established · -2.5 capability schema

SMART on FHIR

Score 26.0 / 100 43 providers +5 via APIs 25 APIs Search apis.io →

Providers using this tag (43)

Ranked by API Evangelist rating — Exemplar and Strong are expanded by default.

Exemplar 7 Complete, well-documented, and agent-ready
Strong 5 Solid coverage with minor gaps
Developing 15 Usable, with meaningful gaps to close
Thin 11 Limited public surface area
Emerging 4 Early or largely undocumented
Minimal 1 Almost no public developer surface

APIs with this tag (25)

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 5 Complete, well-documented, and agent-ready
Strong 5 Solid coverage with minor gaps
Developing 9 Usable, with meaningful gaps to close
Thin 4 Limited public surface area
Emerging 2 Early or largely undocumented

Companies reaching this through an API (5)

These companies publish an API, specification or operation carrying “SMART on FHIR” 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.

athenahealth AWS HealthLake Defense Health Agency Rhapsody University of California, Davis

Score breakdown

Frequency
48.9
log-scaled weighted occurrences
Breadth
1.0
spread across providers
Quality lift
46.6
mean composite of providers using it
Cohesion
28.1
strength of nearest seed neighbor

Where this tag sits

FHIR broader

Related tags

FHIR 44 co-occurrences US Core 12 co-occurrences HL7 24 co-occurrences Patient Access 17 co-occurrences Provider Directory 13 co-occurrences

Where this tag comes from

Provider tag44
Api tag25

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.

Cohort brief

Auto-generated

The 42 providers in the APIs.io catalog tagged SMART on FHIR, scored on the Kin Score. Every figure below is computed from the catalog — nothing here is written.

Providers
42
of 43 in the catalog
Mean Kin Score
45.4
+23.2 vs catalog 22.2
Mean Agent Readiness
31.2
+19.2 vs catalog 12
Spread
11.8–79.4
median 44.9 · σ 17.3
How the 42 split by band
Exemplar 7Strong 5Developing 15Thin 11Emerging 4Minimal 0
Facet averages, against the whole catalog
FacetThis cohortCatalogDifferenceScored
Contract Quality 44.8 17.2 +27.6 42
Developer Ergonomics 47 23.2 +23.8 42
Access Clarity 40.6 23.9 +16.7 42
Operational Transparency 27.3 13 +14.3 42
Contract Governance 19.5 6.5 +13 42
Discoverability 70.1 57.9 +12.2 42

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.

What this cohort publishes
ArtifactThis cohortCatalogDifference
MCP server (any) 19% 13% +6
MCP server (first-party) 19% 12% +7
Agent Skills 0% 0% 0
OAuth scopes 79% 11% +68
Security 100% 98% +2
Arazzo workflows 10% 2% +8
Governance rules 31% 16% +15

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.

Top by Kin Score
  1. 1 Elation Health 79.4
  2. 2 drchrono 77
  3. 3 Medplum 71.7
  4. 4 Health Gorilla 71.6
  5. 5 1upHealth 70.6
  6. 6 eClinicalWorks 67.5
  7. 7 NextGen Healthcare 66.6
  8. 8 Epic Systems 62.5
  9. 9 Medblocks 61.6
  10. 10 Aidbox 57.8
Top by Agent Readiness
  1. 1 Medblocks 66.3
  2. 2 Medplum 55.8
  3. 3 ModMed 49.8
  4. 4 Centene 47.7
  5. 5 Elation Health 43.4
  6. 6 Health Gorilla 43.4
  7. 7 Aidbox 41.6
  8. 8 Aetna 41.3
  9. 9 eClinicalWorks 40.1
  10. 10 drchrono 40
All 43 members of this roster resolve to a provider in the catalog; 42 carry a score (98%). The figures above describe the scored members only.
Coverage caveat. 29 of 42 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.

MCP server

One button, every client — Claude, Cursor, VS Code and the rest.

https://apis.io/mcp

Tools for tags

7 MCP tools reach this
  • find_tagsBrowse and filter every tag in the catalog.
  • get_cohortThis tag as a scored cohort — every provider carrying it, with scores.
  • cohort_statsPRO — the distribution across this tag: mean, median, band split, adoption rates.
  • cohort_rankingsPRO — the leaderboard, on composite AND agent-readiness axes.
  • apis_io_searchSTART HERE — APIs, providers and tags for one query, each with its total.
  • resolveTurn a domain, URL or GitHub org into the provider it belongs to.
  • find_cohortsEvery scored population of providers in the catalog.
All 92 tools →

Call it yourself

curl for this page
This tag
curl "https://apis.io/api/v1/tags/smart-on-fhir"
All tags
curl "https://apis.io/api/v1/tags?limit=25"
As a scored cohort
curl "https://apis.io/api/v1/cohorts/tag/smart-on-fhir"
The distribution (Pro)
curl "https://apis.io/api/v1/cohorts/tag/smart-on-fhir/stats" \
  -H "X-API-Key: $APIS_IO_KEY"

Discovery needs no key. Ratings and market analysis are Pro.

Get an API key

Free tier, no form to fill in. Signing in shares your email address with us — we store it to create your key and to recognise you if you sign in with another provider. See our Privacy Policy and Terms.

A second provider on the same verified email joins the account you already have.