Agents
AgentAgents
Providers using this tag (493)
Ranked by API Evangelist rating — Exemplar and Strong are expanded by default.
Exemplar 42 Complete, well-documented, and agent-ready
Strong 69 Solid coverage with minor gaps
Developing 133 Usable, with meaningful gaps to close
Thin 119 Limited public surface area
Emerging 94 Early or largely undocumented
Minimal 36 Almost no public developer surface
APIs with this tag (850)
Ranked by the provider's API Evangelist rating — the Kin Score is scored per provider, not per API, so every API of a provider shares its band. How the rating works →
Exemplar 118 Complete, well-documented, and agent-ready
Strong 179 Solid coverage with minor gaps
Developing 229 Usable, with meaningful gaps to close
Thin 178 Limited public surface area
Emerging 136 Early or largely undocumented
Minimal 10 Almost no public developer surface
Companies reaching this through an API (532)
These companies publish an API, specification or operation carrying “Agents” but do not classify their business under it. Listed unranked and kept out of the count above, because one tagged operation is not a statement about what a company does.
Show all 532 companies ↓
Score breakdown
Related tags
Where this tag comes from
Markets provisional
Kin Score markets whose measured providers carry this tag. Share is the fraction of the market's measured providers that carry it — it describes the market, not this tag.
| Market | Share of the market's providers |
|---|---|
| x402 Micropayments & Agentic Pay-per-Call | 26% |
| AI Model Routing | 23% |
Cohort brief
Auto-generatedThe 488 providers in the APIs.io catalog tagged Agents, scored on the Kin Score. Every figure below is computed from the catalog — nothing here is written.
| Facet | This cohort | Catalog | Difference | Scored |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Developer Ergonomics | 46.9 | 23.2 | +23.7 | 488 |
| Access Clarity | 46 | 23.9 | +22.1 | 488 |
| Operational Transparency | 29.3 | 13 | +16.3 | 488 |
| Contract Quality | 29.8 | 17.2 | +12.6 | 488 |
| Discoverability | 69.2 | 57.9 | +11.3 | 488 |
| Contract Governance | 14 | 6.5 | +7.5 | 488 |
A facet is averaged over the members that carry it, not over the whole cohort — the “Scored” column is that count. Averaging an absent facet as zero would score our own coverage gaps as the providers’ posture.
| Artifact | This cohort | Catalog | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| MCP server (any) | 62% | 13% | +49 |
| MCP server (first-party) | 63% | 12% | +51 |
| Agent Skills | 0% | 0% | 0 |
| OAuth scopes | 31% | 11% | +20 |
| Security | 100% | 98% | +2 |
| Arazzo workflows | 2% | 2% | 0 |
| Governance rules | 15% | 16% | -1 |
mcp_pct counts any mcp/ artifact including ones API Evangelist derived from the provider OpenAPI; mcp_first_party_pct counts only servers the provider publishes. Prefer the latter.
- 1 SMKlog 95.3
- 2 Anthropic 89
- 3 Eventwren 85.6
- 4 Hagglebee 84.3
- 5 Yarnhen 84.3
- 6 Yawplet 84.3
- 7 Appwrite 82.3
- 8 Agoragentic 80.4
- 9 ElevenLabs 80.4
- 10 Kit 79.7
- 1 Eventwren 75
- 2 Hagglebee 75
- 3 Yarnhen 75
- 4 Yawplet 75
- 5 Agent Ready 74.4
- 6 Natural AI 71
- 7 CarsXE 69.1
- 8 Lightfield 67.4
- 9 The Colony 65.4
- 10 Parallel 64.7
Coverage caveat. 390 of 488 scored members had under half their catalog-attributable points satisfied at all (catalog_earned / catalog_max < 0.5). They are INCLUDED in the mean above. A large share here means the cohort mean is partly a measurement of how far our enrichment reached, not only of how these providers publish.Generated from the catalog build of 24 October 2026, across 31984 providers, using the same computation served by the APIs.io cohort API. Briefs are published for rosters of 5 or more scored providers; below that a distribution is not meaningful.
Work with this as data
Every tag here is available over the APIs.io API and to AI agents over MCP.