United States
Providers using this tag (308)
Ranked by API Evangelist rating — Exemplar and Strong are expanded by default.
Exemplar 11 Complete, well-documented, and agent-ready
Strong 15 Solid coverage with minor gaps
Developing 59 Usable, with meaningful gaps to close
Thin 51 Limited public surface area
Emerging 96 Early or largely undocumented
Minimal 76 Almost no public developer surface
APIs with this tag (120)
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 9 Solid coverage with minor gaps
Developing 11 Usable, with meaningful gaps to close
Thin 43 Limited public surface area
Emerging 47 Early or largely undocumented
Minimal 10 Almost no public developer surface
Companies reaching this through an API (2)
These companies publish an API, specification or operation carrying “United States” 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
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.
Cohort brief
Auto-generatedThe 302 providers in the APIs.io catalog tagged United States, 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 | 30.5 | 23.2 | +7.3 | 302 |
| Discoverability | 62.8 | 57.9 | +4.9 | 302 |
| Operational Transparency | 17.4 | 13 | +4.4 | 302 |
| Contract Quality | 21.4 | 17.2 | +4.2 | 302 |
| Access Clarity | 27.7 | 23.9 | +3.8 | 302 |
| Contract Governance | 9.6 | 6.5 | +3.1 | 302 |
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) | 11% | 13% | -2 |
| MCP server (first-party) | 8% | 12% | -4 |
| Agent Skills | 0% | 0% | 0 |
| OAuth scopes | 25% | 11% | +14 |
| Security | 100% | 98% | +2 |
| Arazzo workflows | 2% | 2% | 0 |
| Governance rules | 16% | 16% | 0 |
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 Plaid 84.6
- 2 Elation Health 79.4
- 3 Hive Civilization 74.7
- 4 Oracle Hospitality 74
- 5 Dwolla 72.9
- 6 SCVD General Store 72.2
- 7 8x8 71.3
- 8 1upHealth 70.6
- 9 Clix 67.9
- 10 Zoom Phone 67.9
- 1 SCVD General Store 64.1
- 2 PostalForm 59
- 3 Zoom Phone 54.4
- 4 Dwolla 53.9
- 5 Photon 52.6
- 6 Shift4 52.4
- 7 Plaid 52.1
- 8 OptionsAhoy 50.2
- 9 LVL LTD CO 48
- 10 Vim 47.8
Coverage caveat. 273 of 302 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.