Are our project management histories worth anything to AI companies?

Often, yes, when tasks keep years of comments, status changes and approvals. Less so when an export keeps only each task’s current state. As of October 2026, 16 of the 25 providers Data Licensing Report tracks name project histories or a project tool.

What do AI companies want from project histories?

The record of how a piece of work went from request to done, and why it changed course on the way. Appen calls decision records “the category frontier labs ask for most often”, lists “Project tracking” among their typical sources, and names “Stage transitions with stated reasons” among the signals it extracts. Miro Advisory describes what it looks for in project tools as “Tasks, project history, status changes, ownership, dependencies, documentation and completed outcomes” (both as of October 2026).

Polyshares’ Jira guide (checked September 2026) puts it this way: “A Jira work item records a piece of work from creation to resolution: the description, every status change, the comments between people doing the work and links to related items”. Its Asana guide adds that tasks there cover “marketing launches, legal reviews and onboarding checklists”, so the records need not come from software teams.

What makes a project history worth more or less?

History, links and years. Scale AI asks for “Tickets, wikis, and project records carried over with their complete history”, and Nyne for “the project and service records that show work moving start to finish”. A task that points to the email thread, chat discussion or code change behind it carries more, as the Slack page explains for linked records.

Less comes through when a board was used as a to-do list with titles and checkboxes and nothing else, when most tasks are recurring templates, or when the export dropped the comments and status changes (next section). Polyshares counts project tools in records, “Tasks, issues and their comment history”, so count tasks, years and projects for your data inventory.

Which buyers say they want project histories?

As of October 2026, 16 providers’ own pages name project histories, project tracking or a task tracker such as Jira, Asana or monday.com. Data Licensing Report applies that test to every provider, Telegraph Lab (affiliated with this site) included. Not every one pays you directly: Avelence, License My Data, Miro Advisory and Sell My Business Data pass companies on to buyers, HUD’s marketplace buys nothing itself, and SimpleClosure mainly works with companies that are closing.

Provider	What it is	What its own pages name
Appen	Licenses directly	“Project tracking” among typical sources (source)
Avelence	Introducer	Jira, Linear and Asana: “Tasks, sprints, project histories”
Corpus	Licenses directly	“project histories”; Jira in a deal example (source)
DataVendor (HUD)	Marketplace; buys nothing itself	“Attach exports of your Jira or Linear tickets”, sent with a codebase for sale
Handshake AI	Licenses directly	Monday.com among example sources (source)
License My Data	Introducer	“Project management workflows and task execution histories”; Jira
micro1	Licenses directly	“project histories” among operational data (source)
Miro Advisory	Introducer	Jira, Asana, Monday and Linear (source)
Nyne	Licenses directly	“project management tools such as Asana and Jira” (source)
Polyshares	Licenses directly	Export guides for Jira, Linear, Asana, ClickUp, monday.com and Trello (source)
Replay	Licenses directly	“project management” among record types; Asana and Atlassian in its catalog (source)
Scale AI	Licenses directly	Jira, Confluence, Asana, Notion and Linear (source)
Scrimdata	Licenses directly	“project trackers” (source)
Sell My Business Data	Introducer	“project systems” among business systems (source)
SimpleClosure (AssetHub)	Wind-down platform	“project data” among the assets it helps sell (source)
Troveo	Licensing agent	Jira, Linear, Asana and Monday: “complete project histories”

Two others come close without passing. Mercor names Notion and Confluence, which hold documents and wikis, and lists “Client decks, SOWs, project files” for professional services, which are files rather than task histories. Telegraph Lab names “the decisions behind a project” among work conversations but no project tool. The other seven name neither.

Does our export keep the history, and how far back does it go?

Not always. In the tools below, the everyday export shows each task as it stands now. Comments and changes come out another way, and monday.com keeps its change log only as far back as your plan allows.

Tool	The everyday export	Where the fuller history is
Jira Cloud	CSV, at most 10,000 work items at a time (Atlassian, updated July 3, 2026)	A backup from Backup Manager, with work items, their fields, comments and, if chosen, attachments; your organization can block exports for some apps or data classifications (Atlassian)
Asana	A project as CSV or JSON (Asana)	An organization export of “the complete data of an organization in JSON format”, available only to service accounts of Enterprise+ organizations
monday.com	The activity log shows each change, from the previous value to the new one, for the past week on Basic, 6 months on Standard, up to 1 year on Pro and up to 5 years on Enterprise; its Excel export shows column value changes only (monday.com, updated June 17, 2026)	An account export by the admin, covering all boards and uploaded files but not archived boards or workdocs; “The Emails & Activities timeline is currently not supported” (updated September 9, 2026)
Trello	CSV, on Premium Workspaces; “Comments aren’t included in the CSV export”, nor are archived cards	A board’s JSON export, with “the 1000 most recent actions on a board, which includes comments”; a Workspace export for all comments
Basecamp	“Account owners can export a full HTML copy of Basecamp data at any time” (updated September 14, 2026)	The same export, by project or for the whole account

Procore’s RFIs, submittals and change orders are covered on the construction page. Before you downgrade or cancel a plan, ask the vendor what happens to history beyond the new plan’s window, and export first. How much work is it? covers who usually runs these exports.

Our projects are full of client names and client work. Can they go in?

Only after you have sorted whose work each project holds. In an agency, consultancy or contractor, task titles name clients, attachments are drafts of client deliverables, and clients invited in as guests wrote their own comments. Providers draw the line in different places. Mercor lists client decks and SOWs among its examples; Miro Advisory says “Any dataset involving client information requires appropriate rights and legal review”; and Polyshares’ intake page says “Data you hold for your own clients is out of scope”.

Read three things in each client agreement: the confidentiality clause, who owns deliverables and work in progress, and whether you must return or destroy client materials when the work ends. Miro adds that “anonymization alone does not resolve an ownership or contractual restriction”. The marketing agency and MSP pages go further into client ownership, and your own lawyer should read any clause you are unsure of.

Leaving clients out is usually done by project, workspace or board (how to write exclusions). Comments also describe colleagues’ mistakes and absences; what “anonymized” means covers how providers treat that.

Is our project software vendor already using this data for AI?

Atlassian is, by default on some plans. Since August 17, 2026, it uses customer metadata and, on Free and Standard plans unless an admin opts out, in-app data such as “titles, description, and comments of Jira work items” to improve its own products. In-app data is off by default on Premium and Enterprise, and only Enterprise organizations can opt out of metadata. Atlassian says it de-identifies and aggregates the data and “does not share customer metadata or in-app data with our third-party-hosted LLM providers”. Admins change the setting under Atlassian Administration > Security > Data contribution; when a software vendor wants your data compares other vendors’ settings. Record the setting in your inventory and read your vendor agreement as well. Miro Advisory warns that “The agreements behind the tools you use may restrict extraction or secondary use of what they store”.

What could project histories be worth?

As of October 2026, nobody publishes a price for project histories alone; where they show up in a published figure, they are one part of a whole-company bundle. Corpus lists $1,100,000 for a 760-employee Michigan industrial manufacturer whose records from 2012 to 2024 came from Jira, Confluence, Dropbox and NetSuite; Corpus says its figures “reflect closed engagements” but not when each one closed. And cielo24, while winding down its transcription business, sold its Jira tickets together with Slack messages and email for “hundreds of thousands of dollars”, according to a Forbes report of April 16, 2026 (Forbes).

Neither figure prices task history on its own. The ranges providers publish for whole-company records are collected in How much is my company’s data worth?