Enchant to Puzzel Case Management migration requires API-to-API extraction with careful mapping of Inboxes→Teams, Labels→Categories/Tags, and Customers→Organisations. Plan for Enchant's 100 credits/min rate limit and Puzzel's in-app-only API docs.
There is no native migration path between Enchant and Puzzel Case Management; all data movement requires custom API-led development. Enchant uses a flat data model (inboxes, tickets, messages, labels) while Puzzel employs a hierarchical structure with Teams, Organisations, Categories, Forms, and Tags as first-class entities, requiring significant data remodeling during transfer. Custom work is needed for API extraction with rate-limit handling, schema transformation to map Enchant's flat labels and inboxes to Puzzel's team-centric hierarchy, attachment re-upload, and contact deduplication — with Puzzel's API requiring tenant-level activation and lacking a public bulk import endpoint.
Read this first
Pair-specific gotchas that catch teams out. Each one has cost somebody a weekend.
Do not skip the data audit
Discovering you have 500,000 closed tickets instead of the expected 50,000 will fundamentally alter your rate limit strategy and timeline.
Enchant's snoozed and archived ticket states have no direct Puzzel equivalent
Import these as Resolved tickets and add an internal note with the original state and snooze date for audit purposes. Critically, ensure you map these to a terminal Puzzel status — if you accidentally import them as "Open" or "In Progress," they will trigger SLA breach alerts and pollute agent queues.
Request Puzzel API access and documentation early — ideally 2–4 weeks before you plan to
Request Puzzel API access and documentation early — ideally 2–4 weeks before you plan to start development. The in-app-only documentation makes pre-integration planning harder than with most platforms. Navigate to Help → API Documentation within the Case Management interface. Export or screenshot the Swagger schemas for offline reference during development.
The code samples below are illustrative pseudocode showing the extraction,
The code samples below are illustrative pseudocode showing the extraction, transformation, and loading patterns. They are not production-ready — you will need to add proper error handling, logging, connection pooling, and configuration management. The Puzzel API endpoint URLs are representative; verify exact paths from Puzzel's in-app Swagger documentation.
The single most useful artifact in validation is a source-to-target ID mapping table
The single most useful artifact in validation is a source-to-target ID mapping table stored in a database (SQLite minimum, Postgres recommended) with columns for: Enchant ID, Puzzel ID, object type, migration status (success/fail/skipped), error message, and timestamp. This table is your single source of truth for reconciliation, rollback, and audit.
The runbook
Work top to bottom. Tick steps as you go — your progress is saved in this browser.
01 Discovery Establish why you are moving, what "done" means, and who signs off.
Objective A written scope with agreed success criteria, a named owner per workstream, and a budget approved by finance.
Keep these open
-
Pull the real numbers out of Enchant
Export counts for tickets (open and closed separately), contacts, organisations, attachments, macros, triggers, automations, views and SLA policies. Note the oldest ticket date — history depth drives the whole timeline. Estimating from memory is the single most common cause of a blown migration window.
Data Profiler Get real record counts instead of estimating from memory -
Decide what history actually moves
Agree a cut-off with the support lead: all history, last 24 months, or open tickets plus a read-only archive. Every extra year of closed tickets adds API time and cost without adding much agent value. Get this in writing — it is the decision people relitigate mid-cutover.
A "move everything" default is what turns a two-week migration into a two-month one.
COI & ROI Calculator Build the 36-month business case you will need for sign-off -
Confirm Puzzel Case Management can hold your support model
Walk your current workflow through Puzzel Case Management: multi-brand, business hours, SLA targets, CSAT, side conversations, public vs internal notes, and any channel you depend on (voice, chat, WhatsApp, social). List anything with no native equivalent — those are project risks, not configuration details.
-
Build the business case
Model licence delta, migration effort, agent retraining, and the cost of staying put (Cost of Inaction). Executives approve a number, not a plan, and you will be asked for it again at the go/no-go.
Helpdesk Migration Planner Turn ticket volume into a dated Enchant → Puzzel Case Management timeline -
Name owners and set the go/no-go date
One named owner each for data, configuration, integrations, and agent enablement, plus a decision-maker who can call a rollback. Put the go/no-go meeting in calendars now, 48 hours before the freeze.
