{
  "fixes": {
    "slug": "adobe-acrobat-sign",
    "name": "Adobe Acrobat Sign",
    "listing": "https://www.anchorterminal.com/tools/adobe-acrobat-sign",
    "markdown": "# Fix list: Adobe Acrobat Sign\n\nFrom Anchor Terminal's listing at https://www.anchorterminal.com/tools/adobe-acrobat-sign, the October 2026 research run, assessed 8 October 2026. Grade D, 52.6 out of 100.\n\nThis is everything the published grade says the listing lacks, the biggest possible gain to the total first. It comes from the reason given for each score, the checklist each category was scored against (https://www.anchorterminal.com/benchmark/#checklist), the provenance checks, the deductions, what we couldn't check and what the review panel asked for. A fix counts at the next check, once it's public.\n\nFor a coding agent working on Adobe Acrobat Sign: work through the items below in the product, its docs and its public pages. Each category gives the reason for its score, with the points each checklist item earned, and the checklist itself, so the gap is the items that earned less than their points. Change the product, not the wording, and keep a note of what you changed and where it's published.\n\n## 1. Payments \u0026 pricing, 25 out of 100, up to 9.4 more on the total\n\nWhy it scored 25: Read with the hosted rubric. No x402, MPP or L402 found (0). Acrobat team plan prices are public, but the pricing page doesn't say they include API access, and Acrobat Sign Solutions is by quote with no per-transaction price. We scored between plan-only and contact sales (5). The Developer Edition is free with API access. The sign-up page says no commitments and doesn't mention a card, and we didn't run the form (20). A person must create an Adobe ID, register an application and approve OAuth in a browser (0).\n\nThe checklist (https://www.anchorterminal.com/benchmark/#checklist-payments):\n\nThe published rubric, also on the [x402 page](https://www.anchorterminal.com/x402/).\n\n- 40, a machine payment protocol (x402, MPP or L402) on the tool's own endpoints. 10 to 30 when it covers only some endpoints or only goes through a third party, and the note says which.\n- 20, per-call or per-unit pricing published without a login. 10 for public plan-only pricing, 0 for \"contact sales\" or prices behind a login.\n- 20, a free tier or trial that doesn't need a card.\n- 20, autonomous onboarding, meaning an agent can get access without a person signing up in a browser (keyless use, x402, a programmatic key API).\n\nPayment platforms and agent wallets rarely charge for their own API over a machine protocol, so the first line has steps for them, and the highest one that applies counts. 40 when x402, MPP or L402 runs on all their own endpoints, 30 when it runs on part of their own API, 25 when their merchants can accept one, 20 for running a facilitator, 15 for paying as a buyer, and 0 when the only protocol is their own. Merchant acceptance sits above a facilitator because the platform's own customers can charge agents through it, while a facilitator settles for sellers who wire up the protocol themselves. The counter-argument (a facilitator does more for the protocol as a whole) has a point. Each note says which step applied.\n\nOpen-source software you run yourself is scored on its hosted or paid option if it has one. A free, self-hosted package with nothing to buy gets 20, 20 and 20 for the last three lines, and 0 to 40 for the first only if it ships a payment protocol.\n\n## 2. Maintenance \u0026 community, 10 out of 100, up to 7.9 more on the total\n\nWhy it scored 10: The newest dated entry in the API release notes is November 2025, more than 180 days before this check, and the developer guide was last updated on 17 December 2025 (0). No dated API entries fall in the last 90 days (0). Closed service with release notes, a developer forum link and support. The GitHub repository has nine open issues and its last commit was 14 May 2026. We didn't test a support channel (5 of 15). Adobe's SDK page says its SDKs are obsolete, and a Postman workspace is the suggested replacement (3 of 15). The SDK code hasn't changed since August 2022 and the repository has no CI workflow (2 of 10). Product release notes on helpx.adobe.com answered 403 and went unread, so newer product changes may exist.\n\nThe checklist (https://www.anchorterminal.com/benchmark/#checklist-maintenance):\n\n- 0 to 30, time since the last release, or the last published model or API change for a closed service. 30 within 30 days, 20 within 90, 10 within 180, 0 older.