Commerce
Providers using this tag (249)
Ranked by API Evangelist rating — Exemplar and Strong are expanded by default.
Exemplar 15 Complete, well-documented, and agent-ready
Strong 22 Solid coverage with minor gaps
Developing 48 Usable, with meaningful gaps to close
Thin 58 Limited public surface area
Emerging 59 Early or largely undocumented
Minimal 45 Almost no public developer surface
Unrated 2 Not yet scored
APIs with this tag (205)
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 47 Complete, well-documented, and agent-ready
Strong 29 Solid coverage with minor gaps
Developing 33 Usable, with meaningful gaps to close
Thin 47 Limited public surface area
Emerging 48 Early or largely undocumented
Minimal 1 Almost no public developer surface
Companies reaching this through an API (78)
These companies publish an API, specification or operation carrying “Commerce” 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 78 companies ↓
Score breakdown
Where this tag sits
249 providers carry this tag directly, and 3594 counting the 6 narrower tags below and the 20 beneath them — 3345 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.
| Market | Share of the market's providers |
|---|---|
| Commerce and CRM | 24% |
Cohort brief
Auto-generatedThe 222 providers in the APIs.io catalog tagged Commerce, 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 | 35.3 | 24.5 | +10.8 | 222 |
| Access Clarity | 38.4 | 30 | +8.4 | 222 |
| Contract Quality | 26.2 | 18.6 | +7.6 | 222 |
| Operational Transparency | 19.6 | 13.2 | +6.4 | 222 |
| Discoverability | 65.2 | 59.1 | +6.1 | 222 |
| Contract Governance | 14.4 | 9.7 | +4.7 | 222 |
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) | 38% | 18% | +20 |
| MCP server (first-party) | 23% | 16% | +7 |
| Agent Skills | 0% | 0% | 0 |
| OAuth scopes | 34% | 13% | +21 |
| Security | 99% | 99% | 0 |
| Arazzo workflows | 3% | 1% | +2 |
| Governance rules | 46% | 36% | +10 |
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 HubSpot 91.9
- 2 Salesforce 88
- 3 Lightspeed Commerce 85.3
- 4 Shopify 83.8
- 5 Stripe 82
- 6 Kit 80.4
- 7 Optimizely 78.1
- 8 Adobe Suite 75.9
- 9 Mirakl 74.9
- 10 Facebook Business Manager 72.8
- 1 twelfth-ai 75.4
- 2 Kit 64.4
- 3 Mirakl 63.4
- 4 Goody 63.4
- 5 Optimizely 62.9
- 6 Adobe Suite 59.9
- 7 Medusa 59.1
- 8 Stripe 58.5
- 9 Walmart 57.3
- 10 Gr4vy 55
Coverage caveat. 176 of 222 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 14 November 2026, across 41591 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.