Discuss ideas, submit feedback, and track what's next
Help us understand your request
An intake-ready template
Dear Team Zendesk, First of all, thank you for sharing this update. We were genuinely excited when we saw the announcement about Copilot AI writing tools becoming available for Professional plans and above. However, that excitement faded rather quickly when reviewing the details — specifically: Translation is not included as part of the Copilot writing tools. The allowance is calculated as number of agents × 5 uses per agent, per month. In practice, this means our agents would likely be able to use the tool for approximately 10–50 minutes per month. For teams handling substantial ticket volumes (which I believe applies to many customers on Professional plans), 5 uses per agent per month feels far too limited to meaningfully evaluate the feature. This is not meant as a complaint, but as constructive feedback. I assume the intention behind this rollout was to give Professional plan customers the opportunity to experience how helpful these writing tools can be. However, with such a low usage cap, the feature becomes difficult to introduce internally. From our perspective, it does not make sense to brief and train our team on a tool they can try briefly and then lose access to once the monthly limit is reached. In that case, it feels more practical to disable the feature entirely rather than create short-lived expectations. We did test the full Copilot add-on last year, and at that time it did not perform at the level we needed. That said, we fully recognize how quickly AI capabilities are evolving, and we would have been very interested in reassessing how the tool performs today. For that to be worthwhile internally, we would need a significantly higher monthly usage allowance. One idea could be offering selected accounts a time-limited pilot (e.g., 2–3 months) with higher or unlimited usage up to a defined cap. That would allow teams to properly integrate the tool into their workflows and evaluate its real impact. Additionally, including AI-powered translations would significantly increase the value of the writing tools for many global support teams.We share this feedback in the spirit of collaboration and continuous improvement. If any of this is unclear or if further discussion would be helpful, you can contact me via email or here anytime.
Is anyone else running into issues with the recent changes to pausable update SLAs, or are we just not understanding it? Zendesk Support confirmed that unpausing a ticket now resumes the timer rather than resetting the window - understood. But, this means the SLA is now cumulative. So if a complex ticket spends a total of 10 hours in “active” status and your SLA is 8 hours, it’ll breach regardless of how many times the agent replies. Support suggested just lengthening our SLA targets to “one week,” but that ruins our ability to track consistent update cadences.So my question is, how is everybody tracking agent update consistency now? Are there any workarounds (like triggers or different metrics) that yall have found to be helpful?Thanks!!
Hi, We'd like to be able to copy macros and keep the HTML aspect of it. Meaning, being able to paste hyperlinked texts as well as keeping the text color without giving it a gray background. This would be a great implementation as there are times some different macros need to be merged to provide a response and every time can be a different combination therefore creating new macros for each of them would not be an efficient solution.
For the CC field, I currently have to manually type or paste email addresses each time I submit a ticket via the Help Center. Is there a way to improve this so it remembers previous entries and allows me to select from a dropdown or our user list?
This topic is sticking around for many years. I'm personally surprised how high level of ignorance is presented by Zendesk developer.Sending emails over authorized SMTP is only CORRECT and SAFE option for most companies that are concerned about data safety. SPF method works only to some level and then becomes a liability. Can't understand what kind of issue Zendesk have with SMTP approach but this doesn't build trust to the whole system. Should you care more about data safety and end-user comfort??You can be surprised but adding SPF records in many cases is far more complicated that setting up email account and password for it ;-)Hope you can reconsider ability to sending messages over SMTP. It's biggest disadvantage I can find at the moment if I compare Zendesk to competitors. Rest pass this test with flying colors. Best Regards Konrad
In order to track user activity, for GDPR reasons, in the ticket system there is the Last login data.In the case where a user wants to get information from us, they “Follow” an article section. In our case the “Product Information” section.If the user then never logs in, it looks like the user is "inactive".If the section email notification bounces, then the user has quit the company and should somehow be purged. I propose that some kind of report or notification should be available that a user's emails bounces, so that we can take action.
I'm utilizing the conversation review section to score in bulk conversations between out Ai bots and our customers where a customer is not escalated to a human agent.This is already way better then trying to do this manually within the bot setting in the admin panel.One key detail I see so far is missing, I see the entire conversation but i do not see any of the articles the bot suggests to the customer so cannot check if it share correct information in these contacts.This addition would really assist in accurate scoring and build confidence in our QA users that the bot is doing the right actions with our customers.
