Discuss ideas, submit feedback, and track what's next
Help us understand your request
An intake-ready template
Please, please, please improve and expand the built-in HTML editor used in the course of generating articles. We need the full-range of editing and formatting functionality. Tools are supposed to reduce the amount of effort we exert to create articles, which should be a minor part of my job. I’ve been wrestling with an article for three hours. As an example, given the inexplicably circumscribed font sizes, the font is either microscopic or can be viewed from across the room. I don’t understand why you can’t select font type either. The formatting options are equally abysmal. Fourteen font colors to choose from, no ability to set line or paragraph spacing? It makes our articles uninteresting in design, hard to read and just generally odd layouts that are difficult to finesse. On a side note, no one on our team is going to use HTML code.
We have Master Data Management (MDM) in place, and many of our 'Organisation fields' are populated from this system, so Agents should not make any changes/edits to them. Could there be a way for these fields to be greyed out and uneditable so that Agents could copy/paste data from these fields, but not edit them?
The macro composer enhancements are wonderful. We are especially interested in the background color highlight. If yellow could be added, this would really help the experience. Many of our users are conditioned for a background of yellow for important highlighted text. Having this color available in the macro composer would allow for easier build out of our macros. Thanks for your consideration!
Based on https://support.zendesk.com/hc/en-us/community/posts/360046933933/comments/360011763093 Submitted on behalf of myself and @Maggie St. Clair Feature Request: Add the ability to mark all users of an organization as suspended Description/Example/Use Cases/Proof of End-Users Requesting: https://support.zendesk.com/hc/en-us/community/posts/360046933933/comments/360011763093 Use Case: When an organization is no longer a customer, my company has to go through every single user individually in that organization and mark them as suspended. This is time consuming and can lead to missed users.
Please give a quick overview of your product feature request or feedback and note who in your organization is affected by this issue [ex. agents, admins, customers, etc.] (2-3 sentences)Zendesk QA offers you to filter tickets for the review assignment task. For the assignments I made for the Team Leads, I want them to have 1 assignment review, which is a mix of email tickets and call tickets where recording is available. What problem do you see this solving? (1-2 sentences)Right now, if I use the filter conversation channel and choose Mail and voice, I also get call tickets without a recording. This would mean the Team Lead would need to replace the review with a new ticket and he won’t be sure if this ticket has a call recording. Which cost a lot of time. If I also select transcript, then I will only get call tickets with recordings, but no mail tickets. If the transcript filter would not block the email tickets, than I only would need 1 assignment and not 2When 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)It is affecting daily. The workaround would be that I need to make 2 assignments for my team lead, and he needs to look in both of them, which is not efficient. Are you currently using a workaround to solve this problem? (If yes, please explain) (1-2 sentences) No, I would like to avaid that but if this is not possible I will need to.What would be your ideal solution to this problem? How would it work or function? (1-2 sentences) Basically, if I choose in Conversation Channel voice and emails, and if the transcript is available, it would show the voice tickets but also email tickets and not only voice tickets.
OverviewWe'd like to see a dedicated inline "code" format option (rendering as <code>...</code>) added to the rich text editor's "T" (text style) dropdown in Guide article editing, alongside the existing bold, italic, underline, and quote options.This affects our Knowledge admins and any agent contributing to internal or external help center articles, particularly technical documentation where inline code, variable names, or field references need clear visual distinction from regular text.Problem to be solvedIt would let article authors easily add inline code snippets, JSONata expressions, placeholders, or field keys as visually distinct text without hand-editing the source HTML.How often and impactWe hit this every time we document a Zendesk feature that references API parameters, JSONata snippets, or trigger/condition field names in a Help Center article, which is a recurring, near-weekly occurrence for us. Since there's no inline code toggle, we either leave technical terms unstyled (hurting readability) or drop into the source code view to manually wrap spans in <code> tags, which is slower and easy to forget or apply inconsistently across articles.Current workaroundsYes, we open the HTML source editor and manually wrap the relevant text in <code> tags, then switch back to the WYSIWYG view to keep editing.Ideal solutionWe'd like an inline code icon or entry added next to Bold/Italic/Underline/Quote in the "T" dropdown (as shown in the attached screenshot), or even outside this submenu and right next to the code block button (and it would work in similar way to the existing button that wraps text in <pre>).
