Agent index / MCP server / Asana MCP

MCP server / project management / source-linked

Asana MCP

Asana MCP connects an agent to the work graph behind tasks, projects and portfolios. Setup has an important operational detail: V2 uses pre-registered OAuth applications. Assess both user permissions and client support before assuming that adding a server URL is sufficient.

Compare alternatives ↗How to use ↓

Before you choose.

Identify the implementation and the job it supports.

Which implementation is this?
Asana V2 MCP is generally available. The V1 /sse beta is deprecated; use /v2/mcp.
Implementation source ↗

Workspace MCPs compared →

Setup and connection.

The documented interface, authentication and installation path.

Connection / transport: Streamable HTTP
Authentication: OAuth with pre-registered client ID and secret; no dynamic client registration

Create an MCP app in the Asana developer console, configure its redirect URL and distribution, then connect your client to https://mcp.asana.com/v2/mcp. MCP-issued tokens are separate from standard Asana API tokens.

Setup reference ↗

What it actually exposes.

Concrete capabilities with maintainer sources.

Documented capability / 01

Find unknown work IDs

search_objects locates tasks, projects, portfolios and other supported resource types before an exact-ID operation.

Documentation ↗

Documented capability / 02

Read task context

get_task returns assignment, dates, fields, dependencies, subtasks and comments for a selected task.

Documentation ↗

Documented capability / 03

Apply reviewed work changes

The tool reference separates read tools, write tools and interactive tools with confirmation interfaces in supported clients.

Documentation ↗

Evidence and method.

What was checked and what was not tested.

WHO

Editorial record

Compiled by clawbot.ai.

HOW

Source method

Public maintainer documentation and repositories. This is not a hands-on product review.

WHEN

Last checked 2026-10-01

Setup examples are documented examples. Suggested trials and comparison advice are editorial guidance.

Sources support the adjacent factual statements. A source review does not establish uptime, performance, security or current account eligibility. Read the editorial policy.

Community signals.

Concrete reports from public community discussions, kept separate from product documentation.

Reddit r/Asana / Creation flows differ materially between new projects and existing-project updates / mixed / community_comment_with_specific_failure2026-02-13 · community_thread

Asana's MCP Server Just Got a Big Upgrade

A user reports that Asana MCP creates new projects well but fails to associate later tasks with existing projects, sections, and metadata.

“New projects execute flawlessly, but adding tasks to existing projects is broken and loses project fields.”

Open community source ↗

Reddit r/Asana / Version and transport migrations can break existing client configurations / negative / community_thread_with_regression_report2026-03-25 · community_thread

Asana MCP for claude code break today for anybody else?

Multiple users saw a sudden regression after the Asana V1-to-V2 transport/OAuth migration, requiring client configuration repair.

“The integration worked daily, then stopped creating tasks without creating a whole new project.”

Open community source ↗

Community evidence is anecdotal and may reflect one setup, version or account. It is included for discovery and risk-sensing, not as a representative rating or independent benchmark. Verify the current official documentation before acting on a report.

Try a specific task.

A bounded evaluation you can reproduce in your own environment.

Proposed workflow: review delivery risk

Suggested evaluation, not an observed test result.

Find the project and retrieve its relevant tasks.
Separate overdue work, dependencies and missing owners in a linked review.
Prepare proposed task updates and apply only the reviewed changes.

What to inspect: A task-based risk summary with explicit unknowns. This editorial workflow has not been run.

Workflow reference ↗

Permissions and limitations.

Read these constraints before granting access.

Boundary / 01

MCP authorization is user-based and not tool-scoped: permissions follow the user, with all available MCP tools authorized.

Boundary reference ↗

Boundary / 02

The live tools/list schema is authoritative; tools and parameters can change after a documentation page is published.

Boundary reference ↗

Decide by workflow.

Make the expected output explicit before you connect.

A task-based risk summary with explicit unknowns. This editorial workflow has not been run.

Keep the task inputs, tool calls, output and any errors together when you evaluate. The trial above is a proposal, not a recorded result.

Compare the alternatives.

Specific reasons to choose another route, with the tradeoff shown.

Editorial decision guidance inferred from the linked documentation; no quality or speed benchmark.
Alternative	Choose it when	Tradeoff
ClickUp MCP	Editorial choice: work combines ClickUp tasks, documents and time entries.	Check workspace call allowances. Documentation ↗
Linear MCP	Editorial choice: focus on software issues and milestones.	A different work hierarchy and access model. Documentation ↗

Workspace MCPs compared →

Questions before setup.

Answers specific to this implementation.

Can I reuse a standard personal access token?

V2's documented path uses an MCP app and OAuth. MCP tokens are not general Asana API tokens.
Documentation ↗

Why is my workspace unavailable during login?

Check the MCP app's distribution settings and organization app restrictions.
Documentation ↗

Source trail.

Maintainer documentation used in this record.

V2 OAuth and permissions ↗User setup and workspace controls ↗Tool reference ↗developer.clickup.com documentation ↗linear.app documentation ↗Community discussion ↗Community discussion ↗