Skip to main content
Glama

Asana

by io.github.pipeworx-io
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Asana List Projects

asana_list_projects
Read-onlyIdempotent

List all projects in a workspace. Returns project ID, name, and archived status. Requires workspace ID.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNoNumber of projects to return (default 20, max 100)
workspaceNoWorkspace GID (auto-resolved if omitted)

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
projectsYesList of projects in workspace

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "properties": {
+    "projects": {
+      "description": "List of projects in workspace",
+      "items": {
+        "properties": {
+          "archived": {
+            "description": "Project archived status",
+            "type": "boolean"
+          },
+          "gid": {
+            "description": "Project GID",
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "name": {
+            "description": "Project name",
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "permalink_url": {
+            "description": "Project permalink URL",
+            "type": "string"
+          }
+        },
+        "type": "object"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "projects"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}
  2. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / examples
      Added value: +[
+  {},
+  {
+    "limit": 100,
+    "workspace": "1234567890123456"
+  }
+]
  3. First observed

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior3/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations already indicate read only (readOnlyHint=true), non-destructive, idempotent, and open world. The description adds that workspace ID is required and lists returned fields, but does not significantly expand on behavioral traits beyond what annotations convey.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Two sentences with no wasted words. The first sentence immediately conveys the core function. Front-loaded and efficient.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the tool's simplicity, excellent annotations, presence of output schema, and full parameter schema coverage, the description is complete. It covers purpose, return values, and a key requirement.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100% and baseline is 3. The description adds value beyond schema by clarifying the necessity of workspace ID (though optional in schema) and stating the output fields, which are not detailed in the input schema.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the tool lists all projects in a workspace and returns specific fields (ID, name, archived status). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like asana_list_tasks (tasks) and asana_list_workspaces (workspaces).

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description mentions requirement of workspace ID but does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives. Since no other project-listing sibling exists, usage is implied but lacks explicit when-not or alternative references.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

All Asana toolsInspect
Try in Browser
One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources