{ "data": { "a": { "slug": "check-payroll", "name": "Check", "vendor": "Check Technologies, Inc.", "vendorUrl": "https://www.checkhq.com", "kind": "http-api", "category": "payroll", "summary": "Check is an embedded payroll API from Check Technologies in New York. Software platforms build US payroll on it for their own customers, with tax calculation, payment and filing handled by Check. Access is by partner agreement.", "url": "https://www.anchorterminal.com/tools/check-payroll", "markdownUrl": "https://www.anchorterminal.com/tools/check-payroll.md", "slimMarkdownUrl": "https://www.anchorterminal.com/tools/check-payroll.min.md", "jsonUrl": "https://www.anchorterminal.com/api/v1/tools/check-payroll.json", "repo": "https://github.com/check-technologies/mcp-server-check", "license": "Proprietary service under Check's terms of service and partner agreement. The MCP server and CLI on GitHub are MIT", "transports": [ "http" ], "remoteUrl": "https://api.checkhq.com", "packages": [], "auth": "mixed", "authNotes": "A partner API key sent as `Authorization: Bearer`, one for sandbox and one for production, issued by Check after a request through its sales contact. The key carries the whole partner account, with no per-key scopes found. Check says unused keys expire, last activity is shown and IP restrictions can be set through the account team. Integration partners get OAuth tokens (authorisation code grant, with refresh tokens) limited to one employer and one permission level, after a Check partner authorises them. The hosted MCP server accepts the API key or a Console OAuth login that runs with the Console user's permissions. This listing grades embedded-payroll partner access. Check has no route to an existing employer's payroll account outside a partner platform.", "pricing": "paid", "pricingNotes": "No public prices. checkhq.com/pricing returns 404 and the site's buttons open a sales contact form. A sandbox exists at sandbox.checkhq.com under a Sandbox User Agreement, but the documentation says to request an API key from Check, so an agent can't start without a person contacting sales. Production needs a partner agreement. The Usage API reports billable companies, employees and contractors each month, with no unit price published (checked 2026-10-08).", "priceSummary": "Paid", "where": "hosted", "x402": { "level": "no", "evidence": "No x402, MPP or L402 in the documentation index, the API reference pages read or the website (checked 2026-10-08).", "endpoints": [] }, "toolCount": null, "popularity": { "githubStars": 18, "npmWeekly": null, "pypiWeekly": null, "asOf": "2026-10-08" }, "docsUrl": "https://docs.checkhq.com", "llmsTxt": "https://docs.checkhq.com/llms.txt", "capabilities": [ "payroll.run", "payroll.employees", "payroll.embedded", "payroll.tax-filing", "payroll.contractors" ], "tags": [ "hosted", "embedded-payroll", "us-payroll", "api-key", "oauth", "mcp", "llms-txt", "sandbox", "webhooks", "sales-led", "partner-approval", "status-page", "bug-bounty", "soc2" ], "lastRelease": "2026-10-07", "graded": true, "anchor": { "graded": true, "score": 67.5, "grade": "B", "agentReady": false, "rank": 208, "ranked": true, "rankOf": 722, "categoryRank": 2, "methodology": "0.4", "run": "2026-10-01", "scores": { "ergonomics": 83, "maintenance": 72, "payments": 5, "reliability": 80, "schema": 78, "security": 74, "transparency": 62 }, "pending": [ "performance", "tasks" ], "assessment": { "confidence": "medium", "date": "2026-10-08" }, "negative": 0, "verdict": "Graded as embedded payroll through a partner API key, not access to an existing employer's payroll account. The API has idempotency keys on writes, a required preview before approval and queryable request logs. No price is public, a sandbox key comes through Check's sales team, and one API key carries the whole partner account.", "bestFor": "A software platform that wants to sell US payroll inside its own product and can sign a partnership, with Check handling tax calculation, money movement and filings.", "strengths": [ "`X-Idempotency-Key` is accepted on writes and stored for 24 hours, and a 429 carries `Retry-After` with `RateLimit-Limit` and `RateLimit-Remaining` on every authenticated response", "A payroll must have a succeeded preview before approval, and `preview_started_at` makes approval fail with 409 `preview_superseded` if the preview is stale", "Every response carries `X-Request-Log-Id`, and GET /logs returns request logs with SSNs, bank account numbers and the `Authorization` header redacted", "The MCP server starts with three meta-tools over 270 tools, with read-only mode, toolset filters and optional confirmation for destructive