Architecture
Providers using this tag (50)
Ranked by API Evangelist rating — Exemplar and Strong are expanded by default.
Strong 2 Solid coverage with minor gaps
Developing 3 Usable, with meaningful gaps to close
Emerging 15 Early or largely undocumented
Minimal 24 Almost no public developer surface
APIs with this tag (5)
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 →
Developing 2 Usable, with meaningful gaps to close
Emerging 3 Early or largely undocumented
Companies reaching this through an API (4)
These companies publish an API, specification or operation carrying “Architecture” 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
Related tags
Where this tag comes from
Cohort brief
Auto-generatedThe 34 providers in the APIs.io catalog tagged Architecture, 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 | 29 | 26.5 | +2.5 | 34 |
| Discoverability | 57 | 58.1 | -1.1 | 34 |
| Contract Governance | 4.6 | 6.3 | -1.7 | 34 |
| Developer Ergonomics | 20.7 | 23.2 | -2.5 | 34 |
| Operational Transparency | 8.8 | 13.7 | -4.9 | 34 |
| Contract Quality | 11.6 | 17.6 | -6 | 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) | 12% | 14% | -2 |
| MCP server (first-party) | 12% | 12% | 0 |
| Agent Skills | 0% | 0% | 0 |
| OAuth scopes | 15% | 11% | +4 |
| Security | 100% | 98% | +2 |
| Arazzo workflows | 6% | 2% | +4 |
| Governance rules | 21% | 14% | +7 |
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 Autodesk 59.9
- 2 Amazon Well-Architected Tool 57.9
- 3 Autodesk Construction Cloud 50.6
- 4 AutoCAD 47.8
- 5 Eraser 41.5
- 6 Acelab 38.2
- 7 Newforma 36.8
- 8 Cove.Tool 33.2
- 9 Snaptrude 28
- 10 Twindo 24.7
- 1 Autodesk 44.6
- 2 Amazon Well-Architected Tool 34.5
- 3 Eraser 34.2
- 4 Newforma 33.9
- 5 Autodesk Construction Cloud 27.2
- 6 Acelab 25.5
- 7 Cove.Tool 22.1
- 8 AutoCAD 17.8
- 9 Snaptrude 5.4
- 10 Twindo 2.5
Coverage caveat. 29 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 5 October 2026, across 29093 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.