OpenAPI
Providers using this tag (203)
Ranked by API Evangelist rating — Exemplar and Strong are expanded by default.
Exemplar 22 Complete, well-documented, and agent-ready
Strong 36 Solid coverage with minor gaps
Developing 47 Usable, with meaningful gaps to close
Thin 46 Limited public surface area
Emerging 42 Early or largely undocumented
Minimal 10 Almost no public developer surface
APIs with this tag (151)
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 36 Complete, well-documented, and agent-ready
Strong 19 Solid coverage with minor gaps
Developing 22 Usable, with meaningful gaps to close
Thin 37 Limited public surface area
Emerging 33 Early or largely undocumented
Minimal 4 Almost no public developer surface
Companies reaching this through an API (74)
These companies publish an API, specification or operation carrying “OpenAPI” 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 74 companies ↓
Score breakdown
Related tags
Where this tag comes from
Cohort brief
Auto-generatedThe 189 providers in the APIs.io catalog tagged OpenAPI, scored on the Kin Score. Every figure below is computed from the catalog — nothing here is written.
| Facet | This cohort | Catalog | Difference | Scored |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Contract Quality | 40.7 | 18.6 | +22.1 | 189 |
| Developer Ergonomics | 45.5 | 24.5 | +21 | 189 |
| Operational Transparency | 29.4 | 13.2 | +16.2 | 189 |
| Contract Governance | 22.2 | 9.7 | +12.5 | 189 |
| Access Clarity | 40.6 | 30 | +10.6 | 189 |
| Discoverability | 68.2 | 59.1 | +9.1 | 189 |
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) | 47% | 18% | +29 |
| MCP server (first-party) | 48% | 16% | +32 |
| Agent Skills | 0% | 0% | 0 |
| OAuth scopes | 22% | 13% | +9 |
| Security | 98% | 99% | -1 |
| Arazzo workflows | 4% | 1% | +3 |
| Governance rules | 78% | 36% | +42 |
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 APIs.io 91.9
- 2 Zoho CRM 85.4
- 3 Postman 82.5
- 4 Redocly 81.2
- 5 OpenMercantil 79.4
- 6 Scalar 76.4
- 7 0xArchive 74.9
- 8 Stoplight 74.1
- 9 APIVerve 73.9
- 10 Tvarka ATK API 73.9
- 1 APIs.io 79.5
- 2 Taskfolk 69.1
- 3 0xArchive 67
- 4 classifier-dev 65.2
- 5 Stotles 65
- 6 DeveloperHub 60.5
- 7 StayingAPI 60.2
- 8 Loa Healthcare Pricing API 60
- 9 Archbee 59.3
- 10 Statable Stats API 58.5
Coverage caveat. 105 of 189 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 14 November 2026, across 41591 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.