tools", "llms.txt indexes the documentation, and each page is served as Markdown with an OpenAPI 3.1 fragment per operation" ], "weaknesses": [ "No public price and no self-serve signup. The documentation says to request an API key through Check's sales contact", "An API key carries the whole partner account. No per-key scopes or read-only keys were found in the reviewed documentation", "No official SDK in a general programming language was found. The CLI and MCP server install from a git clone, not from PyPI", "No SLA is published. The terms of service make no representation about uptime unless agreed in writing", "No sub-processor list, hosting location or published DPA text was found, and the privacy policy states no retention periods" ], "agentNotes": [ "Use https://sandbox.checkhq.com with the sandbox key and https://api.checkhq.com with the production key. A key is not valid across environments", "Preview a payroll before approving it, then pass `preview_started_at` to POST /payrolls/{id}/approve so a stale preview fails with 409", "Send `X-Idempotency-Key` on every write. Keys expire after 24 hours, so list the resource before retrying later than that", "On 429 wait for `Retry-After`. The limit is 10 requests a second in sandbox and for partners paying fewer than 1,000 payees a month, with 100 concurrent requests", "Connect the MCP server with `?read_only=true` or `X-MCP-Readonly: true` unless writes are intended. In production, approving a payroll moves money" ], "metrics": { "kind": "remote", "measured": false }, "reviewCount": 0, "avgRating": 0, "history": [ { "basis": "public evidence", "confidence": "medium", "grade": "B", "methodology": "0.4", "pending": [ "performance", "tasks" ], "run": "2026-10-01", "runLabel": "October 2026 research run", "score": 67.5 } ], "editorialScores": { "ergonomics": 83, "maintenance": 72, "payments": 5, "reliability": 80, "schema": 78, "security": 74, "transparency": 38 }, "provenanceScore": 86 }, "connect": { "http": "curl -X POST https://sandbox.checkhq.com/companies \\\n -H 'Content-Type: application/json' \\\n -H 'Authorization: Bearer \u003cAPI_KEY\u003e' \\\n -d '{\"address\": {\"line1\": \"20 W 34th St\", \"postal_code\": \"10001\", \"city\": \"New York\", \"state\": \"NY\"}, \"start_date\": \"2020-05-20\", \"trade_name\": \"Good Web Design\", \"legal_name\": \"Good Web Design, Inc.\"}'", "claudeCode": "claude mcp add --transport http check https://mcp.sandbox.checkhq.com/check/mcp \\\n --header \"Authorization: Bearer your-api-key-here\"", "config": { "mcpServers": { "check": { "type": "url", "url": "https://mcp.sandbox.checkhq.com/check/mcp" } } } }, "letme": { "capability": "https://letme.dev/payroll.run", "tool": "https://letme.dev/check-payroll" }, "area": "domain-data", "provenance": { "legalEntity": "Check Technologies, Inc.", "domain": "checkhq.com", "domainRegistered": "2006-10-28", "endpointOnVendorDomain": true, "terms": "https://www.checkhq.com/company/terms", "privacy": "https://www.checkhq.com/company/privacy", "statusPage": "https://status.checkhq.com", "changelog": "https://www.checkhq.com/resources/changelog", "securityTxt": "none", "checked": "2026-10-08", "notes": [ "The privacy policy (effective 18 April 2024) names Check Technologies, Inc., 228 Park Ave. S, PMB 14961, New York, NY 10003. The site footer also names Check Payments LLC (NMLS #2103307).", "The terms of service are dated 3 September 2021. Sandbox use is also governed by a Sandbox User Agreement at checkhq.com/company/sandbox-user-agreement.", "www.checkhq.com/.well-known/security.txt and checkhq.com/.well-known/security.txt return 404. The security page sends vulnerability reports to a bug bounty at federacy.com/check.", "The API answers at api.checkhq.com and sandbox.checkhq.com, and the hosted MCP server at mcp.checkhq.com and mcp.sandbox.checkhq.com.", "RDAP for checkhq.com gives a registration date of 2006-10-28 and Squarespace Domains II LLC as registrar." ], "score": 86 }, "pageJsonUrl": "https://www.anchorterminal.com/tools/check-payroll.json", "live": { "slug": "check-payroll", "probe": { "target": "https://api.checkhq.com", "method": "get", "lastAt": "2026-10-08T22:39:44.279767872Z", "lastOk": true, "lastStatus": 200, "lastMs": 621, "authRequired": false, "uptime24h": 100, "uptime30d": 100, "p50ms24h": 694, "p95ms24h": 1040, "samples24h": 79, "samples30d": 79, "days": [ { "date": "2026-10-08", "probes": 79, "ok": 79 } ] }, "vendorStatus": { "page": "https://status.checkhq.com", "indicator": "none", "summary": "All Systems Operational", "checkedAt": "2026-10-08T22:39:10.268059781Z" }, "githubStars": 