Would be great for Zendesk to integrate spell check. Having to re-read to ensure no spelling errors or typos takes a bit of extra time. From other user's feedback, the apps available don't work well with Zendesk.
SummaryAllow administrators to configure a default end-user profile language at the brand level, used only when no other language signals are available.ProblemWhen a new end user is automatically created via an incoming email, Zendesk assigns the user profile language to English (US) by default.This occurs even when: The account operates entirely outside the US (e.g. UK, NZ, AU) The brand is clearly regionalised No Help Centre, browser, or user-defined language signal exists Currently, there is no native way to control or override this behaviour: Triggers and automations cannot update the system language/locale field The account-level default language acts only as a fallback and is not consistently applied Language assignment is not configurable per brand As a result, organisations experience: Incorrect spelling and phrasing in system emails (US vs UK English) Inconsistent customer experience Unnecessary reliance on API workarounds for a basic configuration need Proposed solutionIntroduce a “Default end-user profile language” setting at the brand level.Behaviour: When a new end user is created and no language can be determined from: An existing user profile Help Centre language Browser language Zendesk should assign the brand’s configured default language to the user profile This setting should: Apply only as a final fallback Not override an explicitly set user language Be configurable independently per brand Use caseAn organisation operates multiple regional brands: Brand A: English (UK) Brand B: English (US) Brand C: French Customers frequently contact support via email.When a new customer emails Brand A, their user profile should default to English (UK), ensuring: Correct spelling and phrasing in notifications Consistent macro and automation behaviour Reduced manual or API-based remediation ImpactWho benefits: Global and multi-brand organisations Email-first support teams Customers outside the US Business impact: Improved localisation accuracy Reduced operational overhead Fewer custom integrations for basic language control Better customer trust and brand consistency Current workaround Custom API scripts or middleware to retroactively update user locales Manual correction of user profiles Avoiding localisation features entirely and standardising on one language These approaches add unnecessary complexity and maintenance for a common requirement.Additional contextLanguage is a core user attribute, yet administrators currently have no deterministic way to control its default assignment during one of the most common user-creation paths (incoming email).Aligning this behaviour with brand configuration would significantly improve Zendesk’s localisation model without breaking existing logic.
With the introduction of subsections in Guide, our help center now has many sections and subsections. When a section is followed, make all subsections followed as well. This would also apply to any new subsections created in a section that is already being followed. Alternatively, add a "Follow all subsections" option to the "Follow" dropdown. This would imply that any newly created subsection would be followed as well as articles and comments. Basically a "follow all" scenario.
Hello everyone, I would like to share a product feedback and check whether other Zendesk users face a similar need. We use Zendesk in a B2B and enterprise After Sales context, where the Help Center is accessed by: external customers (end users) and internal teams (agents and light agents) Current behaviorIn the Help Center “Submit a request” page: only request forms marked as “visible to end users” are shown forms marked as “agents only” are never visible in the Help Center, even when agents or light agents are logged in there is no native way to show different sets of request forms based on user role. Zendesk Support confirmed that this behavior is by design. Use caseIn structured B2B organizations, internal teams often need to submit internal requests (cross-team, operational, After Sales, Service, etc.) using a standardized and auditable process, without: granting full access to the Agent Workspace to all teams exposing internal request forms to external customers. Being able to configure role-based visibility of Help Center request forms (for example: end users vs agents/light agents) would allow: a single, consistent intake process better governance and compliance reduced risk of customers accessing internal-only forms. Feedback / feature requestWe believe that role-based request form visibility in the Help Center would be a valuable enhancement, especially for: B2B and industrial environments organizations using Zendesk beyond classic customer support internal service and After Sales workflows. I would be interested to hear if other users face the same limitation and have similar need.