-
Contact centre integration
Unifying voice, SMS, email, and social cases into a single CCaaS routing engine.
-
Record count comparison
Total tickets in Enchant (by state) vs total tickets in Puzzel (by status). They must match exactly. Any discrepancy must be traced to a specific skipped, failed, or duplicated record.
Enchant → Puzzel Case Management specifics
- Structured case classification
- Puzzel's category, form, and team system is significantly more powerful than Enchant's flat label and inbox model.
- Enterprise compliance and reporting
- Puzzel offers granular, multi-tier SLA tracking, custom report builders, and organisation-level data segmentation that Enchant does not support.
- Customer count comparison
- Total unique customers in Enchant vs total contacts/organisations in Puzzel. Account for de-duplication reducing the count.
Don't move on until
- Record counts confirmed for tickets, contacts, organisations and macros
- Success criteria signed off by the support lead
- Freeze window provisionally booked with the business
02 Data Audit Find out what is actually in the data before you try to move it.
Objective A profiled, cleaned export with every quality defect either fixed at source or explicitly accepted.
Keep these open
-
Take a full Enchant export and profile it
Export to CSV or JSON and profile every file: row counts, null rates per column, distinct values, and type consistency. Compare row counts against the API totals from Discovery — a gap here means your export is silently truncated, usually by pagination.
Data Profiler Profile the Enchant export for nulls, outliers and type drift -
Validate file structure before anyone writes a transform
Check delimiters, quoting, encoding (expect UTF-8, watch for BOMs and Latin-1), duplicate headers, and embedded newlines in ticket bodies. Ticket descriptions with raw newlines and commas break naive CSV parsers and silently shift columns.
A single unescaped quote in one ticket body can shift every subsequent column without any error.
CSV Validator Catch broken headers and ragged rows in the raw export -
Inventory PII and set retention
Scan for emails, phone numbers, payment card fragments, national IDs and anything else regulated in ticket bodies and custom fields — support tickets are where customers paste things they should not. Decide what gets migrated, masked, or dropped, and record the legal basis.
Ticket bodies and attachments routinely contain card and ID data that never appears in a structured field.
PII & Compliance Scanner Find regulated fields before they land in a new system -
Quantify duplicates, orphans and dead references
Count duplicate contacts (same email, different casing), tickets whose requester no longer exists, organisations with no members, and attachments whose parent ticket is gone. Fix these in Enchant where you can — migrating them just moves the mess.
Data Cleaner Strip empty rows, stray whitespace and dead columns -
Clean and normalise the export
Trim whitespace, drop empty rows and columns, normalise casing on emails and tags, and standardise every timestamp to UTC ISO 8601. Timezone drift is invisible at load time and shows up weeks later as SLA reports nobody can reconcile.
-
Produce a masked copy for sandbox work
Generate a realistic but fake version of the export for testing and for any vendor who needs sample data. Loading real customer PII into a sandbox is a breach in most jurisdictions, and sandboxes are rarely covered by your DPA.
PII Masker Generate a safe copy for sandbox and vendor testing
Enchant → Puzzel Case Management specifics
- Customers
- total count, check for duplicates by email
- Attachments
- estimate total volume (each must be downloaded and re-uploaded)
- Rate limit
- 100 credits per minute, 6 requests per second burst limit
- Pagination
- Max 100 records per page. For >10,000 tickets you must use since_created_at instead of page offsets — standard page-based pagination breaks at that threshold
- Embedding
- Use embed=messages,customer,labels to reduce round trips, but each embed type costs an additional rate limit credit
Don't move on until
- Export parses cleanly with no ragged rows or encoding errors
- PII inventory complete and retention decisions recorded
- Duplicate and orphan records quantified and triaged
03 Field Mapping Turn two schemas into one signed-off mapping spec.
Objective A reviewed field-level mapping covering every object, with an explicit decision for every field that has no target.
Keep these open
-
Generate the first-pass Enchant → Puzzel Case Management field map
Start from an automated match on both schemas, then review every row by hand. Automated matching gets the obvious 70% right and is confidently wrong on the rest — especially anything named "type", "status" or "custom_field_1".
