Project Management
Providers using this tag (153)
Ranked by API Evangelist rating — Exemplar and Strong are expanded by default.
Exemplar 6 Complete, well-documented, and agent-ready
Strong 15 Solid coverage with minor gaps
Developing 35 Usable, with meaningful gaps to close
Thin 37 Limited public surface area
Emerging 31 Early or largely undocumented
Minimal 26 Almost no public developer surface
Unrated 3 Not yet scored
APIs with this tag (58)
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 8 Complete, well-documented, and agent-ready
Strong 11 Solid coverage with minor gaps
Developing 19 Usable, with meaningful gaps to close
Thin 10 Limited public surface area
Emerging 10 Early or largely undocumented
Companies reaching this through an API (23)
These companies publish an API, specification or operation carrying “Project Management” 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.
Score breakdown
Where this tag sits
153 providers carry this tag directly, and 155 counting the 1 narrower tag below — 2 more to reach.
Related tags
Where this tag comes from
Cohort brief
Auto-generatedThe 139 providers in the APIs.io catalog tagged Project Management, 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 | 31.6 | 17.6 | +14 | 139 |
| Access Clarity | 40.4 | 26.5 | +13.9 | 139 |
| Operational Transparency | 25.1 | 13.7 | +11.4 | 139 |
| Developer Ergonomics | 33.7 | 23.2 | +10.5 | 139 |
| Discoverability | 63.5 | 58.1 | +5.4 | 139 |
| Contract Governance | 7.2 | 6.3 | +0.9 | 139 |
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) | 23% | 14% | +9 |
| MCP server (first-party) | 20% | 12% | +8 |
| Agent Skills | 0% | 0% | 0 |
| OAuth scopes | 25% | 11% | +14 |
| Security | 98% | 98% | 0 |
| Arazzo workflows | 4% | 2% | +2 |
| Governance rules | 22% | 14% | +8 |
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 Azure DevOps 76.3
- 2 Jira 76.3
- 3 Trello 74.8
- 4 Clickup 71.9
- 5 Adobe Workfront 70.3
- 6 Asana 69.7
- 7 Erxes 65.6
- 8 Zoho 65.1
- 9 Taskfolk 64.7
- 10 Agave 61.3
- 1 Taskfolk 69.2
- 2 Jira 65.6
- 3 Mavenlink 61.3
- 4 Adobe Workfront 60.8
- 5 Clickup 60.3
- 6 Shortcut Software 55.6
- 7 TimeCamp 54.2
- 8 Asana 53.6
- 9 Monday.com 52.2
- 10 Epsilon3 50
Work with this as data
Every tag here is available over the APIs.io API and to AI agents over MCP.