Cloud Security
Providers using this tag (124)
Ranked by API Evangelist rating — Exemplar and Strong are expanded by default.
Exemplar 4 Complete, well-documented, and agent-ready
Strong 7 Solid coverage with minor gaps
Developing 24 Usable, with meaningful gaps to close
Thin 27 Limited public surface area
Emerging 31 Early or largely undocumented
Minimal 24 Almost no public developer surface
Unrated 7 Not yet scored
APIs with this tag (27)
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 4 Complete, well-documented, and agent-ready
Strong 1 Solid coverage with minor gaps
Developing 7 Usable, with meaningful gaps to close
Thin 8 Limited public surface area
Emerging 7 Early or largely undocumented
Companies reaching this through an API (3)
These companies publish an API, specification or operation carrying “Cloud Security” 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
124 providers carry this tag directly, and 125 counting the 1 narrower tag below — 1 more to reach.
Related tags
Where this tag comes from
Cohort brief
Auto-generatedThe 113 providers in the APIs.io catalog tagged Cloud Security, scored on the Kin Score. Every figure below is computed from the catalog — nothing here is written.
| Facet | This cohort | Catalog | Difference | Scored |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Developer Ergonomics | 32.5 | 23.2 | +9.3 | 113 |
| Operational Transparency | 20.6 | 13.7 | +6.9 | 113 |
| Contract Quality | 24 | 17.6 | +6.4 | 113 |
| Discoverability | 62.7 | 58.1 | +4.6 | 113 |
| Contract Governance | 10.4 | 6.3 | +4.1 | 113 |
| Access Clarity | 29.6 | 26.5 | +3.1 | 113 |
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) | 21% | 14% | +7 |
| MCP server (first-party) | 17% | 12% | +5 |
| Agent Skills | 0% | 0% | 0 |
| OAuth scopes | 13% | 11% | +2 |
| Security | 93% | 98% | -5 |
| Arazzo workflows | 3% | 2% | +1 |
| Governance rules | 22% | 14% | +8 |
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 Palo Alto Networks 76.9
- 2 Aembit 72.6
- 3 Tenable 67.5
- 4 CrowdStrike 67.1
- 5 Cisco Umbrella 62.1
- 6 Azure Key Vault 60.6
- 7 Armor 59.4
- 8 3-shake 57
- 9 Cisco Secure Firewall 56.4
- 10 JupiterOne 55.8
- 1 Aembit 54.6
- 2 Coro 44.6
- 3 Upwind 41.5
- 4 Armor 40.4
- 5 Tenable 39.2
- 6 Cisco Secure Firewall 39.2
- 7 CyCognito 38.7
- 8 Palo Alto Networks 36.9
- 9 CyberArk 35.7
- 10 CrowdStrike 35.1
Work with this as data
Every tag here is available over the APIs.io API and to AI agents over MCP.