Schema Mapper Opens pre-loaded with the Enchant → Puzzel Case Management field pair -
Map status, priority and channel values, not just field names
Enumerate every value in each picklist on both sides and map them explicitly. Value-level mismatches are the defect class that survives all the way to production because the field itself mapped fine — a ticket that should be "Pending" arriving as "Open" reopens SLA clocks.
Statuses with no target equivalent (on-hold, pending-customer) need a policy decision, not a best guess.
-
Decide how custom fields land
Create the target custom fields first, matching type exactly (a dropdown mapped to free text can never be mapped back). Where Puzzel Case Management has no equivalent, decide between a new custom field, a tag, or a note appended to the ticket body — and record which.
-
Resolve identity and threading
Decide how source IDs are preserved — most platforms will not let you set the primary key, so keep the original ID in a custom field. Without it, reconciliation becomes fuzzy matching and every future support question about an old ticket is unanswerable.
Losing the original ticket ID makes reconciliation and rollback effectively impossible.
-
Plan attachments, inline images and threading order
Confirm size limits, allowed MIME types, and whether inline images survive as attachments or need rehosting. Decide the comment ordering and author attribution rules: comments loaded out of order, or all attributed to the API user, destroy the conversation history agents rely on.
-
Freeze and sign off the mapping spec
Version the spec, walk the support lead through it row by row, and get explicit sign-off. Any change after this point goes through change control — mid-flight mapping edits are how partial loads happen.
Enchant → Puzzel Case Management specifics
- Operational labels
- (e.g., "urgent", "escalated", "VIP") → Puzzel Tags (free-form, searchable, no hierarchy needed)
- Classification labels
- (e.g., "Billing - Refund", "Shipping - Delayed") → Puzzel Categories with parent-child structure (Category: "Billing", Sub-choice: "Refund")
- Workflow labels
- (e.g., "needs-review", "waiting-on-vendor") → Puzzel Status or Event Rules (automate rather than tag)
- Deprecated or unused labels
- → Do not migrate. Clean up the taxonomy before migration.
Don't move on until
- Every source field is mapped, deliberately dropped, or parked in a custom field
- Status, priority and channel value maps agreed with the support lead
- Mapping spec version-controlled and signed off
04 Test Migration Prove the pipeline on a small, representative slice.
Objective A pilot load into a Puzzel Case Management sandbox that reconciles cleanly and has been reviewed by real agents.
Keep these open
-
Stand up a Puzzel Case Management sandbox that matches production config
Create the custom fields, groups, brands, business hours and SLA policies first. A pilot into a default sandbox tests nothing, because the failures you care about are all configuration mismatches.
-
Pick a deliberately nasty pilot sample
Take 500-1000 records chosen for difficulty, not convenience: the longest ticket threads, tickets with the most attachments, non-Latin character sets, merged and split tickets, deleted requesters, and every status value. A clean random sample proves only that easy records are easy.
-
Run the load with masked data and instrument everything
Log every API request and response with its source record ID. When 40 records fail out of 10,000 you need to know exactly which ones and why, without re-running the whole batch.
PII Masker Never load real customer PII into a sandbox -
Measure real throughput against the rate limit
Record achieved records-per-hour under Puzzel Case Management's actual rate limits, including retries and backoff. Extrapolate to the full volume: if the maths says the full load exceeds your freeze window, you fix that now, not on cutover night.
Published rate limits are ceilings, not throughput. Assume real-world rates are meaningfully lower once retries and backoff are counted.
-
Reconcile the pilot and triage every failure
Diff source against target on record counts and field-level values. Every discrepancy gets a root cause and a fix — "probably fine" at pilot scale becomes thousands of broken records at full scale.
Migration Validation Tool Diff the pilot batch against source before scaling up -
Put real agents in front of the pilot data
Have two or three agents work sample tickets end to end in the sandbox. They find the things reconciliation cannot see: unreadable threading, missing context, macros that no longer make sense. Fix the mapping, then re-run.
Enchant → Puzzel Case Management specifics
- Message count per ticket
- Sample 50–100 tickets across different sizes (1 message, 5 messages, 20+ messages) and verify message counts match.
- Attachment spot check
- Sample 20 tickets with attachments. Verify files open correctly in Puzzel and are associated with the correct message.
- Relationship integrity
- Verify that tickets are linked to the correct customer and team in Puzzel.
- Private note visibility
- Verify that internal notes are not visible to customers via Customer Hub or public-facing channels.
