JSON:API
Providers using this tag (34)
Ranked by API Evangelist rating — Exemplar and Strong are expanded by default.
Exemplar 1 Complete, well-documented, and agent-ready
Strong 9 Solid coverage with minor gaps
Developing 8 Usable, with meaningful gaps to close
Thin 10 Limited public surface area
Emerging 5 Early or largely undocumented
Minimal 1 Almost no public developer surface
APIs with this tag (6)
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 →
Strong 1 Solid coverage with minor gaps
Developing 2 Usable, with meaningful gaps to close
Thin 2 Limited public surface area
Emerging 1 Early or largely undocumented
Companies reaching this through an API (4)
These companies publish an API, specification or operation carrying “JSON:API” 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 34 providers in the APIs.io catalog tagged JSON:API, 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 | 45.5 | 18.2 | +27.3 | 34 |
| Developer Ergonomics | 45.2 | 22.1 | +23.1 | 34 |
| Operational Transparency | 27.6 | 12.4 | +15.2 | 34 |
| Contract Governance | 21.3 | 9.4 | +11.9 | 34 |
| Discoverability | 69.2 | 57.9 | +11.3 | 34 |
| Access Clarity | 35 | 25 | +10 | 34 |
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) | 29% | 16% | +13 |
| MCP server (first-party) | 24% | 14% | +10 |
| Agent Skills | 0% | 0% | 0 |
| OAuth scopes | 38% | 13% | +25 |
| Security | 100% | 98% | +2 |
| Arazzo workflows | 9% | 2% | +7 |
| Governance rules | 82% | 35% | +47 |
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 Apibara.tech 69.3
- 2 Unit 66
- 3 NationBuilder 65
- 4 Social Fetch 64.5
- 5 Cobot 62.6
- 6 Commerce Layer 59.9
- 7 Beyond Pricing 57.7
- 8 Credo AI 56.7
- 9 Drupal 55.9
- 10 Decisiv 54.7
- 1 Cobot 58.6
- 2 Social Fetch 57.1
- 3 Padlet 52.3
- 4 Apibara.tech 52
- 5 VergeSense 50.9
- 6 Beyond Pricing 47.1
- 7 Decisiv 46.4
- 8 Transistor 45.6
- 9 Drupal 43.8
- 10 Ankorstore 38.9
Coverage caveat. 25 of 34 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 7 November 2026, across 38912 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.