Skip to main content
Glama

create_ticket_comment

Add a comment to an existing Zendesk ticket to provide updates, ask questions, or share information with customers or internal teams.

Instructions

Create a new comment on an existing Zendesk ticket

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
ticket_idYesThe ID of the ticket to comment on
commentYesThe comment text/content to add
publicNoWhether the comment should be public

Implementation Reference

  • The tool handler logic for 'create_ticket_comment' which calls 'zendesk_client.post_comment'.
    elif name == "create_ticket_comment":
        if not arguments:
            raise ValueError("Missing arguments")
        public = arguments.get("public", True)
        result = zendesk_client.post_comment(
            ticket_id=arguments["ticket_id"],
            comment=arguments["comment"],
            public=public
        )
        return [types.TextContent(
            type="text",
            text=f"Comment created successfully: {result}"
        )]
  • The tool definition (schema) for 'create_ticket_comment'.
    types.Tool(
        name="create_ticket_comment",
        description="Create a new comment on an existing Zendesk ticket",
        inputSchema={
            "type": "object",
            "properties": {
                "ticket_id": {
                    "type": "integer",
                    "description": "The ID of the ticket to comment on"
                },
                "comment": {
                    "type": "string",
                    "description": "The comment text/content to add"
                },
                "public": {
                    "type": "boolean",
                    "description": "Whether the comment should be public",
                    "default": True
                }
            },
            "required": ["ticket_id", "comment"]
        }
    ),
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. While 'Create' implies a write operation, it doesn't specify permission requirements, whether the operation is idempotent, rate limits, or what happens on failure. It mentions the comment is added to 'an existing' ticket, which is useful context about prerequisites.

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?

The description is a single, efficient sentence with zero wasted words. It's appropriately sized for a simple creation tool and front-loads the essential information.

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

Completeness2/5

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

For a mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is insufficient. It doesn't explain what the tool returns (e.g., success confirmation, comment ID), error conditions, or behavioral nuances. The context about 'existing Zendesk ticket' helps but doesn't compensate for major gaps.

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 the schema already documents all three parameters thoroughly. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what's in the schema (e.g., no format examples, edge cases, or usage tips). Baseline 3 is appropriate when schema does the heavy lifting.

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

Purpose4/5

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

The description clearly states the action ('Create a new comment') and the target resource ('on an existing Zendesk ticket'), providing a specific verb+resource combination. However, it doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like 'get_ticket_comments' or 'update_ticket' which might also involve ticket comments.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention prerequisites (e.g., needing an existing ticket), exclusions, or comparisons to sibling tools like 'update_ticket' which might also modify tickets.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/kdopenshaw/zendesk-mcp-server'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server