- SLA state check
- Confirm that migrated closed/resolved tickets are not triggering SLA breach alerts.
Don't move on until
- Pilot batch reconciles to 100% on record counts
- Agents have reviewed sample tickets and confirmed they are workable
- Measured throughput extrapolates to a viable full-load window
05 Cutover Execute the switch inside a controlled, reversible window.
Objective All in-scope data live in Puzzel Case Management, agents working in the new system, and a rollback path that stayed available throughout.
Keep these open
-
Pre-load history before the freeze
Load closed tickets and contacts days or weeks ahead while Enchant stays live. Only open tickets and the final delta need to move inside the freeze — this is the single biggest lever on window length.
Helpdesk Migration Planner Size the freeze window from Puzzel Case Management's real API limits -
Publish the runbook with times, owners and abort criteria
A timed sequence: freeze start, final export, delta load, channel switch, smoke test, go/no-go, agent switch. Name who does each step and the explicit condition that triggers a rollback. Decide the abort criteria before the night, when nobody wants to be the one to call it.
-
Freeze Enchant and take the final delta
Stop new ticket creation, let agents finish in-flight replies, then export everything changed since the pre-load. Announce the freeze to the whole business, not just support — someone always tries to raise a ticket during it.
Tickets created during an unenforced freeze land in the old system and are the most common source of permanently lost data.
-
Load the delta and open tickets
Run the delta load, then reconcile counts before touching any channel. Do not repoint email until the delta has verified — an inbound ticket arriving mid-load is far harder to untangle than a few extra minutes of freeze.
Migration Validation Tool Confirm the final delta landed before you reopen -
Repoint channels and verify with live traffic
Switch email forwarding and MX or connector settings, update chat widgets and web forms, and re-authorise integrations. Then send real test tickets through every channel and confirm each lands, routes and triggers the right automation.
Email forwarding changes can take up to a full DNS TTL to propagate — check the TTL days in advance and lower it if needed.
Cron Expression Builder Schedule the delta syncs that run through the freeze -
Run the go/no-go and switch the agents
Walk the exit criteria with the decision-maker, call it explicitly, then move agents over with a named person on hand for the first few hours. Keep Enchant read-only rather than cancelled — cancelling the old contract on day one removes your only fallback.
Enchant → Puzzel Case Management specifics
- Fresh Puzzel instance
- Rollback is straightforward — wipe the instance and start over. Confirm with Puzzel support that a full tenant reset is available and understand the turnaround time.
- Active Puzzel instance
- Tag all migrated tickets with a migration-batch-001 tag (or similar) and all migrated contacts with a corresponding tag. If rollback is needed, you can identify and isolate migrated records. However, note that Puzzel does not publicly document a bulk delete API endpoint. Rollback on an active instance may require:
- Partial rollback
- If only specific inboxes/teams failed, you can re-run the migration for those teams only, using your ID mapping table to skip already-successful records.
Don't move on until
- Full historical load complete and counts matched
- Inbound channels repointed and verified with live test tickets
- Rollback decision point passed explicitly, not by default
06 Validation Prove the migration is complete, then close it out.
Objective Documented evidence that data, workflow and reporting all survived, and a signed acceptance.
Keep these open
-
Run the full reconciliation
Compare source and target on every object: total counts, counts by status, counts by group, attachment counts, and field-level spot checks on a random sample. Produce one report you can hand to an auditor.
Migration Validation Tool Reconcile Enchant and Puzzel Case Management record-for-record -
Verify field completeness, not just record counts
Re-profile the loaded data and compare null rates per field against the source profile. Matching record counts with a field that silently arrived empty is the failure mode counts alone will never catch.
Data Profiler Prove field completeness held up through the load -
Rebuild reporting and compare against baselines
Recreate your core dashboards — volume, first response time, resolution time, CSAT — and compare to pre-migration figures for the same period. Explain every variance; a changed SLA calculation is a real finding, not a rounding error.
SLA and first-response metrics are usually recalculated from the loaded timestamps, so they will differ if any timestamp mapping was approximate.
-
Test the workflow layer end to end
Fire every trigger, automation, SLA escalation, macro and notification with a live ticket. Workflow does not migrate — it gets rebuilt — so it is untested until someone has actually watched it run.
