or format 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?

Specific verb (preview) + resource (macro diff on a ticket) with explicit scope: it returns only the fields the macro changes plus the canned reply, and commits nothing. This distinguishes it cleanly from update_ticket, which is named as the actual mutator.

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?

States exactly when to use it (to see a macro's effect before applying) and routes the agent to update_ticket, add_public_comment, and add_private_note for the follow-up write. It also names list_macros, search_tickets, and list_tickets for obtaining the required ids.

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