Location Intelligence
Providers using this tag (26)
Ranked by API Evangelist rating — Exemplar and Strong are expanded by default.
Exemplar 1 Complete, well-documented, and agent-ready
Strong 1 Solid coverage with minor gaps
Developing 6 Usable, with meaningful gaps to close
Thin 6 Limited public surface area
Emerging 9 Early or largely undocumented
Minimal 3 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 →
Strong 1 Solid coverage with minor gaps
Developing 4 Usable, with meaningful gaps to close
Thin 1 Limited public surface area
Emerging 2 Early or largely undocumented
Minimal 1 Almost no public developer surface
Companies reaching this through an API (2)
These companies publish an API, specification or operation carrying “Location Intelligence” 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 26 providers in the APIs.io catalog tagged Location Intelligence, 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 | 33 | 23.4 | +9.6 | 26 |
| Access Clarity | 33.3 | 26.5 | +6.8 | 26 |
| Discoverability | 66.1 | 61 | +5.1 | 26 |
| Contract Quality | 24.7 | 20.1 | +4.6 | 26 |
| Operational Transparency | 13 | 14 | -1 | 26 |
| Contract Governance | 4.5 | 6.5 | -2 | 26 |
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) | 27% | 10% | +17 |
| MCP server (first-party) | 19% | 13% | +6 |
| Agent Skills | 0% | 0% | 0 |
| OAuth scopes | 8% | 11% | -3 |
| Security | 100% | 96% | +4 |
| Arazzo workflows | 0% | 2% | -2 |
| Governance rules | 0% | 13% | -13 |
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 HERE 69.9
- 2 TELUS 54.3
- 3 VOYGR 53.5
- 4 PontoFato 49.6
- 5 Sheeva 44.6
- 6 Carto 44.3
- 7 Precisely APIs 39.8
- 8 Microburbs 39.3
- 9 GroundTruth 39.1
- 10 Maia-analytics 32
- 1 HERE 55.9
- 2 Microburbs 38.4
- 3 PontoFato 37.6
- 4 VOYGR 34.1
- 5 Sheeva 32.1
- 6 Maia-analytics 32.1
- 7 GroundTruth 31.6
- 8 Precisely APIs 28
- 9 Carto 26.8
- 10 Cosmose AI 26.4
Work with this as data
Every tag here is available over the APIs.io API and to AI agents over MCP.