-
Confirm compliance and produce the audit trail
Re-scan the loaded data for regulated fields, confirm retention and deletion policies are configured in Puzzel Case Management, and file the evidence with your PII decisions from the audit phase.
PII & Compliance Scanner Produce the compliance evidence your auditor will ask for -
Sign off, then decommission on a schedule
Get written acceptance against the Discovery success criteria. Keep Enchant read-only for an agreed period (30-90 days is typical), take a final archive export, and only then cancel. Diarise the decommission date so it does not quietly renew.
-
Rebuild automations
Enchant's trigger and automation rules do not migrate. Recreate them as Event Rules and Inbound Rules in Puzzel. Map each Enchant automation to its Puzzel equivalent before cutover.
-
Configure SLAs
Puzzel's SLA engine is more granular than Enchant's. Set response and resolution time targets per team. Ensure migrated closed tickets do not count against SLA metrics.
-
Update integrations
Any third-party tools connected to Enchant (Slack, CRM, e-commerce) must be reconnected to Puzzel. Document every Enchant integration endpoint and its Puzzel equivalent.
Enchant → Puzzel Case Management specifics
- Field-level validation
- Check that subject, status, timestamps, and assigned agent match for a random sample of at least 50 tickets.
- Train agents
- Puzzel's interface is significantly different from Enchant's shared inbox. Plan at least one training session focused on the ticket view, category selection, and team queue workflows. Budget 2–4 hours per agent.
- Decommission Enchant
- Once you have verified the delta sync is complete and all email forwarding rules point to Puzzel, revoke user access to Enchant and export a final compliance backup. Keep the Enchant account active (read-only) for 30–90 days in case you need to reference original records.
Don't move on until
- Full reconciliation report attached to the project record
- Reporting baselines match pre-migration figures within agreed tolerance
- Formal acceptance signed and archive retention scheduled
Field mapping reference
The field-by-field mapping for each object. Use this as the starting point for your mapping spec.
Object Object
| Enchant field | Puzzel Case Management field | Notes |
|---|---|---|
| Inbox | Team | Each Enchant Inbox maps to a Puzzel Team. Configure Teams before import. |
| User (agent) | User/Agent | Create agents in Puzzel first. Map by email address. |
| Customer | Contact / Organisation | Puzzel groups contacts under Organisations. Enchant has no org concept — you may need to infer it from email domain. |
| Ticket | Ticket (Case) | Core record. Map state, subject, timestamps. |
| Message (reply) | Ticket message (timeline) | Preserve direction (in/out), body, timestamps. |
| Message (note) | Ticket note | Internal notes. Map the public/private flag carefully to prevent accidental data exposure. |
| Label | Tag or Category | Enchant labels are flat. Puzzel Categories are structured with parent-child choices. Decide which labels become Tags (free-form) vs Categories (structured). |
| Attachment | Attachment | Download from Enchant, re-upload to Puzzel. |
| CSAT response | No direct equivalent | Puzzel handles satisfaction through separate reporting. Store CSAT data as a custom form field or internal note. |
| Webhook | Event Rule / Outbound Integration | Enchant webhooks fire on ticket events. Puzzel's equivalent is Event Rules combined with Outbound Integrations — both may require activation by Puzzel support. |
Enchant Puzzel
| Enchant field | Puzzel Case Management field | Notes |
|---|---|---|
| ticket.id | externalId or migration log | Store for cross-reference. Puzzel assigns its own ID. |
| ticket.number | Tag or form field | Store as a tag or custom field for cross-reference. |
| ticket.subject | Ticket subject | Direct map. Check max length. |
| ticket.state | Ticket status | Map: open→Open, closed→Resolved, hold→On Hold. See callout below for snoozed/archived. |
| ticket.type | Channel | Map email→Email, sms→SMS. Other types may need API channel. |
| ticket.inbox_id | Team | Map via your Inbox→Team mapping table. |
| ticket.user_id | Assigned user | Map via your User mapping table. |
| ticket.label_ids | Tags / Categories | Per your label mapping decisions. |
| ticket.created_at | Created date | Direct map (both use ISO 8601). |
| customer.first_name | Contact first name | Direct map. |
| customer.last_name | Contact last name | Direct map. |
| customer.contacts [].value | Contact email/phone | Direct map. Lowercase and trim email before dedupe. |
| message.body | Message body | Check htmlized flag for HTML vs plain text. Sanitize HTML; rewrite inline image URLs. |
| message.direction | Message direction | in→inbound, out→outbound. |
Dataset Size Estimated Extraction Time
| Enchant field | Puzzel Case Management field | Notes |
|---|---|---|
| 1K tickets | ~30 minutes | Single-threaded, with embeds |
| 10K tickets | ~2–3 hours | Must switch to since_created_at pagination |
| 50K tickets | 10–15 hours | Schedule during off-hours |
| 100K tickets | 20–30 hours | Consider multi-day extraction with checkpointing |
Risk matrix
Per-object risk for this pair. Plan extra validation around anything marked high.
