Incident Management
Providers using this tag (43)
Ranked by API Evangelist rating — Exemplar and Strong are expanded by default.
Exemplar 1 Complete, well-documented, and agent-ready
Strong 3 Solid coverage with minor gaps
Developing 14 Usable, with meaningful gaps to close
Thin 15 Limited public surface area
Emerging 8 Early or largely undocumented
APIs with this tag (32)
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 22 Solid coverage with minor gaps
Developing 3 Usable, with meaningful gaps to close
Thin 3 Limited public surface area
Emerging 2 Early or largely undocumented
Minimal 1 Almost no public developer surface
Companies reaching this through an API (6)
These companies publish an API, specification or operation carrying “Incident 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 42 providers in the APIs.io catalog tagged Incident Management, 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 | 45.3 | 19.8 | +25.5 | 42 |
| Access Clarity | 39.4 | 26.5 | +12.9 | 42 |
| Developer Ergonomics | 34 | 23.4 | +10.6 | 42 |
| Operational Transparency | 22.1 | 14 | +8.1 | 42 |
| Discoverability | 67.6 | 61.2 | +6.4 | 42 |
| Contract Governance | 9.4 | 6.4 | +3 | 42 |
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) | 26% | 10% | +16 |
| MCP server (first-party) | 29% | 13% | +16 |
| Agent Skills | 0% | 0% | 0 |
| OAuth scopes | 19% | 11% | +8 |
| Security | 100% | 97% | +3 |
| Arazzo workflows | 2% | 2% | 0 |
| Governance rules | 26% | 14% | +12 |
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 BigPanda 70.3
- 2 FireHydrant 65.5
- 3 Moogsoft 61.2
- 4 ScienceLogic 59.5
- 5 Aclaimant 54.2
- 6 Amazon Incident Manager 52
- 7 Everbridge 51.3
- 8 Antimetal 49.9
- 9 Lightup 48.9
- 10 OpsGenie 48.3
- 1 Antimetal 54.3
- 2 Superlog 52.9
- 3 ScienceLogic 47.9
- 4 Everbridge 41.8
- 5 BigPanda 41
- 6 PagerDuty 37.8
- 7 Amazon Incident Manager 34.5
- 8 FireHydrant 34.2
- 9 Traversal 34.2
- 10 Spike.sh 34.2
Work with this as data
Every tag here is available over the APIs.io API and to AI agents over MCP.