◎ Discry Score
verihubs.com
auth · API
D
0 / 100
DISCOVERY0
COMPREHENSION0
Category leader: 93 (A)
Discry your API →
AUTH · RANK #15 OF 16

Verihubs is Poor to agents.

Discry independently scored how well an AI agent can discover and understand the Verihubs 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 · 50/100
OpenAPI specA machine-readable OpenAPI/Swagger spec agents can parse.Partial
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.Partial
llms-full.txtA full-text bundle agents can load in one request.Fail
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.Fail
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.Partial

Comprehension

55% of score · 66/100
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.Partial
Error-recovery guidanceDocumented failure modes and how to recover from them.Partial
Answer-first formatThe answer leads; preamble does not bury it.Pass
Capability boundariesClear limits — what the API can and cannot do.Partial
Naming consistencyConsistent, predictable naming across endpoints.Partial
Heading hierarchyClean heading structure agents can navigate.Partial
Markdown docsDocs available as clean markdown, not JS-rendered HTML only.Pass
Token efficiencyDocs are concise enough to fit an agent context window.Partial

What we found

  • An agent landing anywhere on the docs gets actively steered to machine-readable content: llms.txt exists on both the marketing site and the docs, and even the docs 404 page tells AI agents to visit llms.txt — a deliberate agent-readiness investment that is rare in this corpus.
  • Every documentation page is retrievable as clean markdown via a .md suffix (ReadMe content negotiation), so an agent can read the entire guide and reference set without HTML parsing.
  • There is no downloadable OpenAPI spec: openapi.json 404s on both domains and no spec link exists anywhere, so an agent must stitch the API surface together from per-endpoint OpenAPI fragments embedded in ~45 separate reference pages.
  • Error codes are richly enumerated with descriptions, but no error includes recovery guidance — an agent hitting INSUFFICIENT_QUOTA or a 2 RPS Face-service rate limit is told only to contact Customer Success, not what to do programmatically.
  • Field naming is inconsistent within single endpoints — snake_case body fields (is_quality, error_code) sit next to PascalCase coordinates (TopLeftX, BottomRightY) — and duplicate v1/v2 reference pages with '-1' suffixes make it easy for an agent to land on the wrong version.

What to change

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

  1. 01Publish a downloadable OpenAPI spec (one file per service is fine) and link it from docs.verihubs.com and both llms.txt files — this is the single largest discovery-score gap (weight 5).
  2. 02Add an llms-full.txt or a compact API overview page: the docs llms.txt is 171KB, well past agent-consumable size, and there is no page where an agent can grasp the full API scope in under 5,000 tokens.
  3. 03Replace schema placeholder values on reference pages with realistic, copy-pasteable request examples in at least 2-3 languages (cURL, Python, Node).
  4. 04Add recovery guidance to error tables: what to retry, back-off behavior for the per-service RPS limits, and how to resolve quota and payload-format failures without contacting support.
  5. 05Normalize field casing across endpoints (pick snake_case), remove or clearly label the duplicate v1/v2 '-1' reference pages, and add an AGENTS.md plus an MCP server listing to reach agents where they discover tools.

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.

API key (App-ID + API-Key request headers, issued per application) Error format documented Rate limits documented Pagination documented Idempotency documented

Auth via per-application App-ID/API-Key headers is documented in the reference pages. Errors are machine-parseable JSON with rich per-endpoint code enums (e.g. INVALID_PAYLOAD_IMAGE_FORMAT, INSUFFICIENT_QUOTA, FAIL_ON_1). Per-service rate limits are documented with concrete numbers (50 RPS SMS, 2 RPS Face) but no rate-limit response headers are named. Pagination and idempotency are not mentioned.

See your own Discry Score.

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

Discry your API — free