Government
Providers using this tag (383)
Ranked by API Evangelist rating — Exemplar and Strong are expanded by default.
Exemplar 2 Complete, well-documented, and agent-ready
Strong 11 Solid coverage with minor gaps
Developing 39 Usable, with meaningful gaps to close
Thin 63 Limited public surface area
Emerging 112 Early or largely undocumented
Minimal 155 Almost no public developer surface
Unrated 1 Not yet scored
APIs with this tag (140)
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 1 Complete, well-documented, and agent-ready
Strong 12 Solid coverage with minor gaps
Developing 13 Usable, with meaningful gaps to close
Thin 16 Limited public surface area
Emerging 14 Early or largely undocumented
Minimal 84 Almost no public developer surface
Companies reaching this through an API (10)
These companies publish an API, specification or operation carrying “Government” 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
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 |
|---|---|
| Government Cloud (FedRAMP, GovRAMP, G-Cloud) | 44% |
| Government and Open Data | 42% |
Cohort brief
Auto-generatedThe 376 providers in the APIs.io catalog tagged Government, scored on the Kin Score. Every figure below is computed from the catalog — nothing here is written.
| Facet | This cohort | Catalog | Difference | Scored |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Contract Governance | 6.8 | 6.5 | +0.3 | 376 |
| Discoverability | 57.2 | 57.9 | -0.7 | 376 |
| Contract Quality | 16.1 | 17.2 | -1.1 | 376 |
| Operational Transparency | 11.5 | 13 | -1.5 | 376 |
| Developer Ergonomics | 20.4 | 23.2 | -2.8 | 376 |
| Access Clarity | 18.1 | 23.9 | -5.8 | 376 |
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) | 8% | 13% | -5 |
| MCP server (first-party) | 6% | 12% | -6 |
| Agent Skills | 0% | 0% | 0 |
| OAuth scopes | 7% | 11% | -4 |
| Security | 99% | 98% | +1 |
| Arazzo workflows | 2% | 2% | 0 |
| Governance rules | 16% | 16% | 0 |
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 TaskHawk Systems 69.4
- 2 PagoPA 69
- 3 Seekr 63.4
- 4 La Poste Groupe 60.5
- 5 Logius 58.7
- 6 Consumer Data Right (Energy) 57.1
- 7 EPA — U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 57
- 8 Paper and Beyond 57
- 9 General Services Administration 56.9
- 10 Open Government, New South Wales 56.7
- 1 Starbridge 61.6
- 2 OpenGov 61.3
- 3 Stotles 60.4
- 4 Govly 58.9
- 5 Paper and Beyond 52.5
- 6 Affinda 51.5
- 7 PagoPA 49.6
- 8 FormAssembly 47.9
- 9 TaskHawk Systems 47.8
- 10 NationGraph 44.7
Coverage caveat. 342 of 376 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 24 October 2026, across 31984 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.