MCP
Model Context ProtocolMCP
Providers using this tag (1428)
Ranked by API Evangelist rating — Exemplar and Strong are expanded by default.
Exemplar 125 Complete, well-documented, and agent-ready
Strong 260 Solid coverage with minor gaps
Developing 408 Usable, with meaningful gaps to close
Thin 322 Limited public surface area
Emerging 287 Early or largely undocumented
APIs with this tag (1267)
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 135 Complete, well-documented, and agent-ready
Strong 228 Solid coverage with minor gaps
Developing 348 Usable, with meaningful gaps to close
Thin 276 Limited public surface area
Emerging 269 Early or largely undocumented
Minimal 11 Almost no public developer surface
Companies reaching this through an API (368)
These companies publish an API, specification or operation carrying “MCP” 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 368 companies ↓
Score breakdown
Where this tag sits
1428 providers carry this tag directly, and 1617 counting the 1 narrower tag below and the 1 beneath them — 189 more to reach.
Related tags
Where this tag comes from
Markets provisional
Kin Score markets whose measured providers carry this tag. Share is the fraction of the market's measured providers that carry it — it describes the market, not this tag.
Cohort brief
Auto-generatedThe 1425 providers in the APIs.io catalog tagged MCP, 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 | 49.5 | 23.2 | +26.3 | 1425 |
| Access Clarity | 48.5 | 23.9 | +24.6 | 1425 |
| Operational Transparency | 29.9 | 13 | +16.9 | 1425 |
| Discoverability | 71.7 | 57.9 | +13.8 | 1425 |
| Contract Quality | 30.1 | 17.2 | +12.9 | 1425 |
| Contract Governance | 15 | 6.5 | +8.5 | 1425 |
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) | 92% | 13% | +79 |
| MCP server (first-party) | 79% | 12% | +67 |
| Agent Skills | 0% | 0% | 0 |
| OAuth scopes | 48% | 11% | +37 |
| Security | 99% | 98% | +1 |
| Arazzo workflows | 4% | 2% | +2 |
| Governance rules | 13% | 16% | -3 |
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 Xquik 91.8
- 2 APIs.io 78.7
- 3 Telnyx 78.1
- 4 Eventwren 75
- 5 Hagglebee 75
- 6 Yarnhen 75
- 7 Yawplet 75
- 8 Agent Ready 74.4
- 9 DoiT 74.1
- 10 ClosedLoop AI 73.8
Coverage caveat. 1113 of 1425 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 24 October 2026, across 31984 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.