Asana Smart status gives you a useful first draft, but you should not send it to a sponsor or client without reviewing it first. The draft relies on the data available within the project, and it can summarize detail away without telling you. Treat it as a draft. Check each claim against the tasks behind it, add the decisions and blockers that live outside Asana, then send.
What does Asana Smart status actually draft?
Asana's help article on Smart status says the feature uses AI to draft status updates that point out blind spots, open questions, roadblocks and a path toward goals, and that you can steer it with "+ Add guidance". Asana calls the output a draft, so a Smart status draft is meant to be edited before you share it.
The same help article says the feature drafts updates for projects, portfolios and goals. The portfolio and goal announcement shows the flow: click Set status, choose Draft update with AI, pick the projects to focus on, add guidance, then edit the result by adding or removing sections. The same post says portfolio and goal status was rolling out to the Advanced, Enterprise and Enterprise+ tiers.
The important limit comes from a Forum Leader tip on Smart status: it relies on the data available within the project, such as tasks, due dates and task titles, and it "won't contain any notes that haven't been added to Asana." If a decision was made on a call, or a risk sits in someone's inbox, the draft will not mention it.
Where do Smart status drafts go wrong?
Smart status drafts can go wrong in a few ways worth checking for: items left out without notice, blank or misplaced fields, stale context, the wrong level of detail for a sponsor, and claims you cannot trace to a task. The one first-hand report involves a task table, so treat the rest as checks to run.
- Items dropped silently. In an Asana community thread, a user with approximately 37 incomplete tasks asked AI Status Update for a table of every one and got back around 8 to 10, with no sign the list had been cut. A reply in the same thread, not marked as Asana staff, said status updates are meant to be short stakeholder summaries with an output limit. Asana has not published an output limit, so treat this as one user's report, and check for gaps yourself.
- Fields blank or misplaced. The same thread reports populated custom fields coming back as a dash or "Not specified", and a task title landing in the date column.
- Stale or missing context. The draft won't contain any notes that haven't been added to Asana. Check for overdue tasks nobody has updated, owners who have moved on, and decisions never logged, since these flow straight into the summary.
- Wrong level of detail. Task-level detail suits your team. Check that the sponsor version keeps to the few things that affect scope, date, budget or a decision they owe you.
- Claims with no source. Check lines like "testing is on track". A line can read well and still rest on a handful of task titles. If you cannot point to the evidence, your sponsor cannot either.
The general warning holds here too. As Everhour's review of Asana AI puts it, AI is only as useful as your data quality. That review also calls status suggestions "surprisingly accurate" but shows no test behind the claim, so it is not evidence either way.
How do I check a Smart status draft before sending it?
Check a Smart status draft by tracing every claim to a task, comparing the overall status to what you know, and adding the decisions and blockers kept elsewhere, since the draft relies on the data available within the project. Run the check every time a draft goes to a sponsor or client, because the gaps change as the project changes.
Run this checklist on the draft:
- Trace each claim. For every sentence about progress, open the task or milestone it rests on. Confirm the date and owner are current. Delete or rewrite anything you cannot trace.
- Count the workstreams. List your workstreams or deliverables from memory, then confirm each appears in the draft. Anything missing was either dropped or has no recent activity, and either way your sponsor should hear about it.
- Test the colour. Ask yourself: if the sponsor called me now, would I describe this as on track, at risk or off track? If your answer differs from the draft, your answer wins.
- Add what lives outside the project record. Decisions made in meetings, approvals given by email, client feedback in chat, and risks you are watching but have not logged.
- Name what you need. Most drafts describe the project. Few ask the sponsor for anything. Add the decision, review or help you need, and by when.
- Cut for the reader. Remove internal task names, team shorthand and anything the sponsor cannot act on.
- Check tables line by line. If the draft includes a table, compare the row count and field values with your list view before sending.
What guidance should I give Smart status?
Use Add guidance to tell Smart status who the reader is, what to include, and what not to invent. Clear guidance cannot add missing data to the project. It does make the draft easier to check and closer to what a sponsor needs, because gaps show up as gaps instead of guesses.
A prompt you can adapt:
Write this update for [sponsor name], who is [role] and needs to know about scope, dates and decisions. Cover only [deliverable or workstream list]. For each, say whether it is on track and name the task or milestone that shows it. List blockers and say who owns each. Do not infer or fill in values that are not in the project. If something is missing, write "not recorded" instead. Keep it short.
The instruction not to infer or substitute values echoes advice from the reply in the community thread. Marking gaps as "not recorded" turns hidden gaps into ones you can see and fix during review.
What should the update I send look like?
The update you send should lead with the overall status and what you need from the sponsor, then give progress by deliverable with its evidence. Keep the Smart status draft as raw material and move the verified parts into a structure the sponsor can read quickly and answer.
Subject: [Project name] status, [date]: [on track / at risk / off track]
What I need from you
- [Decision, review or help] on [topic] by [date], because [impact if late]
Progress by deliverable
- [Deliverable]: [status]. Evidence: [milestone, task or document]
- [Deliverable]: [status]. Evidence: [milestone, task or document]
Blockers and risks
- [Blocker]: owner [name], next step [action] by [date]
Decisions since last update
- [Decision], agreed by [name] on [date]
Next steps
- [Action], [owner], [date]
Is Smart status fine for internal updates but not for clients?
It can be, because your team knows the context and will spot an odd line, while a client or executive reads the update as your considered view. The Digital Project Manager's guide to Asana status updates suggests Asana updates suit internal communication best, and that for external stakeholders the Asana update works as a starting point for another format.
A practical rule: send the draft to your team with light edits, and give any sponsor or client version the full checklist above.
How do I get better drafts from my Asana project?
You get better Smart status drafts by keeping the project record current, because the draft can only summarize what is there. Update dates when they slip, keep an owner on every open task, fill in the custom fields your sponsor cares about, and log decisions and blockers as tasks or comments when they happen.
A short routine before you generate:
- Close or reschedule overdue tasks.
- Add a task or comment for any decision made in a meeting since the last update.
- Log open blockers with an owner.
- Check that milestones reflect the dates you have agreed with the sponsor.
The Forum Leader tip makes the same point from the other side: the tool shouldn't completely replace the way you prepared reports before.
When is sending the draft almost as is reasonable?
Sending the draft with only light edits is reasonable when the project record is clean, the reader already knows the project well, and nothing in the update asks for a decision. A short weekly note to an engaged internal sponsor on a well-kept project may need little more than a scan for accuracy.
The review matters more as the stakes rise: a client relationship, a slipping date, a budget question, or a sponsor who reads updates only when something is wrong. In those cases the gaps in the draft are exactly the things the sponsor most needs to see.
When would a review-first setup serve me better?
A review-first setup serves you better when most of your review time goes on adding what the draft missed: decisions, blockers, the evidence behind progress, and what you need from the sponsor. In that case, record those things in the project as they happen, so any draft starts from them and you spend review time directing the message instead of rebuilding it.
Unblockd sets up projects with deliverables, activities, tasks, evidence, blockers, risks, decisions.
Whatever tool you use, the loop is the same. The draft is prepared from project evidence, you review and direct it, the sponsor responds to a clear ask, and the team follows through on the answer.
Before your next sponsor update, generate the Smart status draft, run the checklist, and note which items you had to add by hand. That list tells you what to start recording in the project, and it shows how far you can trust the next draft.