Tools
Providers using this tag (159)
Ranked by API Evangelist rating — Exemplar and Strong are expanded by default.
Strong 4 Solid coverage with minor gaps
Developing 26 Usable, with meaningful gaps to close
Thin 41 Limited public surface area
Emerging 60 Early or largely undocumented
Minimal 28 Almost no public developer surface
APIs with this tag (205)
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 16 Complete, well-documented, and agent-ready
Strong 52 Solid coverage with minor gaps
Developing 74 Usable, with meaningful gaps to close
Thin 47 Limited public surface area
Emerging 14 Early or largely undocumented
Minimal 2 Almost no public developer surface
Companies reaching this through an API (191)
These companies publish an API, specification or operation carrying “Tools” 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.
Show all 191 companies ↓
Score breakdown
Related tags
Where this tag comes from
Cohort brief
Auto-generatedThe 136 providers in the APIs.io catalog tagged Tools, 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 | 13.3 | 9.7 | +3.6 | 136 |
| Access Clarity | 33.3 | 30 | +3.3 | 136 |
| Discoverability | 61.4 | 59.1 | +2.3 | 136 |
| Contract Quality | 20.1 | 18.6 | +1.5 | 136 |
| Developer Ergonomics | 24.6 | 24.5 | +0.1 | 136 |
| Operational Transparency | 10.6 | 13.2 | -2.6 | 136 |
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) | 38% | 18% | +20 |
| MCP server (first-party) | 35% | 16% | +19 |
| Agent Skills | 0% | 0% | 0 |
| OAuth scopes | 15% | 13% | +2 |
| Security | 99% | 99% | 0 |
| Arazzo workflows | 1% | 1% | 0 |
| Governance rules | 55% | 36% | +19 |
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 jithox-com 65.9
- 2 Composio 62.6
- 3 Monid 58.4
- 4 Gatana 56.2
- 5 Agentik 53.9
- 6 archtools-dev 50.9
- 7 MCPBundles 50.8
- 8 Toolhouse 50.2
- 9 tektolo-com 49.2
- 10 AI Alt Finder 48
- 1 jithox-com 61.5
- 2 moltlinestudio-com 59.9
- 3 Agentik 59.3
- 4 AMNT 56.9
- 5 AI Alt Finder 53.5
- 6 Monid 52.2
- 7 IA Selecta 50.4
- 8 Agent Web Map 48.8
- 9 Agent Revenue Network 48.3
- 10 Evident 44.4
Coverage caveat. 106 of 136 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.