We would like more control over when intent is applied to tickets, beyond channel and whether the ticket was created by an agent. Please allow intent to be restricted based on additional conditions, such as: Brand (e.g. only apply intent for specific brands) Potentially other ticket attributes (ticket group, ticket form, etc.) ReasonSome tickets are created as receipt/confirmation tickets, where intent is not needed.When these tickets are created, a large number of triggers run, and the intent update can interfere with other updates happening at the same time. More granular control would prevent conflicts on these tickets and would be much appreciated.
Currently CSAT supports only 2 binary scale " Good " or " BAD" as default even though we set it on a 5 -point scale on Zendesk. so, we would like to request a feature to use a 5 point scale without using the survey monkey tool . There is no "neutral" option on CSAT rating. The satisfaction ratings are designed to be positive or negative. Rating “3 “ should be “Neutral”. We would like to request make option “ Neutral” when the rating is “3”.
Hi Team, We are requesting the ability to fully edit and customize the body of email notifications within the Zendesk QA product. This issue affects both our admins and operations teams who manage the QA process, as well as our agents who receive the feedback. Allowing us this control would ensure that only necessary and relevant information is shared, which would streamline our internal processes and significantly improve the clarity of our QA feedback. We recently experienced this limitation when we needed to remove a specific sentence about an average monthly score metric. This problem happens every time we need to adjust our notification content, forcing us to send unnecessary or outdated information that confuses our agents and necessitates manual follow-up communication. Our ideal solution is an editor within the Zendesk QA settings that provides full control over the email notification body. This would allow our operations teams to add, remove, or edit any part of the text, ensuring notifications are always targeted and up-to-date.
This is pretty minor, but as an admin I’ve noticed that a lot of agents seem to struggle to find the Close tab/Stay on ticket dropdown next to the status update button on tickets.I’ve had countless agents message me asking how to stop the ticket from closing when they update it, so something about that dropdown just doesn’t seem to be intuitive to a portion of people. You could chalk it up to user error of course, but it’s come up enough times now that I felt compelled to bring it up 😄Maybe something could be done to highlight it better, especially on an agent’s first ticket etc.?
Hello, After testing the new functionality for audio comments for messaging and email tickets in our environments, we've identified several concerns that may limit adoption and create customer experience challenges. 1. Audio messages expose the Zendesk domain to end usersWhen agents send audio recordings through messaging channels, customers receive a download link that contains the Zendesk subdomain.Impact: Many organizations intentionally abstract or hide their support platform from customers. Exposing the Zendesk domain:Reveals underlying infrastructure to end users. Creates branding inconsistencies. May raise security or trust concerns in organizations that prefer not to disclose third-party platforms. Can create confusion when customers receive links from an unfamiliar domain.Suggested ImprovementProvide admins with one or more of the following options:Deliver audio files natively within supported messaging channels wherever possible. Allow custom domains for audio delivery links. Provide a configurable CDN or download URL option. Allow attachments to be delivered without exposing the Zendesk tenant URL.2. OGG format creates a significant compatibility issue for iOS usersAudio recordings are delivered in .ogg format.While OGG is natively supported on Android devices, support on iOS remains limited and inconsistent across applications.Impact: This creates an uneven customer experience:Android users can generally access recordings without additional steps. iOS users may need third-party applications to open or play the file. Customers may abandon the interaction rather than installing additional software. Agents have no visibility into whether recipients can actually consume the content being sent.For customer-facing communication, support teams need confidence that recipients can easily access the content regardless of device type.Suggested ImprovementProvide support for more universally compatible formats such as:MP3 M4A AACAlternatively, allow administrators to choose the output format.3. File names cannot be customized, reducing customer trustThe generated audio files use randomized system-generated names.Impact: Customers are increasingly cautious about opening unknown files or links.A randomly generated filename may:Look suspicious. Be interpreted as spam or malware. Reduce open