Skip to main content
Glama
cristip73

MCP Server for Asana

by cristip73

asana_get_project_status

Retrieve project status updates from Asana to monitor progress, track milestones, and stay informed about project developments.

Instructions

Get a project status update

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
project_status_gidYesThe project status GID to retrieve
opt_fieldsNoComma-separated list of optional fields to include

Implementation Reference

  • Handler case in tool_handler switch that destructures arguments and calls AsanaClientWrapper.getProjectStatus to retrieve the project status, then returns JSON stringified response.
    case "asana_get_project_status": {
      const { project_status_gid, ...opts } = args;
      const response = await asanaClient.getProjectStatus(project_status_gid, opts);
      return {
        content: [{ type: "text", text: JSON.stringify(response) }],
      };
    }
  • Tool definition with name, description, and input schema requiring project_status_gid and optional opt_fields.
    export const getProjectStatusTool: Tool = {
      name: "asana_get_project_status",
      description: "Get a project status update",
      inputSchema: {
        type: "object",
        properties: {
          project_status_gid: {
            type: "string",
            description: "The project status GID to retrieve"
          },
          opt_fields: {
            type: "string",
            description: "Comma-separated list of optional fields to include"
          }
        },
        required: ["project_status_gid"]
      }
    };
  • Registration of all tools including getProjectStatusTool in the exported tools array used by MCP.
    export const tools: Tool[] = [
      listWorkspacesTool,
      searchProjectsTool,
      getProjectTool,
      getProjectTaskCountsTool,
      getProjectSectionsTool,
      createSectionForProjectTool,
      createProjectForWorkspaceTool,
      updateProjectTool,
      reorderSectionsTool,
      getProjectStatusTool,
      getProjectStatusesForProjectTool,
      createProjectStatusTool,
      deleteProjectStatusTool,
      searchTasksTool,
      getTaskTool,
      createTaskTool,
      updateTaskTool,
      createSubtaskTool,
      getMultipleTasksByGidTool,
      addTaskToSectionTool,
      getTasksForSectionTool,
      getProjectHierarchyTool,
      getSubtasksForTaskTool,
      getTasksForProjectTool,
      getTasksForTagTool,
      getTagsForWorkspaceTool,
      addTagsToTaskTool,
      addTaskDependenciesTool,
      addTaskDependentsTool,
      setParentForTaskTool,
      addFollowersToTaskTool,
      getStoriesForTaskTool,
      createTaskStoryTool,
      getTeamsForUserTool,
      getTeamsForWorkspaceTool,
      addMembersForProjectTool,
      addFollowersForProjectTool,
      getUsersForWorkspaceTool,
      getAttachmentsForObjectTool,
      uploadAttachmentForObjectTool,
      downloadAttachmentTool
    ];
  • AsanaClientWrapper method that wraps the Asana SDK ProjectStatusesApi.getProjectStatus call to retrieve project status data.
    async getProjectStatus(statusId: string, opts: any = {}) {
      const response = await this.projectStatuses.getProjectStatus(statusId, opts);
      return response.data;
    }
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the action ('Get'), implying a read operation, but lacks details on permissions, rate limits, error handling, or response format. For a tool with zero annotation coverage, this is a significant gap—it doesn't describe what 'Get' entails beyond the basic verb, missing critical context for safe and effective use.

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?

The description is a single, clear sentence with zero waste—it directly states the tool's purpose without redundancy or fluff. It's appropriately sized and front-loaded, making it easy for an agent to parse quickly. Every word earns its place, meeting the highest standard for conciseness.

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

Completeness2/5

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

Given the complexity of a read operation with no annotations and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain what a 'project status update' returns, how to handle the optional fields, or any behavioral traits. With siblings present, it also fails to differentiate contextually. For a tool with these gaps, the description should provide more guidance to be fully helpful.

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

Parameters3/5

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

Schema description coverage is 100%, with both parameters ('project_status_gid' and 'opt_fields') documented in the schema. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, such as examples or usage notes for parameters. According to the rules, when schema coverage is high (>80%), the baseline score is 3, which applies here as the description doesn't compensate but doesn't need to given the schema's completeness.

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

Purpose3/5

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

The description states the action ('Get') and resource ('project status update'), providing a basic purpose. However, it's vague about what a 'project status update' entails compared to siblings like 'asana_get_project_statuses' (plural) or 'asana_get_project'—it doesn't specify if this retrieves a single status update, its details, or how it differs from related tools. This meets the minimum viable threshold but lacks sibling differentiation.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

The description offers no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. With siblings like 'asana_get_project_statuses' (likely for listing multiple statuses) and 'asana_get_project' (for project details), there's no indication of context, prerequisites, or exclusions. This leaves the agent to infer usage, which is inadequate for effective tool selection.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/cristip73/mcp-server-asana'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server