18, "securityTxt": { "url": "https://checkhq.com/.well-known/security.txt", "state": "none", "checkedAt": "2026-10-08T15:38:31.878118114Z" }, "pages": [ { "url": "https://www.checkhq.com/resources/changelog", "kind": "changelog", "status": 200, "checkedAt": "2026-10-08T18:27:02.804039275Z", "changedAt": "0001-01-01T00:00:00Z", "fingerprint": "ada7be68b809" }, { "url": "https://www.checkhq.com/company/privacy", "kind": "privacy", "status": 200, "checkedAt": "2026-10-08T18:26:58.734249468Z", "changedAt": "0001-01-01T00:00:00Z", "fingerprint": "2d782586e2af" }, { "url": "https://www.checkhq.com/company/terms", "kind": "terms", "status": 200, "checkedAt": "2026-10-08T18:27:00.809006213Z", "changedAt": "0001-01-01T00:00:00Z", "fingerprint": "c2d2a944fcea" } ], "updatedAt": "2026-10-08T22:39:44.279767872Z" } }, "answer": "Check scores 67.5 (B) on agent readiness against Paychex's 44.8 (E), and leads in every scored category.", "b": { "slug": "paychex", "name": "Paychex", "vendor": "Paychex, Inc.", "vendorUrl": "https://www.paychex.com", "kind": "http-api", "category": "payroll", "summary": "Paychex's REST API reads and updates company, worker and pay data in Paychex Flex, a US payroll and HR service. Clients create an app inside their Flex account. Software partners apply to Paychex for a sandbox and production credentials.", "url": "https://www.anchorterminal.com/tools/paychex", "markdownUrl": "https://www.anchorterminal.com/tools/paychex.md", "slimMarkdownUrl": "https://www.anchorterminal.com/tools/paychex.min.md", "jsonUrl": "https://www.anchorterminal.com/api/v1/tools/paychex.json", "license": "Proprietary service. Public use is under the Paychex User Terms of Use. Partner terms aren't published", "transports": [ "http" ], "packages": [], "auth": "oauth", "authNotes": "Graded on the Paychex API for Paychex Flex. Access is by OAuth 2.0 client credentials. A key and secret go in the form body of POST `/auth/oauth/v2/token` and return a Bearer token that lasts 60 minutes, with no refresh token. A Paychex client with a Super Admin or Security Admin role creates an app inside Flex and chooses its access levels. A software partner fills in a questionnaire, is reviewed by the Corporate Partnerships Team, builds in a sandbox Paychex issues, demos the integration and then receives a production key and secret limited to the verbs and endpoints requested. Each client approves a partner app in Flex before its data is reachable.", "pricing": "paid", "pricingNotes": "No price is published for the API or for Paychex payroll. The Request Pricing button on paychex.com/payroll leads to the sales contact form, and the developer centre states no fee. The API reaches only companies with a paid Paychex Flex account, and the Payroll API needs online payroll added by a Paychex representative. The partner sandbox is issued after Paychex approves the partnership, so there is no way to start without Paychex's agreement (checked 2026-10-08).", "priceSummary": "Paid", "where": "local", "x402": { "level": "no", "evidence": "No x402, MPP or L402 in the developer centre pages or the OpenAPI definition (checked 2026-10-08).", "endpoints": [] }, "toolCount": null, "popularity": { "githubStars": null, "npmWeekly": null, "pypiWeekly": null, "asOf": "2026-10-08" }, "docsUrl": "https://developer.paychex.com/documentation", "openapi": "https://developer.paychex.com/sites/default/files/apidocument/openapi-merge-develop.210-public.json", "capabilities": [ "payroll.employees", "hr.employees", "hr.onboarding", "hr.documents", "hr.org" ], "tags": [ "hosted", "payroll", "hr", "oauth", "openapi", "partner-approval", "sandbox", "webhooks", "sales-led", "soc2", "iso27001" ], "lastRelease": "2026-08-20", "graded": true, "anchor": { "graded": true, "score": 44.8, "grade": "E", "agentReady": false, "rank": 666, "ranked": true, "rankOf": 722, "categoryRank": 9, "methodology": "0.4", "run": "2026-10-01", "scores": { "ergonomics": 54, "maintenance": 26, "payments": 0, "reliability": 41, "schema": 66, "security": 58, "transparency": 54 }, "pending": [ "performance", "tasks" ], "assessment": { "confidence": "medium", "date": "2026-10-08" }, "negative": 0, "verdict": "A public OpenAPI 3.0.3 definition covers 110 operations, and payroll entries stay unprocessed until a person submits the payroll in Flex. Partner credentials and the sandbox follow approval by Paychex, no price is published, and no status page, SLA or SDK was found in the reviewed pages.", "bestFor": "A software partner with shared customers on Paychex Flex that needs to sync workers, pay rates, direct deposits and tax setup, or to send hours and earnings into pay entry.", "strengths": [ "One public OpenAPI 3.0.3 file describes 110 operations and 147 schemas, with named request and response examples for most of them", "Checks are created as unprocessed entries. The docs say the client or a Paychex service provider must review and submit the payroll", "A client admin approves each partner app inside Paychex Flex before any company data is reachable, and a delete endpoint removes the link", "Errors return a `code`, `description` and `resolution`, and every response carries an `x-payx-txid` for support", "Published limit of 10,000 requests a minute per partner, with `X-RateLimit-*` headers and `Retry-After` on 429" ], "weaknesses": [ "Partner access needs a questionnaire, review by the Corporate Partnerships Team, a demo and final approval. The sandbox is issued only after approval", "No price is published for the API or for Paychex payroll. The pricing button leads to a sales contact form", "No status page, incident history or SLA was found, and the User Terms of Use give no availability guarantee", "Paging works on three endpoints only, and on the worker list it can't be combined with filters", "No SDK, llms.txt or dated changelog was found. The News page holds two notices", "The User Terms of Use bar automated access to Paychex sites and applications unless Paychex approves it, and allow suspension without notice" ], "agentNotes": [ "POST `grant_type=client_credentials` with the key and secret in the form body to `/auth/oauth/v2/token`. Tokens last 60 minutes and there is no refresh token, so request a new one", "Call GET `/companies` first. Worker and payroll paths need a `companyId` or `workerId` the app has been granted", "Send `offset` and `limit` on GET `/companies/{companyId}/workers`, 50 at most, and resend the `ETag` between pages. The unpaged form is withdrawn on 24 February 2027", "Creating a check doesn't pay anyone. A person must review and submit the payroll in Paychex Flex", "Send a unique `X-payx-client-correlationId` per request and keep the `x-payx-txid` from the response. Support asks for it", "On 423 the client is locked by another user or process. Wait and retry" ], "metrics": { "kind": "remote", "measured": false }, "reviewCount": 0, "avgRating": 0, "history": [ { "basis": "public evidence", "confidence": "medium", "grade": "E", "methodology": "0.4", "pending": [ "performance", "tasks" ], "run": "2026-10-01", "runLabel": "October 2026 research run", "score": 44.8 } ], "editorialScores": { "ergonomics": 54, "maintenance": 26, "payments": 0, "reliability": 41, "schema": 66, "security": 58, "transparency": 39 }, "provenanceScore": 69 }, "connect": { "http": "curl --location 'https://api.paychex.com/auth/oauth/v2/token' \\\n--header 'Content-Type: application/x-www-form-urlencoded' \\\n--data-urlencode 'grant_type=client_credentials' \\\n--data-urlencode 'client_id=CLIENT_ID' \\\n--data-urlencode 'client_secret=CLIENT_SECRET'" }, "letme": { "capability": "https://letme.dev/payroll.employees", "tool": "https://letme.dev/paychex" }, "area": "domain-data", "provenance": { "legalEntity": "Paychex, Inc.", "domain": "paychex.com", "domainRegistered": "1991-06-10", "endpointOnVendorDomain": true, "terms": "https://www.paychex.com/corporate/terms", "privacy": "https://www.paychex.com/corporate/security/privacy", "statusPage": "", "changelog": "https://developer.paychex.com/news", "securityTxt": "none", "checked": "2026-10-08", "notes": [ "The privacy policy (last updated 1 June 2026) names Paychex, Inc., 911 Panorama Trail South, Rochester, NY 14625.", "The terms link is the Paychex User Terms of Use, effective 1 June 2026, which govern Paychex's websites, software applications, mobile applications and services. No API-specific terms are published. The partner agreement and the Third-Party Terms of Use a client accepts in Flex weren't found in public.", "API calls go to https://api.paychex.com. An unauthenticated GET `/companies` answered 401 with error code API-103.", "www.paychex.com/.well-known/security.txt, www.paychex.com/security.txt and developer.paychex.com/.well-known/security.txt return 404. Vulnerability reports go through a form at paychex.com/corporate/security/responsible-disclosure run with Bugcrowd.", "No status page was found on the developer centre or the security page, and status.paychex.com didn't resolve.", "The changelog link is the developer centre's News page, which holds two notices and no dated list of changes.", "RDAP for paychex.com gives a registration date of 1991-06-10." ], "score": 69 }, "pageJsonUrl": "https://www.anchorterminal.com/tools/paychex.json" }, "facts": [ { "a": "HTTP API", "b": "HTTP API", "name": "Kind" }, { "a": "Check