| Object | Risk | Notes |
|---|---|---|
| Tickets | medium | Tickets transfer via API with full history, but the flat-to-hierarchical model rewrite (inboxes to Teams, labels to Categories/Tags) introduces mapping errors if not carefully validated. |
| Messages / Conversations | medium | Message threading must be reconstructed during import since Puzzel's conversation model differs from Enchant's simple ticket-message nesting, risking thread ordering issues. |
| Contacts / Customers | medium | Customer records can be extracted reliably, but deduplication by email and the new requirement to assign contacts to Puzzel Organisations adds transformation complexity. |
| Organisations | high | Enchant has no native Organisation concept, so these entities must be inferred or manually constructed from customer data before loading into Puzzel, with high risk of misassignment. |
| Labels to Categories/Tags | high | Enchant's flat string-based labels must be decomposed and mapped into Puzzel's structured Category and Tag hierarchy, which is team-dependent and requires careful taxonomy design. |
| Attachments | medium | Each attachment requires individual download and re-upload via API, and large volumes significantly extend migration timelines due to rate limits and file size handling. |
| Agents / Users | low | Agent records are typically small in number and can be manually provisioned in Puzzel, though role and permission mappings require manual review. |
| Inboxes to Teams | medium | Enchant inboxes map conceptually to Puzzel Teams, but Teams in Puzzel control Category and Form availability, so the mapping must account for downstream configuration dependencies. |
| Custom Fields / Forms | high | Enchant does not have a structured custom fields system comparable to Puzzel's Forms and Form Fields, so any custom data captured informally in Enchant must be manually restructured. |
| SLA Policies | low | SLA configurations cannot be migrated and must be rebuilt natively in Puzzel, but since these are configuration rather than data, the risk of data loss is minimal. |
The hard parts
What makes this specific migration difficult, beyond the mechanics.
No Native Migration Path
Puzzel Case Management lacks a public bulk import endpoint or built-in migration tool, requiring all ticket history, contacts, and attachments to be loaded exclusively through a tenant-activated REST API.
Fundamental Data Model Mismatch
Enchant's flat structure of inboxes, tickets, and labels must be remodeled into Puzzel's hierarchical system of Teams, Organisations, Categories, Forms, and Tags, with no one-to-one field mapping available.
Enchant API Rate Limits
Enchant enforces a rate limit of 100 credits per minute and a 6 requests-per-second burst cap, making large-scale historical extractions slow and requiring careful pagination and retry logic.
Attachment Re-upload Workflow
Every attachment must be individually downloaded from Enchant and re-uploaded to Puzzel via API, as there is no direct transfer mechanism or CSV-based attachment migration option.
Organisation Mapping Gap
Puzzel groups contacts under Organisations — a concept that does not exist natively in Enchant — requiring custom logic to infer and construct organisation records from customer data.
Limited Puzzel API Documentation
Puzzel's API documentation is only available in-app rather than publicly published, adding friction to development and making it harder to plan field mappings and integration logic in advance.
What breaks
Known failure modes. Have a recovery plan for each before you cut over.
Inline images:
Images pasted directly into Enchant emails are often hosted on Enchant's CDN. If you only migrate the HTML text, the <img> tags will break when Enchant is decommissioned. Parse the HTML, download each image, upload it to Puzzel, and rewrite the src attribute in the HTML body.