\n- 20, at least three releases or dated changelog entries in the last 90 days.\n- 0 to 25, responsiveness. Issues and pull requests answered on GitHub (the open issues and how recent the replies are). For closed services, a public changelog and a support or community channel that answers, 0 to 15.\n- 15, presence in the official MCP registry under a verified namespace (MCP servers), or current official SDKs (APIs and models).\n- 10, package health, current dependencies and CI.\n\nModels are read for deprecation notice periods and model churn rather than release counts.\n\n## 3. Schema \u0026 documentation, 54 out of 100, up to 7.5 more on the total\n\nWhy it scored 54: Graded on the REST v6 API. The live reference is a Swagger UI on secure.na1.adobesign.com, whose robots.txt disallows crawlers, so we didn't read it. The only downloadable contract found is a set of Swagger 1.2 files from August 2018 with 92 operations, and Adobe calls the SDKs built from it obsolete (12 of 25). developer.adobe.com/llms.txt returns 404 (0). The developer guide and a best practices page of 17 December 2025 state required scopes, valid state transitions and good and bad call patterns for each main endpoint (12 of 20). The 2018 files mark 231 of 489 parameters required and hold 99 enums (9 of 15). The guide has request and response examples and named error codes, with per-endpoint error lists in the reference we didn't read (10 of 15). The API is versioned in the path, and the release notes are dated by month, most recently November 2025 (11 of 15).\n\nThe checklist (https://www.anchorterminal.com/benchmark/#checklist-schema):\n\nAPIs and MCP servers.\n\n- 25, a machine-readable contract (a public OpenAPI file or similar; for MCP, typed JSON Schema inputs on every tool).\n- 10, llms.txt or Markdown docs served for agents.\n- 0 to 20, descriptions that say what a tool is for, when to use it and when not to, read from the tool definitions in the source or the API reference.\n- 0 to 15, typed inputs with enums, constraints and required fields, and no free-form JSON blobs.\n- 0 to 15, examples and documented error responses.\n- 15, versioning and a public changelog.\n\nModels are read from the API reference, the OpenAPI file, llms.txt, the structured-output and tool-use docs and the model cards. Frameworks from docs a model can follow, typed interfaces, examples and the API reference.\n\n## 4. Agent ergonomics, 55 out of 100, up to 7.3 more on the total\n\nWhy it scored 55: List calls take `pageSize` and return ETags for 304 responses. No field selection was found (13 of 25). Cursor pagination with `page.nextCursor`, a `/search` endpoint and a 500-agreement page cap (15 of 20). Errors are JSON with a stable code and message, such as `INVALID_API_ACCESS_POINT`, `THROTTLING_TOO_MANY_REQUESTS` and `RESOURCE_MODIFIED` (15 of 20). No idempotency key. `If-Match` protects updates and a `DRAFT` state lets a caller build an agreement before sending (8 of 20). A caller must first discover the account's shard, sending a file takes an upload call and then an agreement call, and Adobe marks every SDK deprecated (4 of 15).\n\nThe checklist (https://www.anchorterminal.com/benchmark/#checklist-ergonomics):\n\n- 0 to 25, context cost. For MCP, the number and size of the tool definitions (25 for ten or fewer compact tools, 15 for 11 to 30, 5 for more than 30, plus up to 10 back for toolsets, dynamic loading or read-only subsets). For APIs, whether responses can be sized (field selection, limits, summaries).\n- 20, pagination, filtering and output-size controls.\n- 20, actionable, documented error responses, codes and messages an agent can recover from.\n- 20, idempotency or safe retries, and for MCP the `readOnlyHint` and `destructiveHint` annotations.\n- 15, sensible defaults, few required parameters, and official SDKs in at least two languages.\n\nModels are read for tool use, structured output, prompt caching, context length, batch and SDKs. Frameworks for how much code and how many defaults a tool-calling agent with MCP needs.\n\n## 5. Reliability, 66 out of 100, up to 6.8 more on the total\n\nWhy it scored 66: Graded as a hosted API. status.adobe.com is Adobe's status page and the Unified SLA names it for outage notices (20). The page is drawn by script and our reader saw no incident history, so the last 90 days are scored as unreadable (5). Numbers are published for `/search` (1,000 a minute, 2,500 an hour, 7,200 a day) and for identical GET calls (three a minute on Global, Enterprise and Developer tiers). Per-endpoint limits depend on the plan and aren't published (9 of 15). 