Get the weekly research letter
Companies change their terms quietly. We read every version and catch what actually changed. One email a week on the changes that matter and what they mean. No account.
Users of Asana AI features agree to implement human oversight and safeguards for AI use, remain responsible for all decisions made based on AI outputs, evaluate AI outputs for accuracy, and provide information about their AI use to Asana upon request.
This analysis describes what Asana's agreement states, permits, or reserves. It does not constitute a legal determination about enforceability. Regulatory applicability and practical outcomes may vary by jurisdiction, enforcement context, and individual circumstances. Read our methodology
This provision places direct responsibility on users for decisions, actions, and omissions arising from their use of Asana AI features, including third-party models, and requires proactive human oversight and accuracy evaluation as contractual obligations.
Interpretive note: The scope of 'appropriate human oversight' is not defined in the terms; operational sufficiency of oversight mechanisms may depend on applicable regulatory frameworks and use case context.
Under this clause, users who engage Asana AI features accept full responsibility for any decisions, advice, or actions based on AI outputs, and are required to implement human oversight and report intended use to Asana upon request. The agreement does not limit the scope of AI feature coverage to first-party models, explicitly including third-party models.
Cross-platform context
See how other platforms handle AI Acceptable Use and Oversight Obligations and similar clauses.
Compare across platforms →Monitoring
Asana has changed this document before.
Receive same-day alerts, structured change summaries, and monitoring for up to 20 platforms.
"If you use any AI or machine learning features and functionality (including third-party models) provided by Asana (collectively, "Asana AI"), you agree to: implement appropriate human oversight and safeguards to mitigate potential risks associated with your use of Asana AI (i.e., impacts on a person's fundamental rights, health or safety); remain responsible for all decisions made, advice given, actions taken, and failures to take action based on your use of Asana AI; provide information about your intended use of Asana AI and compliance with this Acceptable Use Policy upon request; and evaluate Asana AI outputs for accuracy and appropriateness in light of the probabilistic nature of AI and potential for producing inaccurate content.Excerpt from Asana's Terms of Service
1) REGULATORY LANDSCAPE: The EU AI Act, which introduces obligations for providers and deployers of AI systems, is relevant for organizations using Asana AI in the EU/EEA. The provision's human oversight and accuracy evaluation requirements align with deployer obligations under the EU AI Act for certain risk categories. The FTC has issued guidance on AI transparency and accuracy obligations for businesses. Sector-specific regulations (healthcare, financial services) may impose additional requirements on AI-assisted decision-making. 2) GOVERNANCE EXPOSURE: Medium to High for enterprise customers in regulated industries. The clause's broad assignment of responsibility for 'all decisions made, advice given, actions taken, and failures to take action' based on AI outputs creates significant operational exposure in high-stakes use cases. Organizations using Asana AI for tasks affecting employees, clients, or regulated processes should assess this allocation of responsibility. 3) JURISDICTION FLAGS: EU/EEA organizations deploying Asana AI must evaluate whether their use cases trigger EU AI Act deployer obligations, including conformity assessments and fundamental rights impact evaluations referenced in the provision's language. Healthcare and financial services organizations in any jurisdiction face additional sector-specific AI governance requirements. 4) CONTRACT AND VENDOR IMPLICATIONS: The provision's requirement to provide information about intended AI use upon Asana's request creates a potential disclosure obligation. Enterprise customers should assess whether this requirement is consistent with their information security, trade secret, and client confidentiality policies. Procurement teams should review whether the Customer Agreement modifies these AI use obligations. 5) COMPLIANCE CONSIDERATIONS: Organizations using Asana AI should document their human oversight mechanisms, establish internal policies for AI output review, and assess whether their use cases qualify as high-risk under the EU AI Act or applicable sector regulations. The 'upon request' disclosure obligation should be flagged in vendor management and incident response frameworks.
This provision places direct responsibility on users for decisions, actions, and omissions arising from their use of Asana AI features, including third-party models, and requires proactive human oversight and accuracy evaluation as contractual obligations.
Under this clause, users who engage Asana AI features accept full responsibility for any decisions, advice, or actions based on AI outputs, and are required to implement human oversight and report intended use to Asana upon request. The agreement does not limit the scope of AI feature coverage to first-party models, explicitly including third-party models.
No. ConductAtlas is an independent monitoring service. We are not affiliated with, endorsed by, or sponsored by Asana.