rates. Create confusion regarding the content's legitimacy.This concern becomes even more important in regulated industries where customer trust is critical.Suggested Improvement: Allow administrators to configure a naming convention, such as:Support_Message_{{ticket.id}}Voice_Message_{{brand.name}}Audio_Response_{{agent.name}}Or provide a simple static/customizable filename option.4. No visible reporting or ticket audit events for audio recordingsDuring testing, we were unable to identify clear reporting or audit visibility for audio comments within ticket events/history.Impact: This limits operational oversight and makes it difficult to answer questions such as:Was an audio response sent? How many audio responses are agents sending? Which tickets included audio interactions? Can supervisors audit customer communications? Can reporting teams track adoption and effectiveness?Without visibility in ticket events and analytics, organizations may struggle to govern or measure usage.Suggested Improvement: Expose audio interactions through:Ticket event history. Automatic tags applied on audio recording sent via public/internal comment. Ticket audits. Triggers and automations. Explore datasets and reporting metrics. API-accessible event types.This would allow teams to measure adoption, perform quality assurance reviews, and meet compliance requirements.Overall FeedbackWe like the direction of bringing native audio communication into Agent Workspace and believe it can be a valuable addition for both agents and customers.However, before broad adoption, we would like to see improvements in:Audio delivery that does not expose Zendesk domains. Better cross-platform compatibility, particularly for iOS users. Customizable and customer-friendly file naming. Full audit trail and reporting support.These areas directly impact customer trust, accessibility, compliance, and operational reporting, and could become barriers to adoption for many support organizations.We'd be interested in hearing whether Zendesk plans to address these limitations in future iterations of the feature. Thank you.
Restricted help content is great, but when a user is not signed in, there should be a warning or message to sign in and that some search results were omitted, because they were not logged in.
Hi, For us, when merging tickets, the vast majority of use cases do not require the requester to have the ability to see the comment/reply letting them know the ticket was merged. It would be a huge time saver (and also helpful to avoid human error) if we could have a setting to set this as disabled/unticked by default. Cheers.
Hi team,We would like to provide feedback on the suspension flow for players, specifically regarding comment requirements and UI visibility.We strongly support keeping the comment mandatory when suspending a player. Suspensions are high-impact actions that require accountability, auditability, and clear justification. Mandatory comments are essential for ensuring that decisions are documented consistently and responsibly.However, the current implementation creates a usability issue:the option to leave an additional comment is not clearly visible or discoverable in the UI Reduced audit and compliance value: In reviews, disputes, or regulatory audits, missing contextual details can weaken the justification for a suspension and increase operational risk.Inconsistent internal understanding: Other teams reviewing the case later (QA, Risk, Compliance, Support) may lack the full reasoning behind the action, leading to rework or misinterpretation.Training and onboarding challenges: New agents may not realize that an additional comment option exists at all, resulting in uneven documentation quality across teams. Suggested improvements: Keep the mandatory comment requirement in place for suspensions. Make the additional comment field clearly visible and intuitive during the suspension flow. Maintaining mandatory comments while improving visibility and clarity would significantly enhance data quality, accountability, and confidence when taking critical actions such as player suspensions.
OverviewKnowledge Copilot lists knowledge gaps, but these knowledge gaps do not refresh once action has been taken. This makes it cumbersome to continually review and manage knowledge gaps and increases the unlikelihood that we will adopt this feature long-term. What would your ideal solution look like?It would be ideal for knowledge recommendations to either update real-time when actions were taken OR for the team to dismiss recommendations when acted upon. This way, the recommendations data contains only relevant data that the team needs to review.When did this issue last affect you? How often does it happen, and what impact does it have on your work?This is a consistent issue that has affected us each time we use Knowledge Copilot. Coupled with the fact that we cannot filter by the most impactful recommendations, this increases our risk that this feature is not utilized to its full potential, and the highest knowledge gaps are missed.
