Directory
Providers using this tag (108)
Ranked by API Evangelist rating — Exemplar and Strong are expanded by default.
Exemplar 2 Complete, well-documented, and agent-ready
Strong 1 Solid coverage with minor gaps
Developing 27 Usable, with meaningful gaps to close
Thin 22 Limited public surface area
Emerging 40 Early or largely undocumented
APIs with this tag (78)
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 6 Complete, well-documented, and agent-ready
Strong 16 Solid coverage with minor gaps
Developing 24 Usable, with meaningful gaps to close
Thin 22 Limited public surface area
Emerging 6 Early or largely undocumented
Minimal 4 Almost no public developer surface
Companies reaching this through an API (70)
These companies publish an API, specification or operation carrying “Directory” 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 70 companies ↓
Score breakdown
Related tags
Where this tag comes from
Cohort brief
Auto-generatedThe 96 providers in the APIs.io catalog tagged Directory, 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 | 36.3 | 30 | +6.3 | 96 |
| Discoverability | 63.9 | 59.1 | +4.8 | 96 |
| Contract Governance | 13.4 | 9.7 | +3.7 | 96 |
| Contract Quality | 20.9 | 18.6 | +2.3 | 96 |
| Developer Ergonomics | 24.6 | 24.5 | +0.1 | 96 |
| Operational Transparency | 12 | 13.2 | -1.2 | 96 |
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) | 48% | 18% | +30 |
| MCP server (first-party) | 48% | 16% | +32 |
| Agent Skills | 0% | 0% | 0 |
| OAuth scopes | 14% | 13% | +1 |
| Security | 100% | 99% | +1 |
| Arazzo workflows | 0% | 1% | -1 |
| Governance rules | 51% | 36% | +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 Anchor Terminal 68.4
- 2 Google Admin SDK 67.8
- 3 surfingdog-ai 61.1
- 4 CurlShip 54.1
- 5 ADHDEvaluations 52.1
- 6 Rett fra Bonden 51.5
- 7 Skills Directory 51.3
- 8 MCPBundles 50.8
- 9 Meta Agent Tools 49.7
- 10 DeFi Fintech Directory 49.5
- 1 surfingdog-ai 65.1
- 2 AllMCPs 64.1
- 3 AI Alt Finder 53.5
- 4 Alternativas IA 53.5
- 5 joinsandwich-com 52.7
- 6 IA Selecta 50.4
- 7 Agent Web Map 48.8
- 8 Meta Agent Tools 46.6
- 9 CurlShip 45.3
- 10 Rett fra Bonden 43.9
Coverage caveat. 66 of 96 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.