Technologies, Inc.", "b": "Paychex, Inc.", "name": "Vendor" }, { "a": "https://api.checkhq.com", "b": "no (local only)", "name": "Hosted endpoint" }, { "a": "HTTP", "b": "HTTP", "name": "Transports" }, { "a": "OAuth or key", "b": "OAuth", "name": "Auth" }, { "a": "Paid", "b": "Paid", "name": "Pricing" }, { "a": "no", "b": "no", "name": "x402" }, { "a": "Proprietary service under Check's terms of service and partner agreement. The MCP server and CLI on GitHub are MIT", "b": "Proprietary service. Public use is under the Paychex User Terms of Use. Partner terms aren't published", "name": "Licence" }, { "a": "yes", "b": "no", "name": "Read-only variant documented" }, { "a": "yes", "b": "no", "name": "llms.txt" }, { "a": "2026-10-07", "b": "2026-08-20", "name": "Last release" }, { "a": "2021-09-03", "b": "no date given", "name": "Terms last updated" }, { "a": "2024-04-18", "b": "2026-06-01", "name": "Privacy policy last updated" }, { "a": "not found in the text", "b": "yes", "name": "Customer content may train models" }, { "a": "yes", "b": "yes", "name": "Terms restrict automated access" }, { "a": "not found in the text", "b": "not found in the text", "name": "Terms restrict benchmarking" }, { "a": "not found in the text", "b": "yes", "name": "Terms or service can change without notice" }, { "a": "not found in the text", "b": "yes", "name": "Arbitration or class-action waiver" }, { "a": "18 stars", "b": "none", "name": "Popularity" } ], "faq": [ { "answer": "Check scores 67.5 (B) on agent readiness against Paychex's 44.8 (E), and leads in every scored category.", "question": "Which is better for AI agents, Check or Paychex?" }, { "answer": "Check takes an API key or an OAuth sign-in. Paychex uses an OAuth sign-in.", "question": "Do Check and Paychex need an API key?" }, { "answer": "Check has a hosted endpoint at https://api.checkhq.com. No hosted endpoint is listed for Paychex.", "question": "Can an agent call Check and Paychex without installing anything?" } ], "goodFor": [ { "aheadOn": [ "Reliability, 80 against 41", "Schema \u0026 documentation, 78 against 66", "Agent ergonomics, 83 against 54", "Security \u0026 auth, 74 against 58", "Payments \u0026 pricing, 5 against 0", "Maintenance \u0026 community, 72 against 26", "Transparency \u0026 trust, 62 against 54" ], "also": [ "A hosted endpoint, with nothing to install" ], "goodFor": "A software platform that wants to sell US payroll inside its own product and can sign a partnership, with Check handling tax calculation, money movement and filings.", "slug": "check-payroll", "watchFor": "No public price and no self-serve signup. The documentation says to request an API key through Check's sales contact" }, { "aheadOn": null, "also": null, "goodFor": "A software partner with shared customers on Paychex Flex that needs to sync workers, pay rates, direct deposits and tax setup, or to send hours and earnings into pay entry.", "slug": "paychex", "watchFor": "Partner access needs a questionnaire, review by the Corporate Partnerships Team, a demo and final approval. The sandbox is issued only after approval" } ], "job": { "capability": "payroll.employees", "name": "Payroll employees" }, "others": [ { "json": "https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/argyle-vs-check-payroll.json", "title": "Argyle vs Check", "url": "https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/argyle-vs-check-payroll" }, { "json": "https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/argyle-vs-paychex.json", "title": "Argyle vs Paychex", "url": "https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/argyle-vs-paychex" }, { "json": "https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/check-payroll-vs-finch.json", "title": "Check vs Finch", "url": "https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/check-payroll-vs-finch" }, { "json": "https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/employment-hero-vs-paychex.json", "title": "Employment Hero Payroll vs Paychex", "url": "https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/employment-hero-vs-paychex" }, { "json": "https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/everee-vs-paychex.json", "title": "Everee vs Paychex", "url": "https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/everee-vs-paychex" }, { "json": "https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/finch-vs-paychex.json", "title": "Finch vs Paychex", "url": "https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/finch-vs-paychex" }, { "json": "https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/gusto-vs-paychex.json", "title": "Gusto vs