# Fix list: Apiroc Unified Calendar API From Anchor Terminal's listing at https://www.anchorterminal.com/tools/apiroc, the October 2026 research run, assessed 1 October 2026. Grade E, 41.3 out of 100. This 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. For a coding agent working on Apiroc Unified Calendar API: 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. ## 1. Security & auth, 21 out of 100, up to 13.8 more on the total Why it scored 21: Your application calls with one `x-api-key` that reaches every connected end-user account, and we found no key scopes or rotation docs (10). Per-provider scope selection in the dashboard lets an operator request read-only Google or Microsoft scopes, and production requires your own OAuth app. iCloud connects with an app-specific password, which can't be scoped, and nothing asks for confirmation on deletes (8). Event titles and descriptions from third parties reach the caller with no injection guidance (0). Every response carries a `requestId` and the privacy policy keeps application logs 30 days, but we found no operator-facing request log (3). No security.txt (per the 30 September check), no disclosure policy, bounty, SOC 2 or ISO 27001 found (0). The checklist (https://www.anchorterminal.com/benchmark/#checklist-security): - 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. - 0 to 20, read-only or least-privilege modes, and confirmation or approval for destructive actions. - 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. - 0 to 15, audit logs or per-call visibility for the operator. - 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. ## 2. Reliability, 35 out of 100, up to 13 more on the total Why it scored 35: No public status page with history. status.apiroc.com doesn't resolve and the homepage shows only an "All systems operational" badge with a claim of 34B+ API calls (0). No readable incident history (5). Rate limits published with numbers, 20 requests a second in Sandbox and 300 in Production per application, plus 600 a minute per Google account and 1,000 a minute per Microsoft account (15). The docs don't mention 429 or Retry-After, though the official Node SDK reads a `retry-after` header on 429, and webhook docs say to dedupe on `svix-id` (5). The terms say availability can't be guaranteed, and no SLA was found on any plan (0). GA, with production use licensed on Pro (10). The checklist (https://www.anchorterminal.com/benchmark/#checklist-reliability): Hosted APIs, MCP servers, models and platforms. - 20, a public status page with component history (Statuspage, Instatus, BetterStack or the vendor's own). - 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. - 15, rate limits documented with numbers. - 15, documented 429 or overload handling (Retry-After, backoff guidance), and idempotency keys or safe-retry guidance where writes are involved. - 10, an SLA published for any paid tier. - 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. - 25, a public CI and test suite, passing on the default branch. - 0 to 25, open crash or regression issues relative to activity (25 for few and handled, 0 for many, old and unanswered). - 15, semver discipline and breaking changes called out in a changelog. - 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. ## 3. Schema & documentation, 44 out of 100, up to 9.1 more on the total Why it scored 44: No OpenAPI spec. A Postman collection is the only machine-readable contract (10). No llms.txt, per the 30 September check (0). Reference pages for five resources with parameters and cURL, TypeScript and Python examples, but little on when to use one endpoint over another (10). Typed inputs in the Node SDK and required fields marked in the docs (10). Examples throughout, and an errors page that gives only the shape (`error`, `message`, `requestId`) and the 2xx, 4xx and 5xx ranges, with no list of error names (9). `/v1` in the path but no changelog (5). The checklist (https://www.anchorterminal.com/benchmark/#checklist-schema): APIs and MCP servers. - 25, a machine-readable contract (a public OpenAPI file or similar; for MCP, typed JSON Schema inputs on every tool). - 10, llms.txt or Markdown docs served for agents. - 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. - 0 to 15, typed inputs with enums, constraints and required fields, and no free-form JSON blobs. - 0 to 15, examples and documented error responses. - 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. ## 4. Agent ergonomics, 52 out of 100, up to 7.8 more on the total Why it scored 52: Lists take `limit` and `pageToken`, and event reads return a `syncToken` for incremental sync (15). Pagination and sync tokens, with free/busy as a separate endpoint (15). Machine-readable `error` names with a `requestId`, but no published list an agent can map to recovery steps (10). No idempotency keys. Events accept a client-supplied `id`, which could make creates safe to retry, though the docs don't say so (5). Node is the only SDK. Python, PHP and Java are listed as on the way (7). The