1. What is your request? Who does it affect in your organisation? (2–3 sentences)We would like the ability to create a custom agent role that provides view-only access to Admin Center > AI > Admin Copilot > Recommendations (particularly Macro recommendations) and Admin Center > AI > AI Agents > Automation Potential Report. This would allow agents and operational subject matter experts to review AI-driven recommendations and automation insights without requiring full Zendesk administrator privileges. We are looking to make these insights available to up to 200 agents and 80-90 SMEs while maintaining appropriate access controls and avoiding the need to assign full admin roles.2. What problem would this solve? (1–2 sentences)Currently, these features are only accessible to Zendesk administrators. While administrators have the required permissions to implement changes, they often lack the operational context needed to evaluate recommendations, whereas agents and process experts who have that knowledge cannot access the insights independently.3. When did this issue last affect you? How often does it happen, and what impact does it have on your work? (3–4 sentences)This issue affects us on an ongoing basis whenever we review opportunities to improve macros, automation, and AI-driven support processes. It occurs regularly as part of continuous service improvement activities. Because only administrators can access the recommendations and reports, reviews must be conducted together with an admin, creating additional coordination effort and slowing down assessment and decision-making. This limits the ability of operational teams to proactively identify and prioritize improvement opportunities.4. Are you using any workarounds? If yes, explain briefly. (1–2 sentences)Currently, agents and process experts review the recommendations together with a Zendesk administrator during dedicated sessions. In some cases, screenshots or manually documented findings are shared, but this is inefficient and makes collaboration more difficult.5. What would your ideal solution look like? (1–2 sentences)Ideally, Zendesk would support a custom role that provides view-only access to AI recommendations and automation reports without granting full administrator rights. Alternatively, administrators should be able to export and share these recommendations and reports with non-admin users in a structured and secure format.Additional Business JustificationProviding controlled access to these insights would enable the people with the best understanding of business processes and customer interactions to evaluate improvement opportunities directly, while still maintaining appropriate governance by requiring administrators to approve and implement any changes.
The Zendesk Product Team is looking to speak with customers about how you manage service disruptions, recurring issues, incident response, and underlying problems. We’re especially interested in learning how teams identify and group related incidents, investigate root causes, track fixes or workarounds, and coordinate resolution. Your feedback will help inform future Problem and Incident Management capabilities in Zendesk Employee Service. What’s involved?• 60-minute remote interview• Between September 17th and October 2nd• $100 USD eReward (redeemable at retailers like Amazon) Interested?Sign up for a session via User Interviews.If none of the listed times work, please email me with your availability, and we’ll do our best to accommodate. Contact: Tara Rastogitara.rastogi@zendesk.com Additional InformationParticipation is subject to the Zendesk Privacy Notice, including the California Notice of Financial Incentive, where applicable. Any information shared during research remains subject to the confidentiality obligations in your agreement with Zendesk.By participating in this study and receiving compensation from Zendesk, you affirm that such compensation is authorized in accordance with your organization’s policies. Thank you—I look forward to connecting!
I need to send a message to the client informing them that due to their inactivity, the last message was replied to via email, but I don't have enough data to confirm that the continuous conversation was activated.I tried using the "message status" set to active, but that doesn't guarantee that continuous conversation was activated.
Hello,I would like to request the restoration of a critical feature of the Analytics dashboard. Previously, in the legacy system, filtered reports could be sent to different users or groups on a regular basis, without needing to be refreshed every year, and without providing information that is irrelevant or potentially sensitive. Currently, the “scheduled delivery” system for Analytics provides a full view of historical/ticket information without applying the user's data restrictions assigned to them when the dash is shared to them. I would like for this to be an overt feature with clearly defined rules that do not need to be recreated each year. Preferably assigning a data restriction to each delivery definition.
I don’t understand why Zendesk doesn’t have an option to edit messages sent during a live chat. Your CS team mentioned that it’s for QA purposes, and as someone who has managed QA teams for years, I completely understand the reasoning behind that.However, what we’re asking for is simply the ability to edit a message before the customer has read it, which a lot of other ticketing platforms already allow. You could put a short time limit on edits or only allow editing while the message is still unread.People make spelling and grammar mistakes, especially during fast-paced live chats. Being able to quickly correct an unread message would improve the customer experience without compromising QA, since you could still keep the original message and edit history available for auditing. There are many ways to do this.
I would like to request a feature request, when doing public reply, to have 5-10 minutes delay on the email to be sent to the end customer.In case we want to redact a message so that we have time to do this before the email is sent.
We are in a situation where there are good reasons not to use a full HTML email template.This week, we received reports about suspicious activity concerning agent accounts. Agents received an email containing only the message: "Update your password now to keep your account secure. Go to Security Settings," without any additional context. As a result, employees did not trust this email and reported it as suspicious.The option to customize internal service emails would be very valuable. By doing so, we hope to increase employees' confidence in these types of service emails.The feature request, formulated as a user story, could then be something like this:In Admin → Channels → Email → Email Templates, it should be possible to add a separate email template for internal service emails.
