Asset Management
Providers using this tag (155)
Ranked by API Evangelist rating — Exemplar and Strong are expanded by default.
Exemplar 1 Complete, well-documented, and agent-ready
Strong 5 Solid coverage with minor gaps
Developing 22 Usable, with meaningful gaps to close
Thin 20 Limited public surface area
Emerging 52 Early or largely undocumented
Minimal 55 Almost no public developer surface
APIs with this tag (46)
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 1 Complete, well-documented, and agent-ready
Strong 7 Solid coverage with minor gaps
Developing 11 Usable, with meaningful gaps to close
Thin 9 Limited public surface area
Emerging 15 Early or largely undocumented
Minimal 3 Almost no public developer surface
Companies reaching this through an API (21)
These companies publish an API, specification or operation carrying “Asset Management” 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 152 providers in the APIs.io catalog tagged Asset Management, 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 | 27.6 | 26.5 | +1.1 | 152 |
| Discoverability | 58.9 | 58.1 | +0.8 | 152 |
| Contract Governance | 6.7 | 6.3 | +0.4 | 152 |
| Contract Quality | 14.1 | 17.6 | -3.5 | 152 |
| Developer Ergonomics | 19.6 | 23.2 | -3.6 | 152 |
| Operational Transparency | 9.6 | 13.7 | -4.1 | 152 |
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% | 14% | -5 |
| MCP server (first-party) | 7% | 12% | -5 |
| Agent Skills | 0% | 0% | 0 |
| OAuth scopes | 13% | 11% | +2 |
| Security | 100% | 98% | +2 |
| Arazzo workflows | 1% | 2% | -1 |
| Governance rules | 13% | 14% | -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 Limble CMMS 75.4
- 2 Bentley Systems 63.8
- 3 Accruent 56
- 4 SewerAI 56
- 5 MaintainX 55.7
- 6 Amazon IoT SiteWise 55.5
- 7 73 Strings 53
- 8 Decisiv 51.6
- 9 Axonius 51.4
- 10 Atomicwork 51.2
- 1 OpenGov 63.1
- 2 Facilio 51.6
- 3 Decisiv 49
- 4 Cloudinary 45.7
- 5 Aerones 44.1
- 6 Freshservice 42.1
- 7 Limble CMMS 41.9
- 8 Accela 40
- 9 VTS 37.2
- 10 ServiceChannel 36.9
Work with this as data
Every tag here is available over the APIs.io API and to AI agents over MCP.