429 responses carry `Retry-After` and a `retryAfter` field, the guide asks for exponential backoff, and `If-Match` ETags stop stale updates. No idempotency key was found for `POST /agreements` (12 of 15). The Unified SLA of 3 August 2026 commits to 99.9 per cent for Acrobat Sign Solutions for Enterprise, with credits of 5 to 25 per cent (10). REST v6 is generally available (10).\n\nThe checklist (https://www.anchorterminal.com/benchmark/#checklist-reliability):\n\nHosted APIs, MCP servers, models and platforms.\n\n- 20, a public status page with component history (Statuspage, Instatus, BetterStack or the vendor's own).\n- 0 to 30, the incident record for the last 90 days on that page. 30 for a clean record or trivial incidents only, 20 for minor incidents only, 10 for one major outage (an hour or more of a core API down, or errors across the board), 0 for several. 5 when there's no history we could read, and the note says so.\n- 15, rate limits documented with numbers.\n- 15, documented 429 or overload handling (Retry-After, backoff guidance), and idempotency keys or safe-retry guidance where writes are involved.\n- 10, an SLA published for any paid tier.\n- 10, the surface agents use is generally available, not beta or preview.\n\nLocal packages, SDKs, frameworks and stdio MCP servers.\n\n- 20, installs from an official package with supported runtimes stated.\n- 25, a public CI and test suite, passing on the default branch.\n- 0 to 25, open crash or regression issues relative to activity (25 for few and handled, 0 for many, old and unanswered).\n- 15, semver discipline and breaking changes called out in a changelog.\n- 15, version 1.0 or later, or declared stable.\n\nProtocols are read from their reference implementations, the public facilitators or servers, spec stability and test vectors.\n\n## 6. Security \u0026 auth, 66 out of 100, up to 6 more on the total\n\nWhy it scored 66: OAuth 2.0 authorisation code grant with one-hour access tokens, refresh tokens that lapse after 60 days unused, a revoke endpoint and per-resource scopes with `:self`, `:group` and `:account` modifiers. PKCE wasn't found in the guide, and no secret in a URL query string was documented (26 of 30). Read scopes are separate from write and send scopes and only admins can grant the wider modifiers. Nothing requires confirmation before a send (13 of 20). The API returns form data and documents written by signers, and no prompt-injection guidance was found (3 of 15). Each agreement has an audit trail and an events endpoint. A log of API calls for the operator wasn't found (10 of 15). security.txt is PGP-signed and valid to 30 July 2027, and names PSIRT and a bug bounty on Intigriti. The certification list for Acrobat Sign sits behind a script-drawn filter and an NDA trust centre, so SOC 2 and ISO 27001 are unconfirmed (14 of 20).\n\nThe checklist (https://www.anchorterminal.com/benchmark/#checklist-security):\n\n- 0 to 30, the credential model. 30 for OAuth 2.1 with scopes, or scoped and revocable keys with rotation. 20 for plain revocable API keys. 10 for one all-powerful key. 10 off when a secret can travel in a URL query string as a documented option.\n- 0 to 20, read-only or least-privilege modes, and confirmation or approval for destructive actions.\n- 0 to 15, prompt-injection posture where the tool returns untrusted content (documented mitigations or guidance). A tool that returns no untrusted content gets 10.\n- 0 to 15, audit logs or per-call visibility for the operator.\n- 0 to 20, a security programme. security.txt or a disclosure policy, a bug bounty, SOC 2 or ISO 27001, advisories handled in public.\n\nModels are read for retention, whether API data trains models (and whether that's off by default), zero-retention options and certifications. Frameworks for telemetry defaults, approval hooks, guardrails and sandboxing.\n\n## 7. Transparency \u0026 trust, 70 out of 100, up to 2.6 more on the total\n\nMade of editorial 59, provenance 81.\n\nWhy it scored 70: Closed service under the Adobe General Terms of Use of 3 October 2025 and the Acrobat Sign product terms of May 2023. The documentation repository is MIT (15). The privacy policy of 24 October 2025 keeps most personal information while the user is active and contract records for ten years. The product terms store customer content for the licence term, and the General Terms say content isn't used to train generative AI models, with content analytics on by default and an opt-out. The data processing agreement wasn't read (18 of 30). v5 and SOAP are marked deprecated without an end date. Classic webhooks were retired on a dated schedule in 2023, and the product terms promise only reasonable effort to give notice of changes (8 of 20). The sub-processor list of 28 September 2026 names each company with its locations, with OpenAI and Google among them (18 of 20).