Automation
Automationautomation
Providers using this tag (486)
Ranked by API Evangelist rating — Exemplar and Strong are expanded by default.
Exemplar 16 Complete, well-documented, and agent-ready
Strong 43 Solid coverage with minor gaps
Developing 92 Usable, with meaningful gaps to close
Thin 76 Limited public surface area
Emerging 112 Early or largely undocumented
Minimal 141 Almost no public developer surface
APIs with this tag (326)
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 31 Complete, well-documented, and agent-ready
Strong 72 Solid coverage with minor gaps
Developing 105 Usable, with meaningful gaps to close
Thin 80 Limited public surface area
Emerging 33 Early or largely undocumented
Minimal 5 Almost no public developer surface
Companies reaching this through an API (185)
These companies publish an API, specification or operation carrying “Automation” 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 185 companies ↓
Score breakdown
Related tags
Where this tag comes from
Cohort brief
Auto-generatedThe 461 providers in the APIs.io catalog tagged Automation, 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 | 34.1 | 26.5 | +7.6 | 461 |
| Developer Ergonomics | 29.8 | 23.4 | +6.4 | 461 |
| Contract Quality | 24.5 | 19.8 | +4.7 | 461 |
| Operational Transparency | 18.3 | 14 | +4.3 | 461 |
| Contract Governance | 8.8 | 6.4 | +2.4 | 461 |
| Discoverability | 62.1 | 61.2 | +0.9 | 461 |
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) | 18% | 10% | +8 |
| MCP server (first-party) | 23% | 13% | +10 |
| Agent Skills | 0% | 0% | 0 |
| OAuth scopes | 16% | 11% | +5 |
| Security | 99% | 97% | +2 |
| Arazzo workflows | 5% | 2% | +3 |
| Governance rules | 18% | 14% | +4 |
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 Xquik 87.6
- 2 Brevo 87.3
- 3 Tray.ai 87.1
- 4 Dynatrace 86.5
- 5 Ada 83.2
- 6 Kit 82.8
- 7 Salesforce Marketing Cloud 82.6
- 8 Klaviyo 79.1
- 9 MailerLite 77.3
- 10 Adobe Suite 75.6
- 1 Xquik 91.4
- 2 Duvo Ai 63.1
- 3 Adobe Suite 62.3
- 4 Kit 60.4
- 5 Tray.ai 57.9
- 6 Salesforce Marketing Cloud 57.9
- 7 Brevo 54.8
- 8 Klaviyo 54.4
- 9 MailerLite 54.3
- 10 Postiz 52.7
Work with this as data
Every tag here is available over the APIs.io API and to AI agents over MCP.