zendesk-mcp
Related Servers
Alternatives to zendesk-mcp
No user-submitted related servers found.
Related Servers
- FlicenseNot gradedqualityDmaintenanceEnables interaction with Zendesk to manage tickets, retrieve ticket fields, comments, and priority based on SLA, as well as get unsolved tickets by agent name.1-
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityCmaintenanceEnables AI assistants to search tickets, manage tags, create tickets, inspect automations, and more in Zendesk.MIT
- AlicenseAqualityDmaintenanceEnables fetching and analyzing Zendesk support tickets and Help Center articles for trend analysis, knowledge base management, and drafting new articles.417 npmMIT
- FlicenseNot gradedqualityDmaintenanceEnables interaction with Zendesk Support for managing tickets, comments, and filtering via the Model Context Protocol. It allows LLMs to perform actions like creating, updating, and listing support tickets through natural language in a Heroku-native environment.-
- AlicenseAqualityAmaintenanceEnables AI-powered ticket analysis and comprehensive Zendesk API integration via the Model Context Protocol, supporting both API token (CLI) and OAuth 2.1 (web) authentication modes.55312 npm5MIT
- AlicenseAqualityDmaintenanceEnables comprehensive management of Zendesk tickets, comments, and Help Center articles through tools for searching, creating, and updating content. It includes specialized prompts for ticket analysis and response drafting to streamline support workflows.71Apache 2.0
TDQS
Scored across 29 tools
Each tool has a clearly distinct purpose, even where operations appear similar (e.g., get_ticket, get_tickets, search_tickets). Descriptions clarify when to use each, and there is no meaningful overlap that would cause an agent to select the wrong tool.
All tools share the 'zendesk_' prefix and mostly follow a verb_noun pattern. There is some mixing between 'get_' and 'list_' for read operations, but overall the conventions are predictable and easy to follow.
With 29 tools, this exceeds the 25-tool threshold for a 'too many' rating. While the scope is broad, the high count makes the surface feel heavy and increases selection complexity, even though each tool is well-scoped individually.
The server covers the full ticket lifecycle including comments, attachments, time tracking, views, and macros. Minor gaps exist such as lack of ticket deletion and user management, but core support workflows are well represented.