\n\nThe checklist (https://www.anchorterminal.com/benchmark/#checklist-transparency):\n\n- 0 to 30, source availability and licence clarity. 30 for open source under an OSI licence, 15 for closed with clear terms, 0 for unclear terms.\n- 0 to 30, data handling and retention statements that agree with each other (privacy policy, DPA, retention periods, subprocessors).\n- 0 to 20, a deprecation policy or notices with dates.\n- 0 to 20, telemetry disclosed with an opt-out (local software), or subprocessors and data locations disclosed (hosted).\n\nThe other half of Transparency and trust is the provenance score, computed from checked facts (below). The category score is the mean of the two.\n\nProvenance checks not met in full (half of this category, computed from checked facts):\n\n- Endpoint on the vendor's domain: api.na1.adobesign.com is not on adobe.com (0 of 15)\n- Terms of service: published, but our reader couldn't read it (7 of 10)\n- Privacy policy: read, states 7 of the 8 things a reader expects (9.3 of 10)\n\n## What we couldn't check\n\nWhat we couldn't read counted as absent. Publishing it on a page a plain HTTP fetch can read (not only in a browser) lets the next check count it.\n\n- unchecked: the REST v6 reference on secure.na1.adobesign.com. Its robots.txt disallows crawlers, so the current operation count, schemas and error lists were not read. We loaded the page once before reading robots.txt, saw only a Swagger UI shell, and used nothing from it\n- unchecked: helpx.adobe.com answered 403 to every request, so the product release notes, transaction limits, system requirements and webhook IP ranges went unread\n- unchecked: the incident history on status.adobe.com, which is drawn by script\n- unchecked: certifications that apply to Acrobat Sign. The compliance list filters by script and the trust centre resources need an Adobe ID with a signed NDA\n- unchecked: the data processing agreement and the enterprise General Terms\n- Whether the team plans sold online include API access, and whether Developer Edition sign-up asks for a card, is not stated on the pages read\n- The lead said SDKs. Adobe marks every SDK deprecated and obsolete\n- The best practices page writes the base URI call as `/api/rest/v6/base_uris` and the migration guide and 2018 Swagger files as `/baseUris`. We made no API call to settle it\n- `provenance.terms` points at the Adobe General Terms of Use. Enterprise customers contract under separate General Terms and the Acrobat Sign product terms, which is a PDF\n- No MCP server for Acrobat Sign was found in the developer docs\n\n## Weaknesses\n\n- Adobe's SDK page says the C#, Java and JavaScript SDKs are obsolete and out of step with REST v6\n- The newest dated entry in the API release notes is November 2025, eleven months before this check\n- API plans (Acrobat Sign Solutions) are sold through sales. No per-transaction price is published\n- Per-endpoint request limits depend on the service plan and aren't published. Only the `/search` and polling limits carry numbers\n- No llms.txt, no MCP server and no current OpenAPI file were found. The downloadable Swagger files date from 2018\n\n## What costs an agent a turn today\n\nThe notes we give agents before they call it. Each one is a workaround an agent shouldn't need.\n\n- Call the base URI endpoint first and cache `api_access_point`. Each account lives on one shard such as `api.na1.adobesign.com`, and other hosts answer `INVALID_API_ACCESS_POINT`\n- Request only the scopes the task needs, with the `:self` modifier. `:account` lets the token act for every user in the account\n- On 429 wait the seconds in `Retry-After` or `retryAfter`. Retrying sooner resets the timer on accounts created after 20 May 2025\n- Don't poll. An identical GET repeated past the plan's threshold returns 429. Subscribe to webhooks, or send `If-None-Match` with the ETag\n- Create agreements in `DRAFT` state, check them, then move to `IN_PROCESS`. No idempotency key exists, so check before re-sending a failed `POST /agreements`\n\n## When it's done\n\nSend what changed and where it's published as a dispute (https://www.anchorterminal.com/builders/#disputes, or `POST https://www.anchorterminal.com/api/v1/contact` with `\"kind\": \"dispute\"`). Disputes are answered in public, and the listing is checked again by the same checklist. Paying for an audit or a listing claim changes nothing here.\n",