checklist (https://www.anchorterminal.com/benchmark/#checklist-ergonomics): - 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). - 20, pagination, filtering and output-size controls. - 20, actionable, documented error responses, codes and messages an agent can recover from. - 20, idempotency or safe retries, and for MCP the `readOnlyHint` and `destructiveHint` annotations. - 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. ## 5. Payments & pricing, 40 out of 100, up to 7.5 more on the total Why it scored 40: No x402, MPP or L402 (0). Plan prices and $0.50 per extra end-user account a month published without login (20). Free plan for 10 end-user accounts with no card (20). Browser signup and a dashboard key, no autonomous route (0). The checklist (https://www.anchorterminal.com/benchmark/#checklist-payments): 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. - 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. - 20, a free tier or trial that doesn't need a card. - 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. ## 6. Transparency & trust, 53 out of 100, up to 4.1 more on the total Made of editorial 51, provenance 55. Why it scored 53: Closed service with terms under Albanian law and an MIT Node SDK (15). Privacy policy (24 August 2026) says event content isn't stored persistently, application logs and analytics are kept 30 days, data isn't used to train models, and Google's Limited Use rules apply. A DPA is published. Webhooks are delivered through Svix, which isn't on the sub-processor list, and webhook message retention has no period (18). 30 days' notice for price rises and sub-processor changes, but no API deprecation policy (3). Five sub-processors listed with locations, and servers stated as US. Svix missing (15). The checklist (https://www.anchorterminal.com/benchmark/#checklist-transparency): - 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. - 0 to 30, data handling and retention statements that agree with each other (privacy policy, DPA, retention periods, subprocessors). - 0 to 20, a deprecation policy or notices with dates. - 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. Provenance checks not met in full (half of this category, computed from checked facts): - Domain age: apiroc.com, registered 2026-04-09 (under a year) (0 of 15) - Status page: not found (0 of 10) - Changelog: not found (0 of 10) - security.txt: not found (0 of 10) ## 7. Maintenance & community, 62 out of 100, up to 3.3 more on the total Why it scored 62: Node SDK v2.0.1 on 5 August 2026, 57 days before this check (20). Four SDK releases since 3 July (v1.2.2, v1.3.0, v2.0.0, v2.0.1) (20). No public changelog. Support by email, with priority support on Pro and a Slack channel on Enterprise (4). One current official SDK, in Node (10). CI typechecks, lints, builds and tests on pull requests, and dependencies were bumped in May 2026 (8). The checklist (https://www.anchorterminal.com/benchmark/#checklist-maintenance): - 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. - 20, at least three releases or dated changelog entries in the last 90 days. - 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. - 15, presence in the official MCP registry under a verified namespace (MCP servers), or current official SDKs (APIs and models). - 10, package health, current dependencies and CI. Models are read for deprecation notice periods and model churn rather than release counts. ## What we couldn't check What 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. - unchecked: whether UTC Labs is a registered Albanian company (no registration number on the terms, and utclabs.com didn't load for us) - Whether api.onecalunified.com still answers after the 5 August 2026 host move - Whether API keys can be scoped, rotated or limited to read-only - unchecked: what the homepage status badge reads from, since no status page resolves - Webhook message retention period, and whether Svix is a sub-processor ## Weaknesses - No status page history, changelog, OpenAPI spec, llms.txt or security.txt - One application key reaches every connected account, with no key scopes documented - No SLA on any plan, and no 429 or retry guidance in the docs - Svix handles webhook delivery but isn't on the sub-processor list - Node.js is the only SDK ## What costs an agent a turn today The notes we give agents before they call it. Each one is a workaround an agent shouldn't need. - Send the key in the `x-api-key` header from a server, never a browser - Call api.apiroc.com, since the SDK's old default host was api.onecalunified.com - On 429, wait for the `retry-after` header, since the docs don't describe backoff - Pass back `pageToken` until it's absent, then keep the `syncToken` for the next incremental read - Dedupe webhooks on `svix-id`, since Svix retries deliveries ## What the review panel asked for - Status page with history - Error catalogue - scoped application keys - publish a security.txt ## When it's done Send 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.