Paychex", "url": "https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/gusto-vs-paychex" }, { "json": "https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/paychex-vs-salsa.json", "title": "Paychex vs Salsa", "url": "https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/paychex-vs-salsa" }, { "json": "https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/paychex-vs-zeal.json", "title": "Paychex vs Zeal", "url": "https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/paychex-vs-zeal" }, { "json": "https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/check-payroll-vs-employment-hero.json", "title": "Check vs Employment Hero Payroll", "url": "https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/check-payroll-vs-employment-hero" }, { "json": "https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/check-payroll-vs-everee.json", "title": "Check vs Everee", "url": "https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/check-payroll-vs-everee" }, { "json": "https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/check-payroll-vs-gusto.json", "title": "Check vs Gusto", "url": "https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/check-payroll-vs-gusto" }, { "json": "https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/check-payroll-vs-salsa.json", "title": "Check vs Salsa", "url": "https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/check-payroll-vs-salsa" }, { "json": "https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/check-payroll-vs-zeal.json", "title": "Check vs Zeal", "url": "https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/check-payroll-vs-zeal" } ], "scores": [ { "by": 39, "check-payroll": 80, "edge": "check-payroll", "key": "reliability", "name": "Reliability", "paychex": 41, "weight": 16 }, { "key": "performance", "name": "Performance", "pending": true, "weight": 10 }, { "by": 12, "check-payroll": 78, "edge": "check-payroll", "key": "schema", "name": "Schema \u0026 documentation", "paychex": 66, "weight": 13 }, { "by": 29, "check-payroll": 83, "edge": "check-payroll", "key": "ergonomics", "name": "Agent ergonomics", "paychex": 54, "weight": 13 }, { "by": 16, "check-payroll": 74, "edge": "check-payroll", "key": "security", "name": "Security \u0026 auth", "paychex": 58, "weight": 14 }, { "by": 5, "check-payroll": 5, "edge": "check-payroll", "key": "payments", "name": "Payments \u0026 pricing", "paychex": 0, "weight": 10 }, { "key": "tasks", "name": "Task success", "pending": true, "weight": 10 }, { "by": 46, "check-payroll": 72, "edge": "check-payroll", "key": "maintenance", "name": "Maintenance \u0026 community", "paychex": 26, "weight": 7 }, { "by": 8, "check-payroll": 62, "edge": "check-payroll", "key": "transparency", "name": "Transparency \u0026 trust", "paychex": 54, "weight": 7 } ], "summary": "Check scores 67.5 (B) on agent readiness against Paychex's 44.8 (E), and leads in every scored category. Both do payroll employees.", "verdicts": { "check-payroll": "Graded as embedded payroll through a partner API key, not access to an existing employer's payroll account. The API has idempotency keys on writes, a required preview before approval and queryable request logs. No price is public, a sandbox key comes through Check's sales team, and one API key carries the whole partner account.", "paychex": "A public OpenAPI 3.0.3 definition covers 110 operations, and payroll entries stay unprocessed until a person submits the payroll in Flex. Partner credentials and the sandbox follow approval by Paychex, no price is published, and no status page, SLA or SDK was found in the reviewed pages." } }, "kind": "anchor.page", "links": { "api": "https://www.anchorterminal.com/api/v1/index.json", "html": "https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/check-payroll-vs-paychex", "json": "https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/check-payroll-vs-paychex.json", "llms": "https://www.anchorterminal.com/llms.txt", "markdown": "https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/check-payroll-vs-paychex.md", "slim": "https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/check-payroll-vs-paychex.min.md" }, "markdown": "Check scores 67.5 (B) on agent readiness against Paychex's 44.8 (E), and leads in every scored category. Both do payroll employees.\n\n- Check: grade B, 67.5/100, rank #208 of 722. Markdown https://www.anchorterminal.com/tools/check-payroll.md · JSON https://www.anchorterminal.com/api/v1/tools/check-payroll.json\n- Paychex: grade E, 44.8/100, rank #666 of 722. Markdown https://www.anchorterminal.com/tools/paychex.md · JSON https://www.anchorterminal.com/api/v1/tools/paychex.json\n\n## Which one, for what\n\n### Check (B)\n\nGood for: A software platform that wants to sell US payroll inside its own product and can sign a partnership, with Check handling tax calculation, money movement and filings.