Zendesk AI checklist
Zendesk AI Macro Audit Checklist
A checklist for auditing Zendesk Guide, shared macros, ticket patterns, and internal policies before using AI suggestions or customer-facing automation.
Template target
Zendesk AI
- Macro cleanup before enabling AI suggestions
- Guide and macro conflict review before Zendesk AI rollout
- Support QA review of high-volume contact reasons
How to use it
Turn a template run into a launch decision.
Export or list high-use shared macros
Prioritize macros applied to recent tickets, especially billing, access, returns, security, cancellation, and escalation topics.
Pair each macro with a Guide or policy source
A macro should not be the only source for a customer-facing AI answer unless the team intentionally treats it as canonical.
Assign an AI launch decision
Mark each topic approved, restricted, blocked, or source-fix-needed before exposing it to AI suggestions or automation.
Template preview
Sample rows and readiness decisions.
| Intent | Test question | Source evidence | Risk | Decision |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Refund window | Customer asks whether a refund is possible after 31 days. | Guide article, refund macro, finance policy | Guide and macro may disagree | Source fix before AI launch |
| Account access | Customer asks support to change an admin email address. | Security macro plus identity verification SOP | Account takeover exposure | Human-only unless verification is enforced |
| Shipping exception | Customer asks for free reshipment after carrier delay. | Carrier delay macro and shipping policy | Exception handling | Restrict with eligibility check |
| Plan downgrade | Customer wants to downgrade and keep historical data. | Billing macro and plan lifecycle article | Data retention nuance | Approve if retention language matches |
Readiness checklist
What to review before the AI answer goes live.
Macro evidence
- Confirm whether the macro is shared, current, and available to the team that handles the ticket type.
- Check whether similar tickets in the last nine months used the macro consistently.
- Record the macro owner and the last policy review date.
Guide and policy conflict checks
- Compare refund windows, eligibility rules, and escalation text across Guide and macro copy.
- Check whether internal policies include exceptions that public articles omit.
- Flag any topic where tickets show agents handling cases differently from the macro.
AI launch controls
- Approve only topics where the macro and source evidence say the same thing.
- Restrict topics that need plan, region, identity, or order-status checks.
- Block topics with unresolved conflicts or legal, security, or payment exposure.
Decision rubric
Do not let a good-sounding answer become scope.
Zendesk macro quality is not just an agent-productivity issue. Macros, Guide articles, ticket tags, and internal policies shape what the team believes is the canonical answer.
Use this checklist to find where macros and Guide disagree, where historical ticket patterns imply a different exception, and where an AI workflow needs a human handoff.
Canonical
Guide, macro, and internal policy agree. The topic is a candidate for AI suggestions or approved automation.
Macro drift
The macro contains details that are missing, older, or different from the Guide or internal policy.
Ticket drift
Recent tickets show agents resolving the issue differently from the documented macro.
Human-only
The request requires identity checks, payment judgement, legal review, or high-touch exception handling.
FAQ
Questions before using this template.
Why audit Zendesk macros before AI rollout?
Macros often contain the support team's practical policy. If they disagree with Guide articles or internal docs, AI suggestions can reinforce the wrong answer at scale.
Which macros should we audit first?
Start with high-use shared macros tied to billing, refunds, account access, cancellations, security, shipping exceptions, and escalation.
Can a macro be the canonical source?
Yes, if the team intentionally owns and reviews it as canonical. In most teams, the safer pattern is to pair the macro with a Guide or internal policy source.
Launch boundary
Turn template findings into approved scope.
Meihaku maps each tested intent to source evidence, conflicts, gaps, and the answer your team approves before automation.