Industrial
IndustrialsIndustrial
Providers using this tag (206)
Ranked by API Evangelist rating — Exemplar and Strong are expanded by default.
Developing 11 Usable, with meaningful gaps to close
Thin 15 Limited public surface area
Emerging 40 Early or largely undocumented
Minimal 139 Almost no public developer surface
Unrated 1 Not yet scored
APIs with this tag (22)
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 →
Developing 8 Usable, with meaningful gaps to close
Thin 3 Limited public surface area
Emerging 2 Early or largely undocumented
Minimal 9 Almost no public developer surface
Companies reaching this through an API (3)
These companies publish an API, specification or operation carrying “Industrial” 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
Where this tag sits
206 providers carry this tag directly, and 367 counting the 5 narrower tags below — 161 more to reach.
Related tags
Where this tag comes from
Cohort brief
Auto-generatedThe 183 providers in the APIs.io catalog tagged Industrial, 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 | 3.5 | 6.5 | -3 | 183 |
| Discoverability | 53.3 | 57.9 | -4.6 | 183 |
| Operational Transparency | 6 | 13 | -7 | 183 |
| Access Clarity | 13.4 | 23.9 | -10.5 | 183 |
| Developer Ergonomics | 12.4 | 23.2 | -10.8 | 183 |
| Contract Quality | 5.7 | 17.2 | -11.5 | 183 |
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) | 3% | 13% | -10 |
| MCP server (first-party) | 2% | 12% | -10 |
| Agent Skills | 0% | 0% | 0 |
| OAuth scopes | 3% | 11% | -8 |
| Security | 99% | 98% | +1 |
| Arazzo workflows | 0% | 2% | -2 |
| Governance rules | 7% | 16% | -9 |
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 Paperless Parts 54.1
- 2 Cloud Studio IoT 52.3
- 3 Remberg 48
- 4 GE Vernova 45.6
- 5 Emerson Electric 44.5
- 6 Eaton 43.8
- 7 Cognite 43.5
- 8 Renesas 43.5
- 9 Cosmo Tech 43.1
- 10 Siemens Insights Hub (MindSphere) 41.9
- 1 Emerson Electric 46.9
- 2 Renesas 42
- 3 GE Vernova 41.5
- 4 Paperless Parts 36.9
- 5 Siemens 36.6
- 6 Cognite 31.6
- 7 Helmerich & Payne 30.6
- 8 Siemens Insights Hub (MindSphere) 30.2
- 9 Remberg 29.8
- 10 Cosmo Tech 29.4
Coverage caveat. 176 of 183 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.