IoT
Internet of ThingsIoT
Providers using this tag (521)
Ranked by API Evangelist rating — Exemplar and Strong are expanded by default.
Exemplar 8 Complete, well-documented, and agent-ready
Strong 33 Solid coverage with minor gaps
Developing 76 Usable, with meaningful gaps to close
Thin 86 Limited public surface area
Emerging 136 Early or largely undocumented
Minimal 181 Almost no public developer surface
Unrated 1 Not yet scored
APIs with this tag (122)
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 8 Complete, well-documented, and agent-ready
Strong 29 Solid coverage with minor gaps
Developing 19 Usable, with meaningful gaps to close
Thin 32 Limited public surface area
Emerging 26 Early or largely undocumented
Minimal 8 Almost no public developer surface
Companies reaching this through an API (22)
These companies publish an API, specification or operation carrying “IoT” 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
521 providers carry this tag directly, and 583 counting the 2 narrower tags below — 62 more to reach.
Related tags
Where this tag comes from
Cohort brief
Auto-generatedThe 490 providers in the APIs.io catalog tagged IoT, scored on the Kin Score. Every figure below is computed from the catalog — nothing here is written.
| Facet | This cohort | Catalog | Difference | Scored |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Developer Ergonomics | 26.8 | 23.2 | +3.6 | 490 |
| Contract Quality | 19.4 | 17.6 | +1.8 | 490 |
| Discoverability | 59.8 | 58.1 | +1.7 | 490 |
| Contract Governance | 7.3 | 6.3 | +1 | 490 |
| Operational Transparency | 13.9 | 13.7 | +0.2 | 490 |
| Access Clarity | 26.7 | 26.5 | +0.2 | 490 |
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) | 11% | 14% | -3 |
| MCP server (first-party) | 7% | 12% | -5 |
| Agent Skills | 0% | 0% | 0 |
| OAuth scopes | 13% | 11% | +2 |
| Security | 99% | 98% | +1 |
| Arazzo workflows | 2% | 2% | 0 |
| Governance rules | 15% | 14% | +1 |
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 Losant 83.1
- 2 Telnyx 79.6
- 3 The Things Network / The Things Stack 79.2
- 4 Twilio 77.8
- 5 Hubble Network 70.4
- 6 Edge Impulse 69.4
- 7 Amazon FreeRTOS 67.3
- 8 Cumulocity 67
- 9 Orange Business 64.9
- 10 Shodan 64.4
- 1 Telnyx 83.6
- 2 Losant 62.3
- 3 ev.energy 53.3
- 4 Facilio 51.6
- 5 Kontakt.io 50.5
- 6 Aedifion 47.8
- 7 PubNub 45.2
- 8 Telia Company 44.8
- 9 ETSI 43.7
- 10 Orange Business 43.5
Work with this as data
Every tag here is available over the APIs.io API and to AI agents over MCP.