views should include the condition "subject"


  • Jake

    Yeah, how is this not included? This seems like a no-brainer. Is there any kind of workaround?

  • Liz Rosen


  • Terry Knox

    Huge +1 from us! We have a number of views that search for certain key terms ("Complaint" for example) and it's not uncommon for a customer to put that term in the subject line, but not in the body of the original comment. 

  • Travis Ferguson

    This has been a request since 2009...

  • Jonathan March
    Community Moderator

    Definitely; shocking to have the need (in a big way actually) recently and discover that it is not possible (yes, I read the trigger workaround etc, and perhaps one could also do an automation if it's too late for a trigger, but that doesn't have the needed flexibility and experimentability.) Thanks.

  • Hannah Beard

    Adding my vote - this is a feature that seems arbitrary to exclude.

  • Jonathan March
    Community Moderator

    Pinging this. Just needed it, assumed that it was long-since available, and was flabbergasted to see that it's not yet.

  • Lenka Vostradovska

    Hello, can you please tell me, how far is the solution? As I can see there are many demands to have this filter by "subject" - since 2009! For us is it also very important - our customer mention the importancy in the subject line - now we didn´t have the possibility to solve these tickets. Please, let me know. Thank you

  • Nico Chart

    +1 from my team too

  • Seneca Spurling


    Thanks so much for your response. I really appreciate it. I feel heard :)

    I do understand and appreciate the complexity of managing a complex software product's releases and product features.

    What would really make a difference, I think, is if the company provided its customers with *some* sort of visibility into the decisions that are made. For example, if a feature request has been considered, what are the major categories of "not currently planned" reasons, that you could potentially share without it being a problem? "work required to customer benefit ratio too high", "planned for a future release bundle", "not enough customer demand", "only affects a small number of customers", "workaround is of low impact", "depends on other changes not currently planned", "will be addressed by a future release", etc. What I want to know is why THIS request hasn't been acted on in nearly 10 years. Is it because not enough customers want it? Is it because it actually would be really hard (for reasons I can not fathom but may exist) and so it depends on other future work that will take a long time to see the light of day? Is it because changes to views functionality are planned for a later bundled release and this one will wait for that? Is it that you'll never do it because the workaround seems reasonable to most of your customers?  Is it simply that only small customers or not enough customers need this? 

    I guess I'm trying to figure out if Zendesk product features tend to be driven mainly by the needs of the workflows of larger customers, or if less common workflows like ours can ever get their needs addressed. When requests like this go unmet for 10 years with no explanation as to why, it's easy to assume the worst. If you don't want people assuming the worst, a little transparency goes a long way.

    Which brings me back around again to thanking you for your response, which, while not actually answering my question, did really make me feel heard and gave me some hope for hearing more about the future of this request some day. It also made me realize that our team often uses views very differently from how Zendesk intends views to be used. Which makes me realize that Zendesk might provide other functionality that would better meet our needs. (or, maybe it doesn't and isn't a great fit for how our team operates). I'll look into this further and will reach out to support for further guidance as this isn't the right forum to get into those weeds. 

  • Ian Gifford

    This. We recently sent out an email that elicited quite a bit of noise back into our helpdesk by way of direct replies. This was intentional, but we were having troubles sorting them all out inside of a view.

    There is currently an option to conditionally pull tickets into a view based on full or partial search terms within the ticket description. I agree it would be insanely helpful to have this same logic to filter view results but subject line. 

  • Dan Ross
    Community Moderator

    Yes please!

  • Walden Leverich

    We're absolutely a +1 on this request too. Just went live with ZenDesk on a migration from JIRA and hadn't even considered that we'd be unable to filter on the Subject of a ticket. :-(

  • Alan Wellstead

    I don't understand why this is not already a feature. We MUST have a way to sort/filter ticket history by different Subjects in a view.

  • Kate Styer

    This comes up regularly for us and the need to create triggers that create tags is a hack.

