E-Signature
E-SignaturesE-Signature
Providers using this tag (64)
Ranked by API Evangelist rating — Exemplar and Strong are expanded by default.
Strong 9 Solid coverage with minor gaps
Developing 26 Usable, with meaningful gaps to close
Thin 18 Limited public surface area
Emerging 5 Early or largely undocumented
Minimal 2 Almost no public developer surface
Unrated 1 Not yet scored
APIs with this tag (21)
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 3 Solid coverage with minor gaps
Developing 7 Usable, with meaningful gaps to close
Thin 7 Limited public surface area
Minimal 1 Almost no public developer surface
Companies reaching this through an API (10)
These companies publish an API, specification or operation carrying “E-Signature” 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 62 providers in the APIs.io catalog tagged E-Signature, scored on the Kin Score. Every figure below is computed from the catalog — nothing here is written.
| Facet | This cohort | Catalog | Difference | Scored |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Contract Quality | 46.3 | 17.6 | +28.7 | 62 |
| Access Clarity | 49 | 26.5 | +22.5 | 62 |
| Operational Transparency | 32.2 | 13.7 | +18.5 | 62 |
| Developer Ergonomics | 38.7 | 23.2 | +15.5 | 62 |
| Discoverability | 67.1 | 58.1 | +9 | 62 |
| Contract Governance | 10.7 | 6.3 | +4.4 | 62 |
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) | 32% | 14% | +18 |
| MCP server (first-party) | 29% | 12% | +17 |
| Agent Skills | 0% | 0% | 0 |
| OAuth scopes | 37% | 11% | +26 |
| Security | 98% | 98% | 0 |
| Arazzo workflows | 6% | 2% | +4 |
| Governance rules | 33% | 14% | +19 |
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 80.4
- 2 Docusign 69.8
- 3 Conga 68
- 4 imgauth — API di attestazione opere digitali 65.7
- 5 JuriSign 65.3
- 6 GetAccept 63.8
- 7 Firma.dev 60.5
- 8 Dropbox Sign (HelloSign) 59.6
- 9 GoNitro 56.8
- 10 Nitro Software 56
- 1 Adobe 65
- 2 Anvil 57.9
- 3 Common Paper 51.1
- 4 Conga 50.5
- 5 FormAssembly 50.4
- 6 Lone Wolf Technologies 49.3
- 7 Sadq 48.2
- 8 DocSend 47.1
- 9 Dropbox Sign (HelloSign) 44.8
- 10 Qwilr 44.6
Work with this as data
Every tag here is available over the APIs.io API and to AI agents over MCP.