Please give a quick overview of your product feature request or feedback and note who in your org is affected by this issue [ex. agents, admins, customers, etc.]. (2-3 sentences)Currently, only Public articles can be added to Procedures. As a B2B provider, our Help Center is locked behind an SSO, so only our customers can access it. Because of this, we cannot add articles to Procedures, greatly reducing Copilot's ability to provide accurate responses. What problem do you see this solving? (1-2 sentences) Having access to our articles would allow Copilot to suggest more relevant replies and allow us to write better Procedures. When was the last time you were affected by this lack of functionality, or specific tool? What happened? How often does this problem occur and how does this impact your business? (3-4 sentences)We are currently implementing Copilot and this is slowing down adoption. Are you currently using a workaround to solve this problem? (If yes, please explain) (1-2 sentences)There isn't one. What would be your ideal solution to this problem? How would it work or function? (1-2 sentences)If the customer can access an article, Copilot should also be able to access it without the article having to be fully public.
Please give a quick overview of your product feature request or feedback and note who in your org is affected by this issue (2–3 sentences)I would like Zendesk’s intent prediction to be able to reference internal notes in addition to public comments when determining ticket intent. This primarily affects agents and admins using telephony and other integrations that log transcripts or agent notes as internal notes rather than public comments. In these cases, intent prediction is currently blind to the most meaningful content in the ticket.What problem do you see this solving? (1–2 sentences)This would allow intent prediction to function accurately for tickets created via voice, chat, or system integrations where no public comment (such as an email) exists. As a result, automated routing, macros, and workflows would work reliably regardless of the ticket’s channel or comment visibility.When was the last time you were affected by this lack of functionality, or specific tool? What happened? How often does this problem occur and how does this impact your business? (3–4 sentences)This issue occurs daily for tickets created through telephony, where call transcripts and summaries are logged as internal notes and no customer email address is present. Intent prediction fails to classify these tickets because it only evaluates public comments, even though rich contextual data exists internally. This reduces automation accuracy, increases manual triage, and slows down agent response times. Over time, this negatively impacts operational efficiency and customer experience.Are you currently using a workaround to solve this problem? (If yes, please explain) (1–2 sentences)There is no effective workaround today. Agents either have to manually tag tickets or copy relevant information from internal notes into a public comment purely to trigger intent-based automation.What would be your ideal solution to this problem? How would it work or function? (1–2 sentences)Ideally, intent prediction would have a configurable option to include internal notes (such as call transcripts or agent summaries) when determining intent. This could be controlled via admin settings, allowing teams to decide whether internal notes should be considered, excluded, or weighted differently depending on channel or integration.
Overview of the RequestWe request the ability to display the Organization Name associated with each linked Incident Ticket directly within the Problem Ticket interface.Currently, when viewing the Incidents linked to a Problem Ticket, only the Subject and Requester are visible. This is a critical information gap that forces agents to perform unnecessary lookups and degrades efficiency. The Problem & Current LimitationWhen a large-scale issue affects multiple clients, we link all resulting Incident Tickets to a single Problem Ticket. The current view within the Problem Ticket looks like this (missing Organization): The Limitation: Agents cannot immediately identify which client (Organization) is affected by a specific incident without clicking into each individual ticket. Why This Feature is Needed (The Impact) Including the Organization Name directly in the incident list within the problem ticket will lead to the following benefits: Faster Prioritization and Impact Assessment: Agents can instantly assess the scope of the problem by seeing how many different organizations are affected, and quickly prioritize incidents based on Service Level Agreements (SLAs) or client tier (e.g., Enterprise vs. Standard). Improved Communication: When communicating updates, agents need to know which organizations are impacted. This feature allows for rapid identification of all relevant organizations to be included in proactive mass updates. Reduced Agent Clicks and Context Switching: By eliminating the need to open multiple incident tickets just to determine the organization, we drastically reduce friction, saving significant time during high-pressure problem management scenarios. Proposed Solution Please consider implementing this feature by making the linked incident list within the Problem Ticket editable, specifically allowing us to add the Requester Organization Name as a display column. Goal: The Organization Name should be visible alongside the Requester's name.This small but change would transform the efficiency of managing major incidents and problems for any organization handling multiple B2B clients in Zendesk.
Article Owner API endpoint for creation of article Feature Request Summary: Zendesk Support should provide API endpoint for owner for KB article. this will help to create article and assign the owner. Description/Use Cases: we have a custom for to create KB article from Agent interface which need to set the owner of the article for reviews. We also flagging the content of the article to the owners so that the owners can take action. we are creating ticket once the article flagged. since owner cannot be set via API we are doing it manually. Business impact of limitation or missing feature: This is limiting us to make the automation manually set. which tend to lead to errors.