  • Bryan Matias

    +1, also run into this limitation frequently where filtering by subject is the best way to create certain views.

  • Chris Orlando


  • Grzegorz Ksiazek

    It's really poor from Zendesk functionality perspective that we can't use ticket subject for Views and at the same time subject is not included in description. This is absolute basic type of filtering and 7 years of waiting.

    C'mon 7 year for such a basic thing!!!

  • Kevin Ginger

    So dumb this doesn't exist. Work around is a trigger to tag the ticket if “subject contains” and then make the view condition with that tag. 

  • Milo Convery



    The above thread is now closed for comments. 

    Is this soon going to be option to filter views by subject? I had always assumed you can until I have just tried to do it. This makes no sense to me, a subject is normally something repetitive (or contains a reptitive keyword, i.e. Review) but the description really varies per user? 

    Is this going to be added as a function soon? 

    Thanks, Milo 

  • Chris Hobbs

    Yes, I completely agree with everyone's comments here. This should be Out of the Box, and it is still 7  years for this Feature Request to be implemented.  What has to be done to get this a prioritized and fixed?

  • Casper Wagenaar

    +1 on this subject,

    The fact that we can't use ticket subject for Views and at the same time subject is not included in description is hampering our productivity as well.

    What are the arguments for Zendesk to not pursue this feature? After more than a decade of requests?

  • Seneca Spurling

    I just discovered this issue and am aghast that it's been requested for this long, by so many people, and still hasn't been provided. Could Zendesk at least explain why this is "hard" or "undesirable" in some way, so that it at least makes some sense to us that it hasn't been implemented? 

    The workaround to use tags is not ideal for us. I don't want agents creating tags. I just want agents to be able to create personal views and filter on text in the subject. 

    For example, when we send out notifications of a new build release, we email each user that has a tag indicating they wish to receive that notification. This is done by opening a ticket for the user. That way if they reply, we always have the full history of what they received/what they are replying to, even if they edit it out of or mangle their reply. These tickets all have a specific Subject line, but their Description content varies based on a number of things and contains terms and phrases that would be found in other tickets as well, and the sender varies as well. The Subject is the easiest and best thing to filter on. 

  • Sriram Prakash

    Definite +1 from me.  I am having to tag the subject line and then create a view based on the text in the tag.  It would be much better and cleaner to have Ticket::Subject like the other items.

  • CJ Romberger

    Adding my voice to this request.  It would be helpful if ZenDesk would at least explain why this is a feature they can't make available. 

    It's the only system field that's text, other than the description, which is a multi-line field.  All the other system fields are available for addition as criteria to a view.  Why NOT this one? 

    Rigging it with a trigger to add a tag just makes a hot mess of my tag library.

  • Heather Rommel
    Community Moderator

    Was just thinking --- could there be a function that we can use similar to typing #requester (email address) when forwarding an email in to the system? 

    Perhaps #appendtoticket 99999

    And if it is from an agent or a customer or a CC on that particular ticket, you add it to the ticket. If not, you boot it into a new ticket as normal.

    Is that do-able?

  • Charles Bullough

    Is this a screenshot of exactly what we are looking for:

    Or is this a different part of the product?

  • Nicole Saunders
    Zendesk Community Team

    HI Seneca, 

    Thanks for your post. This forum is just one of several input points for roadmap planning, so sometimes there are things that a lot of users have requested or that was originally requested a long time ago, but it still doesn't make it to the top of the priority list. We also look at other inputs from customers, market predictors, and other features being developed that might solve for a particular solution. 

    I don't have specifics about this request, other than to say that there's been a larger consideration around how tickets are "discovered" (i.e. searched and viewed) in the agent interface. As the product teams are looking at the larger functionality, they aren't adding individual features, conditions, filters, etc. Typically features are not developed on an individual basis, but rather several will be grouped at once. 

    I will raise this thread with the product manager again to ensure that it is being considered as they plan for the future of views. 


Please sign in to leave a comment.

Powered by Zendesk