Smart Metering
Providers using this tag (62)
Ranked by API Evangelist rating — Exemplar and Strong are expanded by default.
Strong 13 Solid coverage with minor gaps
Developing 17 Usable, with meaningful gaps to close
Thin 16 Limited public surface area
Emerging 12 Early or largely undocumented
Minimal 4 Almost no public developer surface
APIs with this tag (5)
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 →
Strong 1 Solid coverage with minor gaps
Thin 3 Limited public surface area
Emerging 1 Early or largely undocumented
Score breakdown
Where this tag sits
Related tags
Where this tag comes from
Markets provisional
Kin Score markets whose measured providers carry this tag. Share is the fraction of the market's measured providers that carry it — it describes the market, not this tag.
| Market | Share of the market's providers |
|---|---|
| Carbon Accounting Disclosure Standards (SBTi, PCAF, CDP, GHG Protocol) | 21% |
Cohort brief
Auto-generatedThe 62 providers in the APIs.io catalog tagged Smart Metering, 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 | 41.3 | 23.2 | +18.1 | 62 |
| Operational Transparency | 30.9 | 13 | +17.9 | 62 |
| Contract Quality | 29 | 17.2 | +11.8 | 62 |
| Contract Governance | 14 | 6.5 | +7.5 | 62 |
| Access Clarity | 31.4 | 23.9 | +7.5 | 62 |
| Discoverability | 64.6 | 57.9 | +6.7 | 62 |
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% | 13% | -11 |
| MCP server (first-party) | 2% | 12% | -10 |
| Agent Skills | 0% | 0% | 0 |
| OAuth scopes | 45% | 11% | +34 |
| Security | 100% | 98% | +2 |
| Arazzo workflows | 2% | 2% | 0 |
| Governance rules | 13% | 16% | -3 |
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 Enphase Energy 65.2
- 2 Amber Electric 64.8
- 3 EDF Energy 62.2
- 4 UK Power Networks 61.7
- 5 Electricity North West 59.6
- 6 Origin Energy 59.6
- 7 Consumer Data Right (Energy) 57.1
- 8 Pacific Gas and Electric 55.5
- 9 Red Energy 55
- 10 Endeavour Energy 54.9
- 1 Amber Electric 47.5
- 2 Southern California Edison 41.7
- 3 Green Button Alliance 41.2
- 4 EDF Energy 40.3
- 5 Origin Energy 40.3
- 6 AEMO 39.2
- 7 Pacific Gas and Electric 38.6
- 8 Consumer Data Right (Energy) 37.8
- 9 UK Power Networks 37.3
- 10 Scottish and Southern Electricity Networks 37.3
Coverage caveat. 54 of 62 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.