Biotechnology
BiotechBiotechnology
Providers using this tag (1194)
Ranked by API Evangelist rating — Exemplar and Strong are expanded by default.
Exemplar 1 Complete, well-documented, and agent-ready
Developing 8 Usable, with meaningful gaps to close
Thin 20 Limited public surface area
Emerging 154 Early or largely undocumented
Minimal 994 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 →
Thin 1 Limited public surface area
Emerging 2 Early or largely undocumented
Minimal 2 Almost no public developer surface
Companies reaching this through an API (1)
These companies publish an API, specification or operation carrying “Biotechnology” 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
Where this tag sits
1194 providers carry this tag directly, and 1225 counting the 15 narrower tags below — 31 more to reach.
Related tags
Where this tag comes from
Markets provisional
Kin Score markets whose measured providers carry this tag. Share is the fraction of the market's measured providers that carry it — it describes the market, not this tag.
Cohort brief
Auto-generatedThe 946 providers in the APIs.io catalog tagged Biotechnology, scored on the Kin Score. Every figure below is computed from the catalog — nothing here is written.
| Facet | This cohort | Catalog | Difference | Scored |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Discoverability | 51.6 | 57.9 | -6.3 | 946 |
| Contract Governance | 1.9 | 9.4 | -7.5 | 946 |
| Operational Transparency | 1.3 | 12.4 | -11.1 | 946 |
| Access Clarity | 10.7 | 25 | -14.3 | 946 |
| Developer Ergonomics | 6.3 | 22.1 | -15.8 | 946 |
| Contract Quality | 1.4 | 18.2 | -16.8 | 946 |
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) | 5% | 16% | -11 |
| MCP server (first-party) | 1% | 14% | -13 |
| Agent Skills | 0% | 0% | 0 |
| OAuth scopes | 3% | 13% | -10 |
| Security | 98% | 98% | 0 |
| Arazzo workflows | 0% | 2% | -2 |
| Governance rules | 3% | 35% | -32 |
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 Benchling 72.2
- 2 Aignostics 51.7
- 3 Element Biosciences 50.5
- 4 Biodock 49.4
- 5 Dyno 48.7
- 6 Cenevo 44.4
- 7 Metabolon 43.2
- 8 Aclid 40.4
- 9 TetraScience 40.1
- 10 Biogen 39.2
- 1 Aignostics 47.2
- 2 Benchling 44.2
- 3 A2 Biotherapeutics 39.6
- 4 Metabolon 36.8
- 5 Slingshot Biosciences 36.2
- 6 Cenevo 33.9
- 7 Aclid 33.2
- 8 Biogen 32.9
- 9 TetraScience 32.3
- 10 Dyno 31.9
Coverage caveat. 939 of 946 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 7 November 2026, across 38912 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.