\n\nAhead on:\n- Reliability, 80 against 41\n- Schema \u0026 documentation, 78 against 66\n- Agent ergonomics, 83 against 54\n- Security \u0026 auth, 74 against 58\n- Payments \u0026 pricing, 5 against 0\n- Maintenance \u0026 community, 72 against 26\n- Transparency \u0026 trust, 62 against 54\n\nAlso in its favour:\n- A hosted endpoint, with nothing to install\n\nWatch for: No public price and no self-serve signup. The documentation says to request an API key through Check's sales contact\n\n### Paychex (E)\n\nGood for: A software partner with shared customers on Paychex Flex that needs to sync workers, pay rates, direct deposits and tax setup, or to send hours and earnings into pay entry.\n\nWatch for: Partner access needs a questionnaire, review by the Corporate Partnerships Team, a demo and final approval. The sandbox is issued only after approval\n\n\n## Score by category\n\n| Category | Weight | Check | Paychex | Edge |\n| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |\n| Reliability | 16% (20 this run) | 80 | 41 | Check +39 |\n| Performance | 10%, pending | pending | pending | not scored in this run |\n| Schema \u0026 documentation | 13% (16.2 this run) | 78 | 66 | Check +12 |\n| Agent ergonomics | 13% (16.2 this run) | 83 | 54 | Check +29 |\n| Security \u0026 auth | 14% (17.5 this run) | 74 | 58 | Check +16 |\n| Payments \u0026 pricing | 10% (12.5 this run) | 5 | 0 | Check +5 |\n| Task success | 10%, pending | pending | pending | not scored in this run |\n| Maintenance \u0026 community | 7% (8.8 this run) | 72 | 26 | Check +46 |\n| Transparency \u0026 trust | 7% (8.8 this run) | 62 | 54 | Check +8 |\n| Negative events | ≤15 | 0 | 0 | |\n| **Total** | | **67.5 · B** | **44.8 · E** | |\n\n## Facts side by side\n\n| Fact | Check | Paychex |\n| --- | --- | --- |\n| Kind | HTTP API | HTTP API |\n| Vendor | Check Technologies, Inc. | Paychex, Inc. |\n| Hosted endpoint | `https://api.checkhq.com` | no (local only) |\n| Transports | HTTP | HTTP |\n| Auth | OAuth or key | OAuth |\n| Pricing | Paid | Paid |\n| x402 | no | no |\n| Licence | Proprietary service under Check's terms of service and partner agreement. The MCP server and CLI on GitHub are MIT | Proprietary service. Public use is under the Paychex User Terms of Use. Partner terms aren't published |\n| Read-only variant documented | yes | no |\n| llms.txt | yes | no |\n| Last release | 2026-10-07 | 2026-08-20 |\n| Terms last updated | 2021-09-03 | no date given |\n| Privacy policy last updated | 2024-04-18 | 2026-06-01 |\n| Customer content may train models | not found in the text | yes |\n| Terms restrict automated access | yes | yes |\n| Terms restrict benchmarking | not found in the text | not found in the text |\n| Terms or service can change without notice | not found in the text | yes |\n| Arbitration or class-action waiver | not found in the text | yes |\n| Popularity | 18 stars | none |\n\n## Verdicts\n\n**Check.** Graded as embedded payroll through a partner API key, not access to an existing employer's payroll account. The API has idempotency keys on writes, a required preview before approval and queryable request logs. No price is public, a sandbox key comes through Check's sales team, and one API key carries the whole partner account.\n\n**Paychex.** A public OpenAPI 3.0.3 definition covers 110 operations, and payroll entries stay unprocessed until a person submits the payroll in Flex. Partner credentials and the sandbox follow approval by Paychex, no price is published, and no status page, SLA or SDK was found in the reviewed pages.\n\n## Before you call either\n\n### Check\n\n1. Use https://sandbox.checkhq.com with the sandbox key and https://api.checkhq.com with the production key. A key is not valid across environments\n2. Preview a payroll before approving it, then pass `preview_started_at` to POST /payrolls/{id}/approve so a stale preview fails with 409\n3. Send `X-Idempotency-Key` on every write. Keys expire after 24 hours, so list the resource before retrying later than that\n4. On 429 wait for `Retry-After`. The limit is 10 requests a second in sandbox and for partners paying fewer than 1,000 payees a month, with 100 concurrent requests\n5. Connect the MCP server with `?read_only=true` or `X-MCP-Readonly: true` unless writes are intended. In production, approving a payroll moves money\n\n### Paychex\n\n1. POST `grant_type=client_credentials` with the key and secret in the form body to `/auth/oauth/v2/token`. Tokens