Description:As a B2B Professional Services provider, we face a significant challenge in managing the extensive information required from our customers. The work we deliver necessitates customers to complete numerous forms when starting a new service and at regular intervals thereafter. These services are managed across various systems, including Laboratory Information Management, Audit Management, Scheduling Systems, third-party proprietary systems, and manual spreadsheets. The redundancy in information required across these forms is a major pain point for our customers.Request:We propose the development of an advanced "Profile Management" feature for Organizations, Sub-Organizations (child sites or departments), and Contacts. This feature should include the following capabilities: Profile Records: Each organization and contact should have a "Profile" record where all relevant information is stored. Administrators should be able have control over adding fields, with support for all current custom field types and the ability to create relationship and repeating fields. Fields: Fields options with the ability to select multiple existing records (Such as contacts with delegated authority for specific tasks or procedures). Option to add new end-users if they do not already exist and select existing contacts from linked organizations. Repeating Fields - so users can enter lists of information such as different product names. Like Ticket forms, the fields should have an internal label and an end-user label along with descriptions. Document upload fields should be available and be able to be linked to different storage locations such as SharePoint or Azure blob. Custom Forms: Create specific forms for various purposes, designing the layout by selecting only the necessary fields. Form logic capability must be included so that certain fields can be shown/hidden/required based on previous answers. Forms should inherit the design and CSS from the help centre. Link directly to forms for new applicants or as a "review" for authorized users to verify and update existing data. Ability to link to these forms in an article Ability to embed the forms in an article Audit Log:An audit log or field flag to identify updated fields during the review process, allowing technical specialists to review and implement necessary changes. Drafts and Collaboration:Enable users to start a form, save progress, and send a link to colleagues for completion of missing data. Help Center Access:Authorized end-users should be able to view and update the organization profile via the help center, with changes flagged for review and potentially creating a ticket. Permissions Management: Agents should be able to designate specific end-users as "Form Owners" with access to the organization profile. End-Users that are linked to an organisation should be able to see a list of all the different organisation forms and initiate completing it, they would become the “form owner”. End-users should be able to see the contact forms. Each form should have an “audience” or “visible to” setting similar to articles in the help centre so that only relevant forms can be shown to users. Only individuals linked to the organization's "family tree" should be selectable. Form Owners should manage access permissions for others within their organization tree. Review Periods and Automation: Set a "last reviewed" date and review period for each form. Trigger/automation options to create tickets when the review period elapses, including a link for the form owner and other authorized users to review the data. Consolidated Forms:Option for customers to review a single consolidated form instead of multiple individual forms. (as opposed to the entire profile which may include hundreds of fields that are not relevant to them. Digital Signature Integration:Support for legally binding digital signatures (e.g., DocuSign) for forms requiring signatures, such as credit applications and contracts. Benefits: Streamlined information management for customers, reducing redundancy and improving efficiency. Enhanced customer satisfaction by minimizing the repetitive completion of forms. Improved data accuracy and consistency across all systems. Better process management and compliance through audit logs and review mechanisms. Increased collaboration and flexibility in form completion and updates. Use Case:A customer starts a new service and needs to provide extensive information. By using the advanced Profile Management feature, they can complete a single form with all necessary details, which is then stored in their profile. When the information needs to be updated, they can review and confirm the existing data, with any changes flagged for review by a technical specialist. This reduces the burden on the customer and ensures accurate and up-to-date information is maintained.
I’d like to share product feedback regarding the management of Web Widgets in Zendesk when multiple brands are configured. In an instance with several brands, if one of the brands becomes deprecated or is no longer in use, there is currently no way to remove or deactivate the associated Web Widget from the Admin Center. The widget for the deprecated brand remains visible in the list of web widgets, even though the brand itself is no longer active. This creates unnecessary clutter and can cause confusion for administrators who are maintaining the account. In some scenarios, a deprecated brand may still need to handle requests through channels such as email or phone, without requiring a Web Widget (Messaging). For these cases, having granular control to remove or disable only the widget - while keeping other channels active - would be extremely valuable. It would be extremely helpful to have the ability to fully remove or archive Web Widgets tied to deprecated brands, ensuring the Admin Center reflects only active and relevant configurations. Adding this capability would significantly improve overall account organization and reduce confusion for administrators managing multi‑brand environments.