    "grade": "D",
    "score": 52.6,
    "assessed": "2026-10-08",
    "run": "October 2026 research run",
    "categories": [
      {
        "key": "payments",
        "name": "Payments \u0026 pricing",
        "score": 25,
        "maxGain": 9.4,
        "reason": "Read with the hosted rubric. No x402, MPP or L402 found (0). Acrobat team plan prices are public, but the pricing page doesn't say they include API access, and Acrobat Sign Solutions is by quote with no per-transaction price. We scored between plan-only and contact sales (5). The Developer Edition is free with API access. The sign-up page says no commitments and doesn't mention a card, and we didn't run the form (20). A person must create an Adobe ID, register an application and approve OAuth in a browser (0).",
        "checklist": [
          "The published rubric, also on the [x402 page](https://www.anchorterminal.com/x402/).",
          "- 40, a machine payment protocol (x402, MPP or L402) on the tool's own endpoints. 10 to 30 when it covers only some endpoints or only goes through a third party, and the note says which.\n- 20, per-call or per-unit pricing published without a login. 10 for public plan-only pricing, 0 for \"contact sales\" or prices behind a login.\n- 20, a free tier or trial that doesn't need a card.\n- 20, autonomous onboarding, meaning an agent can get access without a person signing up in a browser (keyless use, x402, a programmatic key API).",
          "Payment platforms and agent wallets rarely charge for their own API over a machine protocol, so the first line has steps for them, and the highest one that applies counts. 40 when x402, MPP or L402 runs on all their own endpoints, 30 when it runs on part of their own API, 25 when their merchants can accept one, 20 for running a facilitator, 15 for paying as a buyer, and 0 when the only protocol is their own. Merchant acceptance sits above a facilitator because the platform's own customers can charge agents through it, while a facilitator settles for sellers who wire up the protocol themselves. The counter-argument (a facilitator does more for the protocol as a whole) has a point. Each note says which step applied.",
          "Open-source software you run yourself is scored on its hosted or paid option if it has one. A free, self-hosted package with nothing to buy gets 20, 20 and 20 for the last three lines, and 0 to 40 for the first only if it ships a payment protocol."
        ],
        "checklistUrl": "https://www.anchorterminal.com/benchmark/#checklist-payments"
      },
      {
        "key": "maintenance",
        "name": "Maintenance \u0026 community",
        "score": 10,
        "maxGain": 7.9,
        "reason": "The newest dated entry in the API release notes is November 2025, more than 180 days before this check, and the developer guide was last updated on 17 December 2025 (0). No dated API entries fall in the last 90 days (0). Closed service with release notes, a developer forum link and support. The GitHub repository has nine open issues and its last commit was 14 May 2026. We didn't test a support channel (5 of 15). Adobe's SDK page says its SDKs are obsolete, and a Postman workspace is the suggested replacement (3 of 15). The SDK code hasn't changed since August 2022 and the repository has no CI workflow (2 of 10). Product release notes on helpx.adobe.com answered 403 and went unread, so newer product changes may exist.",
        "checklist": [
          "- 0 to 30, time since the last release, or the last published model or API change for a closed service. 30 within 30 days, 20 within 90, 10 within 180, 0 older.\n- 20, at least three releases or dated changelog entries in the last 90 days.\n- 0 to 25, responsiveness. Issues and pull requests answered on GitHub (the open issues and how recent the replies are). For closed services, a public changelog and a support or community channel that answers, 0 to 15.\n- 15, presence in the official MCP registry under a verified namespace (MCP servers), or current official SDKs (APIs and models).\n- 10, package health, current dependencies and CI.",
          "Models are read for deprecation notice periods and model churn rather than release counts."
