◎ Discry Score
eden ai.com
ai · API
B
0 / 100
DISCOVERY0
COMPREHENSION0
Category leader: 99 (A)
Discry your API →
AI · RANK #26 OF 43

Eden AI is Good to agents.

Discry independently scored how well an AI agent can discover and understand the Eden AI API from what’s public — not whether it’s usable. Below: every signal we checked, what’s costing the score, and what to change.

Discry your API — freeView the docs ↗

SCORED UNDER RUBRIC 1.2 · A full re-launch under Discry Score 2.5 — a new behavioral instrument, not comparable to these scores — is in progress.

Discovery

45% of score · 81/100
OpenAPI specA machine-readable OpenAPI/Swagger spec agents can parse.Pass
llms.txtAn llms.txt index that points agents to the docs that matter.Pass
llms.txt qualityThe llms.txt is focused, current, and well under the size budget.Pass
llms-full.txtA full-text bundle agents can load in one request.Pass
AGENTS.mdAn AGENTS.md that tells coding agents how to build on the API.Fail
.well-known/mcp.jsonA discoverable MCP manifest at a well-known path.Pass
MCP registryThe API is listed in a public MCP registry.Fail
robots.txt AI directivesrobots.txt allows (or explicitly guides) AI crawlers.Pass
SitemapA sitemap so agents can enumerate the docs surface.Pass

Comprehension

55% of score · 93/100
Task-oriented descriptionsEndpoints described by what they accomplish, not just their shape.Pass
Realistic examplesRunnable, real-world request/response examples.Partial
Multi-step workflowsDocs that chain calls into complete jobs an agent can follow.Pass
Error-recovery guidanceDocumented failure modes and how to recover from them.Pass
Answer-first formatThe answer leads; preamble does not bury it.Pass
Capability boundariesClear limits — what the API can and cannot do.Pass
Naming consistencyConsistent, predictable naming across endpoints.Pass
Heading hierarchyClean heading structure agents can navigate.Pass
Markdown docsDocs available as clean markdown, not JS-rendered HTML only.Pass
Token efficiencyDocs are concise enough to fit an agent context window.Pass

What we found

  • An agent discovering Eden AI lands in strong shape: robots.txt carries an explicit Content-Signal (ai-train=yes, ai-input=yes), a 20KB structured llms.txt indexes every endpoint with one-line task descriptions, a 435KB llms-full.txt provides the full corpus as markdown, a valid OpenAPI 3.1.0 spec is publicly reachable at /docs/api-reference/v3-openapi.json, and a valid /.well-known/mcp.json advertises a live hosted MCP server (edenai.mintlify.dev/mcp, auth: none).
  • Every documentation page is available as clean markdown — each page has a .md twin and each HTML page opens by pointing agents to /docs/llms.txt — so an agent parsing the docs never has to fight JS-rendered layout to extract structure. Field naming is consistently snake_case throughout (job_id, file_id, total_tokens, provider_params).
  • Error handling is genuinely agent-usable: the docs include an HTTP status table that tells an agent what to DO — 429 means back off and retry or switch to a model with more headroom, 400 returns a typed validation error, 451 documents EU region gating with a programmatic code: region_not_allowed — and built-in fallbacks let the agent list backup models instead of writing retry logic.
  • The remaining discovery gaps are agent-native surfaces beyond the web: there is no AGENTS.md in the edenai GitHub org (including the official edenai-skill Claude Code skill repo), and Eden AI's live MCP server is not listed in the Glama/Smithery/PulseMCP registries — so an agent browsing MCP catalogs rather than crawling the docs would not find it.
  • Endpoint-reference request examples are auto-generated OpenAPI placeholders ("<string>", 123) even though the hand-written quickstart and guides use realistic values (model 'openai/gpt-4', Bearer YOUR_API_KEY, fallbacks). An agent copying a reference example gets the correct shape but must invent plausible model names and payloads itself.

What to change

Prioritized by impact on discoverability. You (or your docs platform) deploy these — Discry never touches your API.

  1. 01List the already-running Mintlify-hosted MCP server (declared in /.well-known/mcp.json) in the Glama, Smithery, and PulseMCP registries — the endpoint exists, so registry presence is the one missing discovery hop for agents that find tools via MCP catalogs. Fastest win.
  2. 02Add an AGENTS.md to the primary edenai GitHub repos (edenai-apis, edenai-skill, SDKs) with orientation for coding agents — setup, auth, and the OpenAI-compatible base URL. A rising standard that is currently absent and cheaply closed (highest-weight remaining discovery gap).
  3. 03Replace auto-generated placeholder values ("<string>", 123) in the OpenAPI endpoint-reference examples with realistic, copy-pasteable payloads (a real model id like 'openai/gpt-4o', a plausible prompt) so an agent can run a reference example without inventing values.
  4. 04Fix the 500 errors returned by some individual /api-reference/*.md and /v3/llms/*.md pages so reliable per-page clean markdown is fetchable directly, not only via the aggregated llms-full.txt.
  5. 05Document the Retry-After response header for 429s and add request-level idempotency keys to strengthen execution-layer guarantees for autonomous agent retries.

Execution coverage · INFORMATIONAL, UNSCORED

Whether an agent can actually complete a call and recover from errors is the deeper Audit layer — documented here, but not part of the Discry Score.

Bearer token (API key)Sandbox API tokenBYOK (bring-your-own provider key) Error format documented Rate limits documented Pagination documented Idempotency documented

Execution characteristics are well documented for an agent. Auth is a Bearer-token pattern (plus free sandbox tokens and BYOK); errors return machine-parseable OpenAI-compatible JSON (e.g. {"error": {...}}) with an HTTP status table pairing codes to recovery actions (400 typed validation error, 402 insufficient credits, 429 back-off, 451 EU region gate with code: region_not_allowed). Rate limits (7 req/sec default, upgradable to 15), automatic provider fallbacks, async-job polling/webhooks with idempotency notes, and offset-based pagination are all described. Idempotency is documented at the webhook-delivery level; there is no request-level idempotency-key header. These are documented claims only; live testing requires a full Discry Audit.

See your own Discry Score.

Drop your API docs URL. See what an agent sees — in 60 seconds, free.

Discry your API — free