Campaign Management
Campaign ManagementCampaign management
Providers using this tag (43)
Ranked by API Evangelist rating — Exemplar and Strong are expanded by default.
Exemplar 4 Complete, well-documented, and agent-ready
Strong 14 Solid coverage with minor gaps
Developing 14 Usable, with meaningful gaps to close
Thin 5 Limited public surface area
Emerging 4 Early or largely undocumented
Minimal 1 Almost no public developer surface
Unrated 1 Not yet scored
APIs with this tag (13)
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 3 Complete, well-documented, and agent-ready
Strong 2 Solid coverage with minor gaps
Developing 3 Usable, with meaningful gaps to close
Thin 2 Limited public surface area
Emerging 3 Early or largely undocumented
Companies reaching this through an API (8)
These companies publish an API, specification or operation carrying “Campaign 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 41 providers in the APIs.io catalog tagged Campaign Management, scored on the Kin Score. Every figure below is computed from the catalog — nothing here is written.
| Facet | This cohort | Catalog | Difference | Scored |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Operational Transparency | 44.3 | 14 | +30.3 | 41 |
| Developer Ergonomics | 53.7 | 23.4 | +30.3 | 41 |
| Contract Quality | 49.9 | 19.8 | +30.1 | 41 |
| Access Clarity | 54.2 | 26.5 | +27.7 | 41 |
| Discoverability | 70.5 | 61.2 | +9.3 | 41 |
| Contract Governance | 15.4 | 6.4 | +9 | 41 |
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) | 33% | 10% | +23 |
| MCP server (first-party) | 36% | 13% | +23 |
| Agent Skills | 0% | 0% | 0 |
| OAuth scopes | 60% | 11% | +49 |
| Security | 98% | 97% | +1 |
| Arazzo workflows | 5% | 2% | +3 |
| Governance rules | 29% | 14% | +15 |
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 Adobe Campaign 74.9
- 2 Google Ads 71.5
- 3 MoEngage 71.5
- 4 SAP Emarsys 71
- 5 Adobe Experience Cloud 66
- 6 CreatorIQ 65.4
- 7 Google Campaign Manager 65.3
- 8 MediaMath 64.5
- 9 Silverpop 63.3
- 10 MOLOCO 62.7
- 1 MoEngage 67.8
- 2 Knak 58.8
- 3 MOLOCO 57
- 4 NextRoll 52.2
- 5 Playable 49.1
- 6 MediaMath 48
- 7 MadHive 44.1
- 8 Basis 43.3
- 9 Google Ads 41.8
- 10 Adobe Experience Cloud 41
Work with this as data
Every tag here is available over the APIs.io API and to AI agents over MCP.