Commitments and Contingencies	6 Months Ended
Commitments and Contingencies	Jun. 30, 2022
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]
Commitments and Contingencies	Commitments and Contingencies Commitments Except as discussed below, there were no material changes in our commitments under contractual obligations as disclosed in our audited consolidated financial statements for the year ended December 31, 2021. In February 2022, we terminated and entered into a new agreement with a cloud services provider for which we have a total obligation of $400 million over a five-year period. Litigation and Loss Contingencies We accrue estimates for resolution of legal and other contingencies when losses are probable and estimable. These estimates are reviewed at least quarterly and adjusted to reflect the impacts of negotiations, estimated settlements, legal rulings, advice of legal counsel, and other information and events pertaining to a particular matter. On October 24, 2019 and November 7, 2019, purported stockholders of the Company filed two putative class action complaints in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California, entitled Charles Reidinger v. Zendesk, Inc., et al., 3:19-cv-06968-CRB and Ho v. Zendesk, Inc., et al., No. 3:19-cv-07361-WHA, respectively, against the Company and certain of the Company’s executive officers. The complaints are nearly identical and allege violations of Section 10(b) and Section 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”), purportedly on behalf of all persons who purchased Zendesk, Inc. common stock between February 6, 2019 and October 1, 2019, inclusive. The claims are based upon allegations that the defendants misrepresented and/or omitted material information in certain of our prior public filings. To this point, no discovery has occurred in these cases. The court appointed a lead plaintiff and consolidated the various lawsuits into a single action (Case No. 3:19-cv-06968-CRB), and the lead plaintiff filed its amended complaint on April 14, 2020 asserting the same alleged violations of securities laws as the initial complaints. On June 29, 2020, Zendesk and the executive officer defendants moved to dismiss the amended complaint. On November 9, 2020, the court granted Zendesk's motion to dismiss and granted plaintiff leave to amend its complaint. On January 8, 2021, plaintiff filed its second amended complaint and on January 22, 2021, Zendesk and the executive officer defendants moved to dismiss the second amended complaint. On March 2, 2021, the court granted Zendesk's motion to dismiss the second amended complaint. On March 23, 2021, judgment was entered in favor of Zendesk and the executive officer defendants. On April 20, 2021, plaintiff filed a notice of appeal with the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit (the "Ninth Circuit"). On July 29, 2021, plaintiff filed its opening brief in the appeal, and on October 13, 2021, the Company and the executive officer defendants filed their answering brief. On March 2, 2022, the Ninth Circuit affirmed dismissal. In May 2022, the deadline to file a writ of certiorari to the United States Supreme Court lapsed. On June 2, 2020, a purported stockholder of the Company filed a derivative complaint in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California, entitled Anderson v. Svane, et al., 3:20-cv-03671, against certain of the Company’s executive officers and directors. The derivative complaint alleged breaches of fiduciary duty against all defendants, and an insider trading claim and violations of Section 10(b) of the Exchange Act against the officer defendants, purportedly on behalf of the Company itself. The claims were based on nearly identical allegations as the two putative class action complaints described above, namely that the defendants misrepresented and/or omitted material information in certain of our prior public filings. On July 27, 2020, the court ordered the derivative action related to the class action, and the derivative action was stayed pending resolution of the class action. On May 6, 2021, the court approved a joint stipulation to extend the stay pending the outcome of the appeal of the class action. On April 18, 2022, following the Ninth Circuit's affirmation of the dismissal of the class action, plaintiff filed a stipulation to dismiss the derivative action, which was granted by the court on May 20, 2022. On May 27, 2022, Zendesk was named as a defendant in an employment-related putative class action captioned Roe, et al. v. Zendesk, No. 22-599855 (S.F. Super. Ct.). The complaint, filed by one current employee and three former employees, alleges violations of the California Equal Pay Act and Unfair Competition Law. Plaintiffs seek to represent a class consisting of all women who worked for Zendesk in California at any time during the four years preceding the filing of the complaint. Zendesk has a deadline of August 1, 2022, to respond. No damages were specified, and no settlement demands or offers have been made. From time to time, we may be subject to other legal proceedings, claims, investigations, and government inquiries in the ordinary course of business. We have received, and may in the future continue to receive, claims from third parties asserting, among other things, infringement of their intellectual property rights, defamation, labor and employment rights, privacy, and contractual rights. In general, the resolution of a legal matter could prevent the Company from offering its service to others, could be material to the Company’s financial condition or cash flows, or both, or could otherwise adversely affect the Company’s operating results. The outcomes of legal proceedings and other contingencies are inherently unpredictable and subject to significant uncertainties. As a result, the Company is not able to reasonably estimate the amount or range of possible losses in excess of any amounts accrued, including losses that could arise as a result of application of non-monetary remedies, with respect to the contingencies it faces. In management’s opinion, resolution of all current matters is not expected to have a material adverse impact on business, consolidated balance sheets, results of operations, comprehensive loss, or cash flows. Indemnifications In the ordinary course of business, we enter into contractual arrangements under which we agree to provide indemnification of varying scope and terms to customers, business partners, and other parties with respect to certain matters, including, but not limited to, losses arising out of the breach of such agreements, intellectual property infringement claims made by third parties, and other liabilities relating to or arising from our products or our acts or omissions. In these circumstances, payment may be conditional on the other party making a claim pursuant to the procedures specified in the particular contract. Further, our obligations under these agreements may be limited in terms of time and/or amount, and in some instances, we may have recourse against third parties for certain payments. In addition, we have indemnification agreements with our directors and executive officers that require us, among other things, to indemnify them against certain liabilities that may arise by reason of their status or service as directors or officers. The terms of such obligations may vary. To date, we have not incurred any material costs, and we have not accrued any liabilities in our consolidated financial statements, as a result of these obligations. Certain of our product offerings include service-level agreements warranting defined levels of uptime reliability and performance, which permit those customers to receive credits for future services in the event that we fail to meet those levels. To date, we have not accrued for any significant liabilities in our consolidated financial statements as a result of these service-level agreements.