last 60 minutes and there is no refresh token, so request a new one\n2. Call GET `/companies` first. Worker and payroll paths need a `companyId` or `workerId` the app has been granted\n3. Send `offset` and `limit` on GET `/companies/{companyId}/workers`, 50 at most, and resend the `ETag` between pages. The unpaged form is withdrawn on 24 February 2027\n4. Creating a check doesn't pay anyone. A person must review and submit the payroll in Paychex Flex\n5. Send a unique `X-payx-client-correlationId` per request and keep the `x-payx-txid` from the response. Support asks for it\n6. On 423 the client is locked by another user or process. Wait and retry\n\n## Questions\n\n### Which is better for AI agents, Check or Paychex?\n\nCheck scores 67.5 (B) on agent readiness against Paychex's 44.8 (E), and leads in every scored category.\n\n### Do Check and Paychex need an API key?\n\nCheck takes an API key or an OAuth sign-in. Paychex uses an OAuth sign-in.\n\n### Can an agent call Check and Paychex without installing anything?\n\nCheck has a hosted endpoint at https://api.checkhq.com. No hosted endpoint is listed for Paychex.\n\n\n## For agents\n\n- This comparison as JSON: https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/check-payroll-vs-paychex.json, and with the fewest tokens: https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/check-payroll-vs-paychex.min.md\n- Over MCP at https://www.anchorterminal.com/mcp (no key): `compare_tools {\"a\": \"check-payroll\", \"b\": \"paychex\"}`. From a terminal: `anchor compare check-payroll paychex`\n- Each listing in full: https://www.anchorterminal.com/api/v1/tools/check-payroll.json and https://www.anchorterminal.com/api/v1/tools/paychex.json\n\n## Other comparisons with Check or Paychex\n\n- [Argyle vs Check](https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/argyle-vs-check-payroll.md)\n- [Argyle vs Paychex](https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/argyle-vs-paychex.md)\n- [Check vs Finch](https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/check-payroll-vs-finch.md)\n- [Employment Hero Payroll vs Paychex](https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/employment-hero-vs-paychex.md)\n- [Everee vs Paychex](https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/everee-vs-paychex.md)\n- [Finch vs Paychex](https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/finch-vs-paychex.md)\n- [Gusto vs Paychex](https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/gusto-vs-paychex.md)\n- [Paychex vs Salsa](https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/paychex-vs-salsa.md)\n- [Paychex vs Zeal](https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/paychex-vs-zeal.md)\n- [Check vs Employment Hero Payroll](https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/check-payroll-vs-employment-hero.md)\n- [Check vs Everee](https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/check-payroll-vs-everee.md)\n- [Check vs Gusto](https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/check-payroll-vs-gusto.md)\n- [Check vs Salsa](https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/check-payroll-vs-salsa.md)\n- [Check vs Zeal](https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/check-payroll-vs-zeal.md)\n", "meta": { "attribution": "Anchor Terminal (https://www.anchorterminal.com)", "docs": "https://www.anchorterminal.com/docs/", "generatedAt": "2026-10-08", "license": "CC-BY-4.0", "method": "https://www.anchorterminal.com/benchmark/", "methodology": "0.4", "openapi": "https://www.anchorterminal.com/openapi.json", "preview": false, "run": "2026-10-01", "runLabel": "October 2026 research run" }, "page": { "breadcrumbs": [ { "name": "Home", "url": "https://www.anchorterminal.com/" }, { "name": "Compare", "url": "https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/" }, { "name": "Check vs Paychex", "url": "" } ], "description": "Check scores 67.5 (B) on agent readiness against Paychex's 44.8 (E), and leads in every scored category. Both do payroll employees. Category scores, facts, verdicts and agent notes side by side.", "facts": [ "Check B 67.5", "Paychex E 44.8", "scores" ], "h1": "Check vs Paychex", "image": "https://www.anchorterminal.com/assets/og/compare-check-payroll-vs-paychex.png", "path": "/compare/check-payroll-vs-paychex", "published": "2026-10-01", "section": "tools", "title": "Check vs Paychex for AI agents, B 67.5 vs E 44.8 | Anchor Terminal", "toc": null, "updated": "2026-10-08", "url": "https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/check-payroll-vs-paychex" }, "tokens": { "markdown": 2150, "slim": 680 }, "version": 1 }