Rewards
Providers using this tag (118)
Ranked by API Evangelist rating — Exemplar and Strong are expanded by default.
Developing 10 Usable, with meaningful gaps to close
Thin 23 Limited public surface area
Emerging 34 Early or largely undocumented
Minimal 42 Almost no public developer surface
Unrated 1 Not yet scored
APIs with this tag (84)
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 6 Complete, well-documented, and agent-ready
Strong 10 Solid coverage with minor gaps
Developing 19 Usable, with meaningful gaps to close
Thin 23 Limited public surface area
Emerging 21 Early or largely undocumented
Minimal 5 Almost no public developer surface
Companies reaching this through an API (49)
These companies publish an API, specification or operation carrying “Rewards” 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
118 providers carry this tag directly, and 119 counting the 1 narrower tag below — 1 more to reach.
Related tags
Where this tag comes from
Cohort brief
Auto-generatedThe 111 providers in the APIs.io catalog tagged Rewards, 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 | 25.4 | 23.2 | +2.2 | 111 |
| Contract Quality | 19.1 | 17.2 | +1.9 | 111 |
| Discoverability | 59.5 | 57.9 | +1.6 | 111 |
| Access Clarity | 25.2 | 23.9 | +1.3 | 111 |
| Contract Governance | 6 | 6.5 | -0.5 | 111 |
| Operational Transparency | 11.5 | 13 | -1.5 | 111 |
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) | 15% | 13% | +2 |
| MCP server (first-party) | 12% | 12% | 0 |
| Agent Skills | 0% | 0% | 0 |
| OAuth scopes | 17% | 11% | +6 |
| Security | 98% | 98% | 0 |
| Arazzo workflows | 0% | 2% | -2 |
| 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 Thanx 74.4
- 2 Antavo 66.8
- 3 Extole 65.2
- 4 Talkable 61.3
- 5 Goody 60.1
- 6 Friendbuy 59.8
- 7 Reachdesk 56.7
- 8 CrowdTwist 54.6
- 9 Accrue Savings 53.6
- 10 Hang 53.3
- 1 Goody 63.4
- 2 Talkable 60.3
- 3 Reachdesk 56.3
- 4 Extole 52.8
- 5 LoyaltyLion 41.7
- 6 Thanx 41.2
- 7 Imprint 41
- 8 Accrue Savings 39.2
- 9 NIFT 38.9
- 10 Kard 37.1
Coverage caveat. 103 of 111 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.