        ],
        "checklistUrl": "https://www.anchorterminal.com/benchmark/#checklist-maintenance"
      },
      {
        "key": "schema",
        "name": "Schema \u0026 documentation",
        "score": 54,
        "maxGain": 7.5,
        "reason": "Graded on the REST v6 API. The live reference is a Swagger UI on secure.na1.adobesign.com, whose robots.txt disallows crawlers, so we didn't read it. The only downloadable contract found is a set of Swagger 1.2 files from August 2018 with 92 operations, and Adobe calls the SDKs built from it obsolete (12 of 25). developer.adobe.com/llms.txt returns 404 (0). The developer guide and a best practices page of 17 December 2025 state required scopes, valid state transitions and good and bad call patterns for each main endpoint (12 of 20). The 2018 files mark 231 of 489 parameters required and hold 99 enums (9 of 15). The guide has request and response examples and named error codes, with per-endpoint error lists in the reference we didn't read (10 of 15). The API is versioned in the path, and the release notes are dated by month, most recently November 2025 (11 of 15).",
        "checklist": [
          "APIs and MCP servers.",
          "- 25, a machine-readable contract (a public OpenAPI file or similar; for MCP, typed JSON Schema inputs on every tool).\n- 10, llms.txt or Markdown docs served for agents.\n- 0 to 20, descriptions that say what a tool is for, when to use it and when not to, read from the tool definitions in the source or the API reference.\n- 0 to 15, typed inputs with enums, constraints and required fields, and no free-form JSON blobs.\n- 0 to 15, examples and documented error responses.\n- 15, versioning and a public changelog.",
          "Models are read from the API reference, the OpenAPI file, llms.txt, the structured-output and tool-use docs and the model cards. Frameworks from docs a model can follow, typed interfaces, examples and the API reference."
        ],
        "checklistUrl": "https://www.anchorterminal.com/benchmark/#checklist-schema"
      },
      {
        "key": "ergonomics",
        "name": "Agent ergonomics",
        "score": 55,
        "maxGain": 7.3,
        "reason": "List calls take `pageSize` and return ETags for 304 responses. No field selection was found (13 of 25). Cursor pagination with `page.nextCursor`, a `/search` endpoint and a 500-agreement page cap (15 of 20). Errors are JSON with a stable code and message, such as `INVALID_API_ACCESS_POINT`, `THROTTLING_TOO_MANY_REQUESTS` and `RESOURCE_MODIFIED` (15 of 20). No idempotency key. `If-Match` protects updates and a `DRAFT` state lets a caller build an agreement before sending (8 of 20). A caller must first discover the account's shard, sending a file takes an upload call and then an agreement call, and Adobe marks every SDK deprecated (4 of 15).",
        "checklist": [
          "- 0 to 25, context cost. For MCP, the number and size of the tool definitions (25 for ten or fewer compact tools, 15 for 11 to 30, 5 for more than 30, plus up to 10 back for toolsets, dynamic loading or read-only subsets). For APIs, whether responses can be sized (field selection, limits, summaries).\n- 20, pagination, filtering and output-size controls.\n- 20, actionable, documented error responses, codes and messages an agent can recover from.\n- 20, idempotency or safe retries, and for MCP the `readOnlyHint` and `destructiveHint` annotations.\n- 15, sensible defaults, few required parameters, and official SDKs in at least two languages.",
          "Models are read for tool use, structured output, prompt caching, context length, batch and SDKs. Frameworks for how much code and how many defaults a tool-calling agent with MCP needs."
