Location
Locationlocation
Providers using this tag (70)
Ranked by API Evangelist rating — Exemplar and Strong are expanded by default.
Exemplar 1 Complete, well-documented, and agent-ready
Strong 7 Solid coverage with minor gaps
Developing 17 Usable, with meaningful gaps to close
Thin 14 Limited public surface area
Emerging 15 Early or largely undocumented
Minimal 15 Almost no public developer surface
Unrated 1 Not yet scored
APIs with this tag (111)
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 14 Complete, well-documented, and agent-ready
Strong 16 Solid coverage with minor gaps
Developing 45 Usable, with meaningful gaps to close
Thin 19 Limited public surface area
Emerging 14 Early or largely undocumented
Minimal 3 Almost no public developer surface
Companies reaching this through an API (84)
These companies publish an API, specification or operation carrying “Location” 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.
Show all 84 companies ↓
Score breakdown
Related tags
Where this tag comes from
Cohort brief
Auto-generatedThe 65 providers in the APIs.io catalog tagged Location, 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 | 36.2 | 23.4 | +12.8 | 65 |
| Contract Quality | 31.7 | 19.8 | +11.9 | 65 |
| Operational Transparency | 23 | 14 | +9 | 65 |
| Discoverability | 66.8 | 61.2 | +5.6 | 65 |
| Access Clarity | 31.6 | 26.5 | +5.1 | 65 |
| Contract Governance | 7.7 | 6.4 | +1.3 | 65 |
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) | 24% | 10% | +14 |
| MCP server (first-party) | 26% | 13% | +13 |
| Agent Skills | 0% | 0% | 0 |
| OAuth scopes | 23% | 11% | +12 |
| Security | 98% | 97% | +1 |
| Arazzo workflows | 3% | 2% | +1 |
| 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 HERE 68.4
- 2 ESRI ArcGIS 65.8
- 3 Kontakt.io 65.3
- 4 Esri 64.9
- 5 positionstack 64.2
- 6 HyperTrack 59.4
- 7 Amazon Location Service 58
- 8 RoxyAPI 55.2
- 9 Azure Maps 50.6
- 10 Mireye 49.6
- 1 ESRI ArcGIS 56
- 2 HERE 55.9
- 3 Esri 53
- 4 Kontakt.io 51.8
- 5 Mireye 47.8
- 6 SK Telecom 43.7
- 7 HyperTrack 42.6
- 8 Paedae 42.3
- 9 MileIQ 39.8
- 10 Swift Navigation 37.1
Work with this as data
Every tag here is available over the APIs.io API and to AI agents over MCP.