emerging · -1.4 market domain

Time Tracking

Score 22.7 / 100 84 providers +13 via APIs 29 APIs Search apis.io →
Business capabilities this tag reaches
Human Capital Management 6

Providers using this tag (84)

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

Exemplar 4 Complete, well-documented, and agent-ready
Strong 5 Solid coverage with minor gaps
Developing 19 Usable, with meaningful gaps to close
Thin 32 Limited public surface area
Workday Tracking SystemAbsence ManagementAttendanceEnterpriseHCM13 APIs35.1PracticePantherLegalLaw Practice ManagementCase ManagementBilling1 API34.8PlandayCompanySoftware-as-a-ServiceWorkforce ManagementScheduling1 API34.3Teamwork.comProject ManagementClient ServicesTask Management1 API33.8ClockifyTimesheetsProductivityProject Management1 API33.6HubstaffTimesheetsWorkforce ManagementProductivity1 API33.0EverhourTimesheetsProductivityProject Management1 API31.1FreshBooksAccountingInvoicingExpense Tracking1 API31.0TimeCampTimesheetsProductivityAttendance1 API30.4PersonioHuman ResourcesHRISRecruitingApplicant Tracking1 API29.8HiveProject ManagementTask ManagementTeam CollaborationProductivity1 API29.5AcceloProfessional Services AutomationProject ManagementCRM1 API28.6TimeSolvCompanyLegal TechBilling27.2ClockodoAbsence ManagementBillingProject ManagementStopclock1 API38.8CORCompanyAgency ManagementProject Management2 APIs38.6forecastCompanyProject ManagementResource ManagementProfessional Services Automation1 API37.7When I WorkEmployee SchedulingWorkforce ManagementTime Clock1 API37.6SmokeballLegalLaw FirmsPractice ManagementMatter1 API36.8MyCaseBillingCalendaringCase ManagementClient Portal1 API35.1Nova LimaCompanyProject ManagementTask ManagementWork Management1 API35.1HakunaCompanyHuman ResourcesWorkforce Management1 API34.3MosaicResource ManagementWorkforce PlanningProject ManagementAEC1 API33.3TimeularCompanyProductivityTime Management11 APIs33.2Toggl TrackProductivityProject ManagementBilling1 API32.8PaylocityHuman ResourcesPayrollHCMBenefits1 API32.4Ceki.meArtificial IntelligenceProductivityMarketplaceCollaboration2 APIs30.9Time DoctorCompanyWorkforce ManagementProductivity1 API29.9Kanban ToolAgileBoardsKanbanProject Management12 APIs29.1RakenConstructionConstruction ManagementDaily ReportingField Management1 API28.8Sesame HRHuman ResourcesHRISWorkforce Management1 API27.5BonsaiCompanyB2BBusiness ManagementFreelancing27.2KenjoHuman ResourcesHRISEmployee ManagementHR Software1 API26.6
Emerging 19 Early or largely undocumented
Minimal 5 Almost no public developer surface

APIs with this tag (29)

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 5 Solid coverage with minor gaps
Developing 8 Usable, with meaningful gaps to close
Thin 6 Limited public surface area
Emerging 4 Early or largely undocumented

Companies reaching this through an API (13)

These companies publish an API, specification or operation carrying “Time Tracking” 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.

Atlassian Deel Hubflo Jira Leapsome Microsoft Dynamics 365 Oyster HR Reonic Rippling ServiceTitan Workable Workday Studio Zoho

Score breakdown

Frequency
53.2
log-scaled weighted occurrences
Breadth
1.1
spread across providers
Quality lift
34.3
mean composite of providers using it
Cohesion
15.2
strength of nearest seed neighbor

Related tags

Project Management 36 co-occurrences Workforce Management 24 co-occurrences Timesheets 14 co-occurrences Time Off 12 co-occurrences Attendance 11 co-occurrences Payroll 26 co-occurrences Employees 15 co-occurrences

Where this tag comes from

Provider tag84
Api tag29
Openapi tag8
Openapi op tag31

Cohort brief

Auto-generated

The 82 providers in the APIs.io catalog tagged Time Tracking, scored on the Kin Score. Every figure below is computed from the catalog — nothing here is written.

Providers
82
of 84 in the catalog
Mean Kin Score
34.3
+10.2 vs catalog 24.1
Mean Agent Readiness
22.8
+8.7 vs catalog 14.1
Spread
4.3–72.6
median 33.3 · σ 16.1
How the 82 split by band
Exemplar 4Strong 5Developing 18Thin 31Emerging 19Minimal 5
Facet averages, against the whole catalog
FacetThis cohortCatalogDifferenceScored
Contract Quality 32.7 18.6 +14.1 82
Developer Ergonomics 34.6 24.5 +10.1 82
Access Clarity 39.6 30 +9.6 82
Discoverability 65.3 59.1 +6.2 82
Operational Transparency 19.4 13.2 +6.2 82
Contract Governance 14.1 9.7 +4.4 82

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) 22% 18% +4
MCP server (first-party) 22% 16% +6
Agent Skills 0% 0% 0
OAuth scopes 23% 13% +10
Security 98% 99% -1
Arazzo workflows 5% 1% +4
Governance rules 63% 36% +27

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 Clickup 72.6
  2. 2 Intuit 70.8
  3. 3 Rocketlane 68.6
  4. 4 Connecteam 68.4
  5. 5 Timely (Memory AS) 66.3
  6. 6 HourSquare 61.7
  7. 7 Mavenlink 58.1
  8. 8 LeanLaw 57.4
  9. 9 WakaTime 55.6
  10. 10 Teambridge 53.7
Top by Agent Readiness
  1. 1 Mavenlink 61.7
  2. 2 Clockodo 58.8
  3. 3 Clickup 57
  4. 4 TimeCamp 50.5
  5. 5 COR 48.8
  6. 6 Factorial 48.5
  7. 7 LeanLaw 47.7
  8. 8 vigotime-com 47.7
  9. 9 Connecteam 46.7
  10. 10 Nova Lima 46.4
All 84 members of this roster resolve to a provider in the catalog; 82 carry a score (98%). The figures above describe the scored members only.
Coverage caveat. 60 of 82 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 14 November 2026, across 41591 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/time-tracking"
All tags
curl "https://apis.io/api/v1/tags?limit=25"
As a scored cohort (paid plan)
The distribution (Pro)

Calls without X-API-Key need no key. Calls with it need a paid plan — get a key.

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.