Content Management
Providers using this tag (114)
Ranked by API Evangelist rating — Exemplar and Strong are expanded by default.
Exemplar 7 Complete, well-documented, and agent-ready
Strong 14 Solid coverage with minor gaps
Developing 32 Usable, with meaningful gaps to close
Thin 26 Limited public surface area
Emerging 26 Early or largely undocumented
Minimal 8 Almost no public developer surface
Unrated 1 Not yet scored
APIs with this tag (63)
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 11 Complete, well-documented, and agent-ready
Strong 9 Solid coverage with minor gaps
Developing 18 Usable, with meaningful gaps to close
Thin 14 Limited public surface area
Emerging 11 Early or largely undocumented
Companies reaching this through an API (28)
These companies publish an API, specification or operation carrying “Content 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 112 providers in the APIs.io catalog tagged Content Management, 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 | 44.8 | 26.5 | +18.3 | 112 |
| Contract Quality | 36.6 | 19.8 | +16.8 | 112 |
| Developer Ergonomics | 37.7 | 23.4 | +14.3 | 112 |
| Operational Transparency | 27.5 | 13.9 | +13.6 | 112 |
| Discoverability | 69 | 61.2 | +7.8 | 112 |
| Contract Governance | 9.9 | 6.4 | +3.5 | 112 |
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) | 30% | 10% | +20 |
| MCP server (first-party) | 35% | 13% | +22 |
| Agent Skills | 0% | 0% | 0 |
| OAuth scopes | 27% | 11% | +16 |
| Security | 100% | 96% | +4 |
| Arazzo workflows | 5% | 2% | +3 |
| Governance rules | 19% | 14% | +5 |
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 Salesforce Marketing Cloud 82.6
- 2 Optimizely 77.4
- 3 Veeva 75.6
- 4 dotCMS 70.4
- 5 Prismic 68.9
- 6 Confluence 67.8
- 7 Showpad 66.5
- 8 Contensis 65.6
- 9 Acoustic 65.5
- 10 Progress Software 63.5
- 1 Archbee 60.6
- 2 Automattic 60.2
- 3 Salesforce Marketing Cloud 57.9
- 4 Prismic 53.6
- 5 Coda Project 53.3
- 6 Acoustic 53
- 7 Box 52.1
- 8 CI HUB 52
- 9 Confluence 51.6
- 10 The Picklr 51.3
Work with this as data
Every tag here is available over the APIs.io API and to AI agents over MCP.