        ],
        "checklistUrl": "https://www.anchorterminal.com/benchmark/#checklist-ergonomics"
      },
      {
        "key": "reliability",
        "name": "Reliability",
        "score": 66,
        "maxGain": 6.8,
        "reason": "Graded as a hosted API. status.adobe.com is Adobe's status page and the Unified SLA names it for outage notices (20). The page is drawn by script and our reader saw no incident history, so the last 90 days are scored as unreadable (5). Numbers are published for `/search` (1,000 a minute, 2,500 an hour, 7,200 a day) and for identical GET calls (three a minute on Global, Enterprise and Developer tiers). Per-endpoint limits depend on the plan and aren't published (9 of 15). 429 responses carry `Retry-After` and a `retryAfter` field, the guide asks for exponential backoff, and `If-Match` ETags stop stale updates. No idempotency key was found for `POST /agreements` (12 of 15). The Unified SLA of 3 August 2026 commits to 99.9 per cent for Acrobat Sign Solutions for Enterprise, with credits of 5 to 25 per cent (10). REST v6 is generally available (10).",
        "checklist": [
          "Hosted APIs, MCP servers, models and platforms.",
          "- 20, a public status page with component history (Statuspage, Instatus, BetterStack or the vendor's own).\n- 0 to 30, the incident record for the last 90 days on that page. 30 for a clean record or trivial incidents only, 20 for minor incidents only, 10 for one major outage (an hour or more of a core API down, or errors across the board), 0 for several. 5 when there's no history we could read, and the note says so.\n- 15, rate limits documented with numbers.\n- 15, documented 429 or overload handling (Retry-After, backoff guidance), and idempotency keys or safe-retry guidance where writes are involved.\n- 10, an SLA published for any paid tier.\n- 10, the surface agents use is generally available, not beta or preview.",
          "Local packages, SDKs, frameworks and stdio MCP servers.",
          "- 20, installs from an official package with supported runtimes stated.\n- 25, a public CI and test suite, passing on the default branch.\n- 0 to 25, open crash or regression issues relative to activity (25 for few and handled, 0 for many, old and unanswered).\n- 15, semver discipline and breaking changes called out in a changelog.\n- 15, version 1.0 or later, or declared stable.",
          "Protocols are read from their reference implementations, the public facilitators or servers, spec stability and test vectors."
        ],
        "checklistUrl": "https://www.anchorterminal.com/benchmark/#checklist-reliability"
      },
      {
        "key": "security",
        "name": "Security \u0026 auth",
        "score": 66,
        "maxGain": 6,
        "reason": "OAuth 2.0 authorisation code grant with one-hour access tokens, refresh tokens that lapse after 60 days unused, a revoke endpoint and per-resource scopes with `:self`, `:group` and `:account` modifiers. PKCE wasn't found in the guide, and no secret in a URL query string was documented (26 of 30). Read scopes are separate from write and send scopes and only admins can grant the wider modifiers. Nothing requires confirmation before a send (13 of 20). The API returns form data and documents written by signers, and no prompt-injection guidance was found (3 of 15). Each agreement has an audit trail and an events endpoint. A log of API calls for the operator wasn't found (10 of 15). security.txt is PGP-signed and valid to 30 July 2027, and names PSIRT and a bug bounty on Intigriti. The certification list for Acrobat Sign sits behind a script-drawn filter and an NDA trust centre, so SOC 2 and ISO 27001 are unconfirmed (14 of 20).",
        "checklist": [
          "- 0 to 30, the credential model. 30 for OAuth 2.1 with scopes, or scoped and revocable keys with rotation. 20 for plain revocable API keys. 10 for one all-powerful key. 10 off when a secret can travel in a URL query string as a documented option.\n- 0 to 20, read-only or least-privilege modes, and confirmation or approval for destructive actions.\n- 0 to 15, prompt-injection posture where the tool returns untrusted content (documented mitigations or guidance). A tool that returns no untrusted content gets 10.\n- 0 to 15, audit logs or per-call visibility for the operator.\n- 0 to 20, a security programme. security.txt or a disclosure policy, a bug bounty, SOC 2 or ISO 27001, advisories handled in public.",
          "Models are read for retention, whether API data trains models (and whether that's off by default), zero-retention options and certifications. Frameworks for telemetry defaults, approval hooks, guardrails and sandboxing."
        ],
        "checklistUrl": "https://www.anchorterminal.com/benchmark/#checklist-security"
      },
      {
        "key": "transparency",
        "name": "Transparency \u0026 trust",
        "score": 70,
        "maxGain": 2.6,
        "reason": "Closed service under the Adobe General Terms of Use of 3 October 2025 and the Acrobat Sign product terms of May 2023. The documentation repository is MIT (15). The privacy policy of 24 October 2025 keeps most personal information while the user is active and contract records for ten years. The product terms store customer content for the licence term, and the General Terms say content isn't used to train generative AI models, with content analytics on by default and an opt-out. The data processing agreement wasn't read (18 of 30). v5 and SOAP are marked deprecated without an end date. Classic webhooks were retired on a dated schedule in 2023, and the product terms promise only reasonable effort to give notice of changes (8 of 20). The sub-processor list of 28 September 2026 names each company with its locations, with OpenAI and Google among them (18 of 20).",
        "blend": "editorial 59, provenance 81",
        "checklist": [
          "- 0 to 30, source availability and licence clarity. 30 for open source under an OSI licence, 15 for closed with clear terms, 0 for unclear terms.\n- 0 to 30, data handling and retention statements that agree with each other (privacy policy, DPA, retention periods, subprocessors).\n- 0 to 20, a deprecation policy or notices with dates.\n- 0 to 20, telemetry disclosed with an opt-out (local software), or subprocessors and data locations disclosed (hosted).",
          "The other half of Transparency and trust is the provenance score, computed from checked facts (below). The category score is the mean of the two."
