Skip to main content
Glama
fruggr

Zendesk MCP Server by Fruggr

by fruggr
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

Create or Update a Category Translation

set_category_translation
DestructiveIdempotent

Create or update a Help Center category translation in a locale. This makes the category reachable where its sections or articles are already translated.

Instructions

Create or update the translation of a Help Center category in one locale, and return the resulting translation (locale, localized name, draft state). Creates the translation when the locale has none and updates it otherwise, so no listing call is needed first; only the fields you pass are written, which makes "publish this draft" a single draft: false. Use it to make a category reachable in a locale where its sections or articles are already translated — a gap find_translation_gaps reports and list_categories cannot explain.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameNoLocalized category name for this locale (sent as the API's translation `title`). Required when the locale has no translation yet; omit on an existing one to leave its name untouched, for instance when only publishing a draft.
draftNoPublication state: false publishes the translation, making the category visible to end users in this locale; true keeps (or puts) it back as a draft. Defaults to false when creating; omit on an existing translation to leave its state unchanged.
localeYesLocale to write, e.g. "fr" or "de". Must be an active locale of the Help Center (zendesk-hc://topology lists them); list_category_translations shows which ones the category already has.
category_idYesCategory ID — the numeric id of the category whose translation to write. Obtain it from list_categories, find_translation_gaps or the zendesk-hc://topology resource.
descriptionNoLocalized category description for this locale (sent as the API's translation `body`). Omit to leave an existing description untouched; pass an empty string to clear it.

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. Addedv2.17.1

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Goes well beyond the annotations by disclosing upsert semantics (creates when absent, updates otherwise), partial-write semantics ('only the fields you pass are written'), and draft toggling as a one-call publish. It does not address permissions/auth or the destructiveHint in terms of what an unintended write could overwrite, but the partial-write and omit-to-preserve rules cover most of that risk.

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?

Three dense sentences, front-loaded with the upsert behavior and return shape before the routing hint. Every sentence carries information, though the third sentence is long and slightly overloaded with sibling references.

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?

No output schema exists, yet the description names the return payload (locale, localized name, draft state). Combined with the upsert, partial-update and draft rules, an agent has everything needed to call it correctly without a prior listing call.

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 workflow meaning the schema does not: the draft:false single-call publish pattern, and the create-vs-update distinction that determines when name is required. That interpretation is genuinely useful rather than a restatement.

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?

States a precise verb+resource+scope: create or update the translation of a Help Center category in one locale. It explicitly distinguishes itself from the sibling translation tools by calling out the category-level, single-locale scope and by naming find_translation_gaps and list_categories as adjacent but insufficient.

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?

Gives explicit when-to-use ('make a category reachable in a locale where its sections or articles are already translated'), names the sibling tools that report or cannot resolve the problem (find_translation_gaps, list_categories), and preempts the common alternative of calling a listing call first.

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