Open Data
Open DataOpen dataOpen-DataOpenDataopen dataopen-data
Providers using this tag (556)
Ranked by API Evangelist rating — Exemplar and Strong are expanded by default.
Exemplar 4 Complete, well-documented, and agent-ready
Strong 25 Solid coverage with minor gaps
Developing 126 Usable, with meaningful gaps to close
Thin 127 Limited public surface area
Emerging 186 Early or largely undocumented
Minimal 87 Almost no public developer surface
Unrated 1 Not yet scored
APIs with this tag (576)
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
Strong 24 Solid coverage with minor gaps
Developing 143 Usable, with meaningful gaps to close
Thin 129 Limited public surface area
Emerging 194 Early or largely undocumented
Minimal 82 Almost no public developer surface
Companies reaching this through an API (80)
These companies publish an API, specification or operation carrying “Open Data” 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 80 companies ↓
Score breakdown
Related tags
Where this tag comes from
Cohort brief
Auto-generatedThe 551 providers in the APIs.io catalog tagged Open Data, scored on the Kin Score. Every figure below is computed from the catalog — nothing here is written.
| Facet | This cohort | Catalog | Difference | Scored |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Discoverability | 67 | 61.2 | +5.8 | 551 |
| Operational Transparency | 19.3 | 14 | +5.3 | 551 |
| Contract Quality | 24.8 | 19.8 | +5 | 551 |
| Contract Governance | 8.6 | 6.4 | +2.2 | 551 |
| Access Clarity | 28.3 | 26.5 | +1.8 | 551 |
| Developer Ergonomics | 24.1 | 23.4 | +0.7 | 551 |
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) | 2% | 10% | -8 |
| MCP server (first-party) | 3% | 13% | -10 |
| Agent Skills | 0% | 0% | 0 |
| OAuth scopes | 12% | 11% | +1 |
| Security | 99% | 97% | +2 |
| Arazzo workflows | 2% | 2% | 0 |
| Governance rules | 27% | 14% | +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 OpenMercantil 88.2
- 2 OpenSanctions 74.6
- 3 Plinth US Grants Data 66.7
- 4 University of Waterloo 66.5
- 5 UK Power Networks 66
- 6 EPA — U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 65.2
- 7 La Poste Groupe 64.5
- 8 Electricity North West 64
- 9 General Services Administration 62.2
- 10 Barclays 62
- 1 OpenGov 63.1
- 2 Comunicate.top API 57
- 3 Plinth US Grants Data 54.9
- 4 OpenMercantil 46.6
- 5 Barclays 46.5
- 6 We > Ultrarich 46
- 7 AI Crawler Index 45.2
- 8 Bank of Ireland (UK) 45.1
- 9 Bargo Congress Trades API 44.8
- 10 Hydro-Québec 43.1
Work with this as data
Every tag here is available over the APIs.io API and to AI agents over MCP.