        ],
        "checklistUrl": "https://www.anchorterminal.com/benchmark/#checklist-transparency"
      }
    ],
    "provenance": [
      {
        "label": "Endpoint on the vendor's domain",
        "value": "api.na1.adobesign.com is not on adobe.com",
        "points": 0,
        "max": 15
      },
      {
        "label": "Terms of service",
        "value": "published, but our reader couldn't read it",
        "points": 7,
        "max": 10
      },
      {
        "label": "Privacy policy",
        "value": "read, states 7 of the 8 things a reader expects",
        "points": 9.3,
        "max": 10
      }
    ],
    "unchecked": [
      "unchecked: the REST v6 reference on secure.na1.adobesign.com. Its robots.txt disallows crawlers, so the current operation count, schemas and error lists were not read. We loaded the page once before reading robots.txt, saw only a Swagger UI shell, and used nothing from it",
      "unchecked: helpx.adobe.com answered 403 to every request, so the product release notes, transaction limits, system requirements and webhook IP ranges went unread",
      "unchecked: the incident history on status.adobe.com, which is drawn by script",
      "unchecked: certifications that apply to Acrobat Sign. The compliance list filters by script and the trust centre resources need an Adobe ID with a signed NDA",
      "unchecked: the data processing agreement and the enterprise General Terms",
      "Whether the team plans sold online include API access, and whether Developer Edition sign-up asks for a card, is not stated on the pages read",
      "The lead said SDKs. Adobe marks every SDK deprecated and obsolete",
      "The best practices page writes the base URI call as `/api/rest/v6/base_uris` and the migration guide and 2018 Swagger files as `/baseUris`. We made no API call to settle it",
      "`provenance.terms` points at the Adobe General Terms of Use. Enterprise customers contract under separate General Terms and the Acrobat Sign product terms, which is a PDF",
      "No MCP server for Acrobat Sign was found in the developer docs"
    ],
    "weaknesses": [
      "Adobe's SDK page says the C#, Java and JavaScript SDKs are obsolete and out of step with REST v6",
      "The newest dated entry in the API release notes is November 2025, eleven months before this check",
      "API plans (Acrobat Sign Solutions) are sold through sales. No per-transaction price is published",
      "Per-endpoint request limits depend on the service plan and aren't published. Only the `/search` and polling limits carry numbers",
      "No llms.txt, no MCP server and no current OpenAPI file were found. The downloadable Swagger files date from 2018"
    ],
    "agentNotes": [
      "Call the base URI endpoint first and cache `api_access_point`. Each account lives on one shard such as `api.na1.adobesign.com`, and other hosts answer `INVALID_API_ACCESS_POINT`",
      "Request only the scopes the task needs, with the `:self` modifier. `:account` lets the token act for every user in the account",
      "On 429 wait the seconds in `Retry-After` or `retryAfter`. Retrying sooner resets the timer on accounts created after 20 May 2025",
      "Don't poll. An identical GET repeated past the plan's threshold returns 429. Subscribe to webhooks, or send `If-None-Match` with the ETag",
      "Create agreements in `DRAFT` state, check them, then move to `IN_PROCESS`. No idempotency key exists, so check before re-sending a failed `POST /agreements`"
    ],
    "recheck": "https://www.anchorterminal.com/builders/#disputes"
  },
  "meta": {
    "attribution": "Anchor Terminal (https://www.anchorterminal.com)",
    "docs": "https://www.anchorterminal.com/docs/",
    "generatedAt": "2026-10-09",
    "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"
  }
}