Currently, I can see the history of who changed the triggers individually, but I hope that feature is added to automation.With this feature, I will be able to quickly follow up on issues when you have problems with automation.
Hi, We would like to have the option to use Talk lines numbers in business rules conditions, similarly to "Receive at" condition for emails: We would like to create a view for calls that were directed to a specific number, no matter if the team responsible for this number actually answered the call or it was routed to another group.Example: if a player calls our "VIP Customer Service" number, all VIP agents are busy, and a member of the secondary group for this line (regular "Customer Service Team") answers the call we would like to be able to add a "vip_customer" tag via a trigger, despite the fact that non-VIP agent answered the call. And we want to achieve this based on the number which the player called. Please, consider adding "Talk number" conditions for triggers and automations. Thank you. Regards, Yanko Chakarov
Please give a quick overview of your product feature request or feedback and note who in your org is affected by this issue [ex. agents, admins, customers, etc.]. (2-3 sentences)We have found that some channels do not route tickets - such as Help Center (not to be confused with Web form) that do not route wiht OCR, even though they should. What problem do you see this solving? (1-2 sentences) Allow all or more types of channels to be routedWhen was the last time you were affected by this lack of functionality, or specific tool? What happened? How often does this problem occur and how does this impact your business? (3-4 sentences)Last week. Are you currently using a workaround to solve this problem? (If yes, please explain) (1-2 sentences)Yes, team leads and managers have to assign the tickets manuallyWhat would be your ideal solution to this problem? How would it work or function? (1-2 sentences)Just allow these to be routed.
Hi All, Custom Objects are a game changer for zendesk so thank you. However in our use case residents and members of the public access our zendesk portal to log issues with known public assets such as lamp posts etc (the defined custom objects) without logging in. (anonymous). Custom Objects are available once someone logs in, but please please can they be made visible to anonymous users? Kind RegardsDean
Hello, Need ability to trigger an action when someone comments an article. Any basic trigger action at all - such as trigger an email. "Moderation" of articles is misleading - there is no real moderation available on Help Center (seems to apply primarily to community). Ultimately, we need a comment to simply generate a ticket (even if it has to use a Zendesk email address email-to-ticket trigger). There are no basic triggers available at all. https://support.zendesk.com/hc/en-us/articles/4408834867610-Creating-a-ticket-from-a-comment-on-a-knowledge-base-article https://support.zendesk.com/hc/en-us/community/posts/4408868261914-Notification-about-comment-on-Article-in-Guide?input_string=Triggers%20Needed%20for%20Guide%20%3E%20Article%20Comments
Hi all, This is a nice update but our agents are not able to turn on the new preview. Their action button seems to be missing. Am I supposed to make changes in the admin center first or is something going wrong?
Thank you for your continued engagement and feedback on our Dashboard Builder. As we work to enhance your experience, we’ve created this dedicated space for you to share your insights. How to Provide FeedbackPlease use the template below to submit your feedback. This structure will help us categorize and address your concerns more efficiently. Feedback Template Problem Category: New Dashboard Builder features Components missing in the Importer Tool Issues experienced while migrating a dashboard Problem Description: (Please provide a detailed description of the issue you’re experiencing or the feature you would like to see prioritized). Severity: (Please choose one of the following options) Low: Minor inconvenience, no immediate impact on usage. Medium: Some disruption in workflow but manageable. High: Major disruption or complete inability to use key features. Critical: Critical business function is impacted, immediate attention required. Helpful ResourcesTo support you in transitioning smoothly to the new Dashboard and Report Builder, we’ve compiled the following resources: How to use the importer tool A video showing how to migrate dashboards Best practices for migrating Migration plan List of features available in the new dashboard builder We genuinely appreciate your contributions and look forward to resolving any concerns you have while enhancing your experience with our reporting tools.Thank you for being a vital part of the Zendesk community!Best Regards,Walter
Already have an account? Login
No account yet? Create an account
Enter your E-mail address. We'll send you an e-mail with instructions to reset your password.
Sorry, we're still checking this file's contents to make sure it's safe to download. Please try again in a few minutes.
Sorry, our virus scanner detected that this file isn't safe to download.
![[S_C]RN](https://uploads-us-west-2.insided.com/zendesk2-en/icon/1900207992304.gif){kind=icon}