Duplicate customers:
Enchant allows multiple customer records with the same email. Puzzel auto-creates customers from email/mobile identifiers on inbound ticket creation. De-duplicate before loading, or you will create duplicate Organisations. Normalize email case and phone format (E.164 for phone numbers) before import. (help.puzzel.com)
Multi-contact customers:
An Enchant customer can have email, phone, and Twitter contacts. Puzzel's contact model may not support all three as first-class identifiers — test which fields are available on your Puzzel instance before writing the loader. For unsupported contact types (e.g., Twitter handles), store them as a custom field or internal note.
Status mapping:
Enchant has a simple state model (open, hold, closed, snoozed, archived). Puzzel often has granular SLA-driven states (New, In Progress, Waiting on Customer, Resolved). Map closed Enchant tickets to a terminal Puzzel state to prevent them from triggering SLA breach alerts upon import.
Label-to-Category mapping:
Enchant labels are flat strings. Puzzel Categories are structured hierarchies. A label like "Billing - Refund" needs to become Category "Billing" with sub-choice "Refund" — parse and split during transformation.
HTML message bodies:
Enchant's htmlized flag indicates whether the body is HTML. Puzzel may strip or reformat HTML — test with representative samples (especially emails with tables, embedded CSS, and signature blocks) before the full migration.
Attachments at scale:
Enchant serves attachments as Base64 via the API. Each file must be downloaded, stored temporarily, and re-uploaded to Puzzel. Puzzel blocks many executable and script extensions (.exe, .bat, .js, .vbs, and others) and returns ERROR status for email payloads over 40 MB. For large attachment volumes (10K+ files), this is the slowest part of the migration. Unsupported file types need an archive strategy — store them in cloud storage and link from an internal note. (help.puzzel.com)
Author override:
When creating historical messages via the API, Puzzel may default the author to the API user rather than the historical agent. Check Puzzel's in-app API documentation for author override or impersonation parameters. If no override exists, add an internal note on each message stating the original author and timestamp.
Private notes and Customer Hub visibility:
Puzzel can expose notes and forwarded content through authenticated API channels or Customer Hub if those settings are enabled. This is a significant data exposure risk: if Customer Hub is active on your Puzzel instance, migrated internal notes may become visible to end customers unless explicitly marked as private. Verify visibility settings in Settings → Customer Hub → Ticket Visibility before loading any data. Keep internal notes private by default. (help.puzzel.com)
Multi-recipient threads:
Enchant handles CCs and BCCs natively. Ensure Puzzel's case configuration captures secondary email addresses so historical context is not lost if a CC'd user replies to an old thread.
CSAT data:
Enchant stores satisfaction ratings on tickets. Puzzel has no equivalent field in the standard ticket schema. Store CSAT scores as a custom form field (if you need to report on them) or internal note (if archival only). Include the rating value, any free-text comment, and the timestamp.
Tools used in this playbook
All free, all run entirely in your browser — nothing is uploaded.
FAQ
Can I migrate historical tickets from Enchant to Puzzel Case Management?
Yes, but there is no native import tool. You must extract tickets via Enchant's REST API and load them into Puzzel using its API ticket channel. Both platforms use JSON-based REST APIs, so an API-to-API migration script is the most reliable approach. CSV imports only cover customers and contacts, not full ticket history.
What are Enchant's API rate limits for data extraction?
Enchant's API is limited to 100 credits per minute per account with a secondary burst limit of 6 requests per second. Embedding related resources (messages, customers, labels) costs additional credits per embed type. For large datasets (50K+ tickets), expect extraction to take 10+ hours.
How do Enchant labels map to Puzzel Case Management?
Enchant uses flat labels on tickets. Puzzel Case Management has both Tags (free-form) and Categories (structured, hierarchical choices). Simple labels can map to Tags. Labels that represent structured classification (e.g., 'Billing - Refund') should be split into Puzzel Categories with parent-child choices.
Does Puzzel Case Management have a bulk import API?
Puzzel Case Management does not publicly document a bulk import endpoint. Tickets are created individually via the API ticket channel. For large migrations, this means building a script that creates tickets one at a time with proper rate limiting and error handling.
How long does an Enchant to Puzzel migration take?
It depends on data volume. A small migration (under 5,000 tickets) can be completed in 1–2 days. Larger datasets (50K+ tickets with attachments) may take 1–2 weeks including extraction, transformation, loading, and validation. A managed migration service can compress this timeline.