Life Sciences
Life ScienceLife Sciences
Providers using this tag (1085)
Ranked by API Evangelist rating — Exemplar and Strong are expanded by default.
Strong 7 Solid coverage with minor gaps
Developing 31 Usable, with meaningful gaps to close
Thin 46 Limited public surface area
Emerging 266 Early or largely undocumented
Minimal 717 Almost no public developer surface
APIs with this tag (9)
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 3 Complete, well-documented, and agent-ready
Thin 1 Limited public surface area
Emerging 5 Early or largely undocumented
Companies reaching this through an API (2)
These companies publish an API, specification or operation carrying “Life Sciences” 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
1086 providers carry this tag directly, and 1633 counting the 17 narrower tags below and the 22 beneath them — 548 more to reach.
Related tags
Where this tag comes from
Cohort brief
Auto-generatedThe 938 providers in the APIs.io catalog tagged Life Sciences, 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 | 3.4 | 6.3 | -2.9 | 938 |
| Discoverability | 53.7 | 58.1 | -4.4 | 938 |
| Access Clarity | 16.4 | 26.5 | -10.1 | 938 |
| Operational Transparency | 3.4 | 13.7 | -10.3 | 938 |
| Developer Ergonomics | 10.8 | 23.2 | -12.4 | 938 |
| Contract Quality | 4 | 17.6 | -13.6 | 938 |
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) | 7% | 14% | -7 |
| MCP server (first-party) | 3% | 12% | -9 |
| Agent Skills | 0% | 0% | 0 |
| OAuth scopes | 5% | 11% | -6 |
| Security | 98% | 98% | 0 |
| Arazzo workflows | 0% | 2% | -2 |
| Governance rules | 3% | 14% | -11 |
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 Clarivate 74.7
- 2 Veeva 72.8
- 3 Benchling 64.5
- 4 Prezent 58.6
- 5 Amazon HealthOmics 57.7
- 6 Seqera Labs 57.3
- 7 Datavant 56.5
- 8 One Codex 55.8
- 9 TileDB 55
- 10 Gencove 53.7
- 1 Prezent 59.5
- 2 Aignostics 46
- 3 Authenticx 44.1
- 4 Veeva 41.5
- 5 Benchling 41.3
- 6 Rhizome Ai 39.4
- 7 A2 Biotherapeutics 38.3
- 8 Metabolon 37.1
- 9 TileDB 36.5
- 10 Slingshot Biosciences 36.2
Coverage caveat. 911 of 938 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 5 October 2026, across 29093 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.