OAuth
OAuth2OAuth 2.0OAuth
Providers using this tag (241)
Ranked by API Evangelist rating — Exemplar and Strong are expanded by default.
Exemplar 13 Complete, well-documented, and agent-ready
Strong 35 Solid coverage with minor gaps
Developing 69 Usable, with meaningful gaps to close
Thin 76 Limited public surface area
Emerging 42 Early or largely undocumented
Minimal 6 Almost no public developer surface
APIs with this tag (815)
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 63 Complete, well-documented, and agent-ready
Strong 113 Solid coverage with minor gaps
Developing 224 Usable, with meaningful gaps to close
Thin 252 Limited public surface area
Emerging 150 Early or largely undocumented
Minimal 13 Almost no public developer surface
Companies reaching this through an API (654)
These companies publish an API, specification or operation carrying “OAuth” 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 654 companies ↓
Score breakdown
Where this tag sits
Related tags
Where this tag comes from
Cohort brief
Auto-generatedThe 236 providers in the APIs.io catalog tagged OAuth, 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 | 45.9 | 23.8 | +22.1 | 236 |
| Contract Quality | 32.6 | 17.7 | +14.9 | 236 |
| Access Clarity | 40.9 | 26.5 | +14.4 | 236 |
| Operational Transparency | 27 | 13.2 | +13.8 | 236 |
| Discoverability | 69.6 | 58 | +11.6 | 236 |
| Contract Governance | 13.3 | 7 | +6.3 | 236 |
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% | 15% | +9 |
| MCP server (first-party) | 22% | 13% | +9 |
| Agent Skills | 0% | 0% | 0 |
| OAuth scopes | 66% | 12% | +54 |
| Security | 100% | 98% | +2 |
| Arazzo workflows | 6% | 2% | +4 |
| Governance rules | 23% | 18% | +5 |
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 Kinde
- 2 Microsoft Entra ID (formerly Azure AD)
- 3 Cvent Registration
- 4 Cvent
- 5 Clerk
- 6 Auth0
- 7 Authentik
- 8 AWeber
- 9 Strivacity
- 10 Cvent Event Cloud
- 1 Taskfolk {"score" => 69.1, "band" => "agent-native"}
- 2 Kann KI das? Sponsoring Agent {"score" => 68, "band" => "agent-native"}
- 3 1F916 {"score" => 66.4, "band" => "agent-ready"}
- 4 Comunicate.top API {"score" => 60.7, "band" => "agent-ready"}
- 5 Cobot {"score" => 58.6, "band" => "agent-ready"}
- 6 Lacuna {"score" => 58.1, "band" => "agent-ready"}
- 7 Microsoft Entra ID (formerly Azure AD) {"score" => 57.9, "band" => "agent-ready"}
- 8 Cvent Hospitality Cloud {"score" => 57.2, "band" => "agent-ready"}
- 9 Flume Health {"score" => 53.2, "band" => "agent-ready"}
- 10 Photon {"score" => 52.6, "band" => "agent-ready"}
Coverage caveat. 183 of 236 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 2 November 2026, across 37080 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.