API Design
Providers using this tag (39)
Ranked by API Evangelist rating — Exemplar and Strong are expanded by default.
Developing 7 Usable, with meaningful gaps to close
Thin 7 Limited public surface area
Emerging 16 Early or largely undocumented
Minimal 5 Almost no public developer surface
APIs with this tag (23)
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 2 Complete, well-documented, and agent-ready
Strong 1 Solid coverage with minor gaps
Developing 3 Usable, with meaningful gaps to close
InsomniaInsomnia is an open-source, cross-platform API development platform by Kong for designing, debugging, and t...MuleSoft Anypoint Design Center APIThe Anypoint Design Center API provides access to the MuleSoft web-based API design environment for creatin...API BlueprintAPI Blueprint is a high-level API design language created by Apiary for designing and documenting web APIs....
Thin 3 Limited public surface area
API BlueprintAPI Blueprint is a high-level API description language using Markdown-based syntax for designing, documenti...Apicurio StudioApicurio Studio is a visual, zero-code API design tool for creating and editing OpenAPI and AsyncAPI specif...TypeSpec CompilerThe TypeSpec compiler processes `.tsp` TypeSpec files and emits output for configured emitters (OpenAPI, JS...
Emerging 12 Early or largely undocumented
Smithy IDLThe Smithy Interface Definition Language (IDL) is a specification for defining API models using shapes and ...APIwizAPIwiz is a low-code, end-to-end API management platform enabling the complete API lifecycle including desi...SpectralSpectral is a flexible JSON/YAML linter and style guide enforcer with built-in support for OpenAPI (v3.1, v...Header-Based VersioningHeader-based versioning passes the API version in a custom HTTP request header (e.g., API-Version: 2026-04-...URI Path VersioningURI path versioning embeds the API version in the URL path, typically as the major version number (e.g., /v...JSON:APIJSON:API is a specification for how a client should request that resources be fetched or modified, and how ...OpenAPI SpecificationThe OpenAPI Specification (OAS) defines a standard, language-agnostic interface to RESTful APIs which allow...SpecLynxStop wrestling with OpenAPI specs. SpecLynx OpenAPI Toolkit delivers the most effective way to author and m...SpecLynx ApiDOMA unified semantic parsing engine that underpins all SpecLynx products. ApiDOM parses OpenAPI, AsyncAPI, Ar...SpecLynx EditorA browser-based OpenAPI editor with real-time validation, smart autocompletion, and live preview. No instal...SpecLynx Language ServiceAn LSP-compatible npm library (@speclynx/apidom-ls) providing 13 intelligent editing capabilities for API d...SpecLynx OpenAPI ToolkitA VS Code extension providing semantic editing, real-time validation, linting, and live preview for OpenAPI...
Minimal 2 Almost no public developer surface
Companies reaching this through an API (2)
These companies publish an API, specification or operation carrying “API Design” 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.
Score breakdown
Frequency
47.9
log-scaled weighted occurrences
Breadth
0.9
spread across providers
Quality lift
30.7
mean composite of providers using it
Cohesion
13.3
strength of nearest seed neighbor
Where this tag sits
Related tags
API Lifecycle 6 co-occurrences
API Testing 10 co-occurrences
API Documentation 7 co-occurrences
OpenAPI 21 co-occurrences
JSON Schema 6 co-occurrences
Mocking 5 co-occurrences
API Governance 5 co-occurrences
Specification 7 co-occurrences
Where this tag comes from
Provider tag40
Api tag23
Cohort brief
Auto-generatedThe 38 providers in the APIs.io catalog tagged API Design, scored on the Kin Score. Every figure below is computed from the catalog — nothing here is written.
Providers
38
of 40 in the catalog
Mean Kin Score
30.1
+7.9 vs catalog 22.2
Mean Agent Readiness
14
+2 vs catalog 12
Spread
1.7–78
median 25.7 · σ 18.3
How the 38 split by band
Exemplar 2Strong 2Developing 7Thin 7Emerging 15Minimal 5
Facet averages, against the whole catalog
| Facet | This cohort | Catalog | Difference | Scored |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Contract Governance | 18 | 6.5 | +11.5 | 38 |
| Contract Quality | 27.7 | 17.2 | +10.5 | 38 |
| Operational Transparency | 22.1 | 13 | +9.1 | 38 |
| Developer Ergonomics | 32.1 | 23.2 | +8.9 | 38 |
| Discoverability | 60.6 | 57.9 | +2.7 | 38 |
| Access Clarity | 24.1 | 23.9 | +0.2 | 38 |
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.
What this cohort publishes
| Artifact | This cohort | Catalog | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| MCP server (any) | 18% | 13% | +5 |
| MCP server (first-party) | 13% | 12% | +1 |
| Agent Skills | 0% | 0% | 0 |
| OAuth scopes | 5% | 11% | -6 |
| Security | 95% | 98% | -3 |
| Arazzo workflows | 5% | 2% | +3 |
| Governance rules | 58% | 16% | +42 |
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.
Top by Kin Score
Top by Agent Readiness
- 1 Postman 55.6
- 2 Routebase 52.8
- 3 RapidAPI 33.2
- 4 Stoplight 32.9
- 5 APIOps Cycles Canvas 32.9
- 6 Hey API 32.4
- 7 Zally 30.2
- 8 API Blueprint 29.7
- 9 Apiary 28.7
- 10 Apidog 26.1
All 40 members of this roster resolve to a provider in the
catalog; 38 carry a score (95%).
The figures above describe the scored members only.
Coverage caveat. 23 of 38 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.
Coverage caveat. 23 of 38 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.