1. Describe the problem or needTicket notification sounds in Agent Workspace can only be fully configured from the Chat agent dashboard, at Settings > Personal > Sounds & notifications (`/chat/agent#personal/sounds_&_notifications`). That page controls sound selection, volume and repeat count for conversation requests, auto-accepted conversations and incoming messages.Within Agent Workspace itself, an agent can only mute notifications temporarily. There is no way to change the sound, adjust the volume, or set repeat behaviour without leaving the workspace and navigating into the Chat dashboard.2. Why the current behaviour is a problemWe don't use Zendesk Chat. Our live channel is Messaging, and our agents have never had a reason to open the Chat dashboard. Sending them there to adjust a notification volume is confusing — it's an unfamiliar interface for a product we don't operate, and there's no discoverable path to it from Agent Workspace.It's also awkward from a change-management perspective. Zendesk has announced that Chat is being removed on 31 January 2028, with dashboard access ending 28 July 2028. Directing agents into a sunsetting product to configure a current Agent Workspace feature is a strange position for both us and Zendesk to be in, and it raises an obvious question about what happens to these settings once the Chat dashboard is gone.Practically, the result is that most agents simply don't adjust their sound settings at all. They either tolerate the default or mute notifications entirely, which defeats the purpose of the feature.3. Ideal solutionSurface sound and notification preferences natively in Agent Workspace, alongside the other personal settings agents already manage there. Specifically:Sound selection, volume and repeat count for ticket and conversation notifications Notification toggles for conversation requests, auto-accepted conversations, new messages and status changes Available to agents on Messaging-only accounts, with no dependency on the Chat dashboardA sensible outcome would be to migrate these settings into the Agent Workspace profile ahead of the Chat removal date, rather than as part of it.4. Business impactWe run Zendesk across four brands with a Messaging-only configuration. Notification sounds are a real productivity lever for our agents — response times depend on them noticing new work — but the settings are effectively inaccessible in day-to-day use. Right now our only option is to document the Chat dashboard URL and walk agents through a product they otherwise never touch.
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)Allow lookup fields to be 1 to many and/or allow users to belong to custom object records What problem do you see this solving? (1-2 sentences) This will allow us to hopefully set up an association between user and custom object records 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)not yet, but this would allow additional customization in workflows Are you currently using a workaround to solve this problem? (If yes, please explain) (1-2 sentences)not yet What would be your ideal solution to this problem? How would it work or function? (1-2 sentences)Have a way to associate multiple users to a custom object. I truly don't know if this is possible or how it would be, but I would love if the idea were out there.
It appears that the contributor and light agent roles permit view access to custom objects and are not configurable to be otherwise. On the other hand, these permissions are configurable for other licenses. I understand that there are serious limitations to access governance with regard to custom objects (ie macro bypass of permissions on other roles), and I assume that is inherent to the architecture. However, since other roles can have their access configured, it seems like this restriction on modifications is arbitrary. Custom objects could include sensitive data relevant to work done by private groups and should not be accessible to our light agents, contributors, or other members not in the private group. In the same way as ticket access can be customized. To enforce effective user access governance, the custom object permissions should be configurable for light agent and contributor roles in the same way as ticket access can be customized. 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) Custom objects are visible to users that should not have access. While full licenses for agents can have their custom permissions restricted, due to the fixed config of light agents and contributors, admins cannot customize their access to these data assets. What problem do you see this solving? (1-2 sentences) The lack of customization options for light agent and contributor roles impacts data governance and may expose sensitive data. This limits the usability of the custom objects feature altogether. 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 is an on-going issue. This impacts the ability for admins to control who access to what data. Are you currently using a workaround to solve this problem? (If yes, please explain) (1-2 sentences) The only workaround presently available is to not use custom objects to store sensitive data. What would be your ideal solution to this problem? How would it work or function? (1-2 sentences) Unlock the light agent and contributor role customization options to allow admins to restrict/customize access to custom object data. At minimum, for the sake of safest data governance, the default should prevent view access.
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.
