Public APIs
Public APIPublic APIs
Providers using this tag (1168)
Ranked by API Evangelist rating — Exemplar and Strong are expanded by default.
Exemplar 2 Complete, well-documented, and agent-ready
Strong 9 Solid coverage with minor gaps
Developing 34 Usable, with meaningful gaps to close
Thin 37 Limited public surface area
Emerging 34 Early or largely undocumented
Minimal 1052 Almost no public developer surface
Showing the top 1,000 of 1,052 by rating. See them all →
APIs with this tag (23)
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 2 Complete, well-documented, and agent-ready
Strong 4 Solid coverage with minor gaps
Developing 9 Usable, with meaningful gaps to close
Thin 8 Limited public surface area
Companies reaching this through an API (22)
These companies publish an API, specification or operation carrying “Public APIs” 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
Related tags
Where this tag comes from
Cohort brief
Auto-generatedThe 1017 providers in the APIs.io catalog tagged Public APIs, scored on the Kin Score. Every figure below is computed from the catalog — nothing here is written.
| Facet | This cohort | Catalog | Difference | Scored |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Contract Governance | 2.4 | 6.5 | -4.1 | 1017 |
| Discoverability | 49.1 | 57.9 | -8.8 | 1017 |
| Operational Transparency | 3.4 | 13 | -9.6 | 1017 |
| Developer Ergonomics | 11.2 | 23.2 | -12 | 1017 |
| Contract Quality | 5 | 17.2 | -12.2 | 1017 |
| Access Clarity | 2.9 | 23.9 | -21 | 1017 |
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) | 4% | 13% | -9 |
| MCP server (first-party) | 4% | 12% | -8 |
| Agent Skills | 0% | 0% | 0 |
| OAuth scopes | 1% | 11% | -10 |
| Security | 100% | 98% | +2 |
| Arazzo workflows | 1% | 2% | -1 |
| Governance rules | 10% | 16% | -6 |
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 OpenSanctions 67.9
- 2 Mailboxlayer 67.4
- 3 Massive (formerly Polygon.io) 64.9
- 4 Kraken 64.4
- 5 Geekflare 61.6
- 6 WebScraping.AI 60
- 7 Open Government, New South Wales 56.7
- 8 Shodan 56.7
- 9 Tomorrow.io 56.3
- 10 IPinfo 56.2
- 1 WebScraping.AI 63.3
- 2 Massive (formerly Polygon.io) 59.9
- 3 Trove 45.1
- 4 Urantia Papers 44.1
- 5 Ron Swanson Quotes 38.3
- 6 apipj (MASTER BI TECNOLOGIA LTDA) 37.6
- 7 Tomorrow.io 37.4
- 8 AniList 36.6
- 9 Geekflare 36.2
- 10 chucknorris.io 35.5
Coverage caveat. 935 of 1017 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.