Appointments
Providers using this tag (34)
Ranked by API Evangelist rating — Exemplar and Strong are expanded by default.
Exemplar 3 Complete, well-documented, and agent-ready
Developing 5 Usable, with meaningful gaps to close
Thin 11 Limited public surface area
Emerging 6 Early or largely undocumented
Minimal 7 Almost no public developer surface
APIs with this tag (90)
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 6 Complete, well-documented, and agent-ready
Strong 13 Solid coverage with minor gaps
Developing 18 Usable, with meaningful gaps to close
Thin 29 Limited public surface area
Emerging 16 Early or largely undocumented
Minimal 8 Almost no public developer surface
Companies reaching this through an API (76)
These companies publish an API, specification or operation carrying “Appointments” 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 76 companies ↓
Score breakdown
Where this tag sits
Related tags
Where this tag comes from
Cohort brief
Auto-generatedThe 34 providers in the APIs.io catalog tagged Appointments, scored on the Kin Score. Every figure below is computed from the catalog — nothing here is written.
| Facet | This cohort | Catalog | Difference | Scored |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Access Clarity | 35.3 | 23.9 | +11.4 | 34 |
| Contract Quality | 28.5 | 17.2 | +11.3 | 34 |
| Developer Ergonomics | 33.3 | 23.2 | +10.1 | 34 |
| Operational Transparency | 20.2 | 13 | +7.2 | 34 |
| Discoverability | 63.3 | 57.9 | +5.4 | 34 |
| Contract Governance | 8.5 | 6.5 | +2 | 34 |
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) | 9% | 13% | -4 |
| MCP server (first-party) | 6% | 12% | -6 |
| Agent Skills | 0% | 0% | 0 |
| OAuth scopes | 24% | 11% | +13 |
| Security | 100% | 98% | +2 |
| Arazzo workflows | 3% | 2% | +1 |
| 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 drchrono 77
- 2 ZnanyLekarz 74.3
- 3 eClinicalWorks 67.5
- 4 Healthie 66.1
- 5 Zocdoc 58.3
- 6 NexHealth 51.9
- 7 Booksy 49.2
- 8 Best Practice Software 48
- 9 Coviu 48
- 10 Zoca 47.8
- 1 Zocdoc 50.1
- 2 SavvyCal 48.1
- 3 ZnanyLekarz 44.1
- 4 eClinicalWorks 40.1
- 5 drchrono 40
- 6 Provet Cloud 32.9
- 7 NexHealth 32.8
- 8 Coviu 30.7
- 9 Zoca 30.4
- 10 Healthie 27.6
Coverage caveat. 28 of 34 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.