# Fix list: Rippling From Anchor Terminal's listing at https://www.anchorterminal.com/tools/rippling, the October 2026 research run, assessed 7 October 2026. Grade C, 60.8 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 Rippling: 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. Payments & pricing, 5 out of 100, up to 11.9 more on the total Why it scored 5: Read with the hosted rubric. No x402, MPP or L402 (0). rippling.com/pricing says products are billed per employee per month and asks for a quote, with no figures (0). No free tier or trial found for customers. Approved App Shop partners use the API and a test company at no cost, which needs an application, so partial credit (5 of 20). A person creates each token in the Developer app or completes an OAuth install (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. ## 2. Reliability, 62 out of 100, up to 7.6 more on the total Why it scored 62: Read with the hosted lines and scored on the REST Platform API v2, the surface an outside agent calls with a token. status.rippling.com on Atlassian Statuspage lists components among them Rippling App and Platform API, with incident history (20). Fourteen incidents between 9 July and 7 October 2026, five marked critical and three major. The app was down on 27 July (twice, about 21 and 14 minutes before access returned), intermittently on 18 September (about an hour) and on 29 September (about 31 minutes, an overloaded authentication database). REST API latency on 10 September lasted about three hours and caused timeouts in Functions. The Rippling MCP was down for 34 minutes on 17 September. None tags the Platform API component, so this is read as short of several API majors (5). Limits with numbers, 300 requests per IP per 10 seconds, page size 100, 64 filter nodes (15). The docs ask for exponential backoff or Retry-After logic on 429 and give a retry column per status. `Idempotency-Key` appears on hires, draft transitions and time entries only (12 of 15). No SLA found, and the customer terms were unreadable (0). The v2 API carries no beta label (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, 73 out of 100, up to 4.4 more on the total Why it scored 73: The reference is generated from an OpenAPI document and shows a JSON Schema tab per operation, but we found no downloadable spec, and the typed SDK on npm is the only public machine-readable contract (12 of 25). llms.txt lists the docs with guidance written for models, though it says Markdown twins aren't published and pages render only with JavaScript (10). Endpoint descriptions are short, with filterable, expandable and sortable fields and the required package listed, and llms.txt says when to use v2, V1, the MCP or Functions (13 of 20). Enums on status and type fields and typed bodies. `filter` is a string expression (12 of 15). Curl examples in every guide and a status table. The documented 401 example differs from the body the API returned to us, `{"ok": false, "error": ...}` (11 of 15). Dated versions through `Rippling-Api-Version` and a changelog of 141 entries (15). 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. Transparency & trust, 51 out of 100, up to 4.3 more on the total Made of editorial 33, provenance 69. Why it scored 51: Closed service. Customer terms, user terms, AI Services Terms and Developer Terms of Use are published at stable URLs, which returned only a JavaScript application to our reader. The SDK is Apache-2.0 (13 of 30). The privacy and compliance page says Rippling processes customer data only as instructed and links a privacy notice and a DPA, both unread for the same reason. The docs state 90 days of activity log retention and the fields the MCP withholds (12 of 30). Versions are dated and V1 is labelled an archive, but breaking changes are logged on the day with no notice period shown and no removal dates (8 of 20). No sub-processor list or hosting locations found on the security, privacy and compliance or legal index pages (0). 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): - Endpoint on the vendor's domain: rest.ripplingapis.com is not on rippling.com (0 of 15) - Terms of service: published, but our reader couldn't read it (7 of 10) - Privacy policy: published, but our reader couldn't read it (7 of 10) - security.txt: not found (0 of 10) ## 5. Agent ergonomics, 75 out of 100, up to 4.1 more on the total Why it scored 75: Related objects come back null until asked for with `expand`, and `limit` sizes a page. No field selection (20 of 25). Cursor pagination through `next_link`, `filter` with nine operators, `order_by` (20). A status table with retry advice, `__meta.redacted_fields` naming hidden fields and `x-rippling-request-id` on responses, though the example error bodies are generic (14 of 20). `Idempotency-Key` on hires, draft transitions and time entries, and the SDK retries twice by default. No general idempotency rule for writes, and MCP annotations weren't visible (12 of 20). List calls need no parameters. One official SDK, JavaScript, still alpha (9 of 15). 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. ## 6. Maintenance & community, 74 out of 100, up to 2.3 more on the total Why it scored 74: The changelog's latest entry is 28 September 2026 and the SDK's latest version 7 October 2026 (30). 46 changelog entries on 16 dates since 9 July, and 39 SDK versions (20). Closed service with a dated changelog, a partner support address and a service desk for applications. No public issue tracker (10 of 15). One official SDK, current but alpha, and no entry for Rippling's own MCP server in the official registry (9 of 15). The SDK has no runtime dependencies. Its repository is private, so CI isn't visible (5 of 10). 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. ## 7. Security & auth, 90 out of 100, up to 1.8 more on the total Why it scored 90: API tokens with 162 listed scopes, most split into read and read-write, limited to the owner's permission profile, shown once, revocable, and revoked after 30 days unused or when the owner leaves. OAuth 2.0 with scopes for partners. All in the `Authorization` header (30). Read-only scopes, admin-only token oversight, hires and worker changes created as drafts for review, leave requests through the normal approval flow, and MCP deletes that need confirmation (19 of 20). The MCP runs model-written code in a sandbox with no network egress and credentials kept outside it, and withholds SSNs, home addresses and tax IDs. No guidance on untrusted text in records (9 of 15). An activity log endpoint with 90 days of events, an email on token creation and MCP Gateway audit logs. A per-token call log wasn't found (14 of 15). SOC 1 and SOC 2 Type II, SOC 3, ISO 27001, 27018 and 42001, CSA STAR Level 2, and a vulnerability reporting programme with bounties. No security.txt (18 of 20). 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. ## Deductions Each comes off the total. A fixed and documented problem counts for less at the next check. - 2026-05-21 and 2026-06-17. The changelog labels 14 changes breaking since October 2025, among them `draft_hire_id` removed from POST /draft-hires/ responses on 21 May 2026 and `candidate_id` made required on GET /candidate-applications/ on 17 June 2026, while the reference still shows a single version, 2024-08-01. The versioning page says a breaking change requires a version update. Each change is documented on the day, so the smallest deduction applies (https://developer.rippling.com/documentation/rest-api/essentials/changelog). ## 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: customer terms, privacy notice, DPA, AI Services Terms and Developer Terms of Use on app.rippling.com (JavaScript-only pages), so retention periods, any SLA, sub-processors and hosting locations are unconfirmed - unchecked: whether the 14 changes labelled breaking were announced to customers before their changelog date, or applied only to tokens on a newer version than 2024-08-01 - unchecked: what API Tier 1 and the other named packages cost, and whether every customer plan includes API tokens - unchecked: whether 429 responses carry a Retry-After header. The docs mention retry-after logic without naming the header - Whether `Idempotency-Key` is accepted on writes beyond hires, draft transitions and time entries - The docs give `npx @rippling/rippling-sdk-mcp` and `@rippling/ripdev`, but both names returned 404 from the npm registry on 7 October 2026 - The remote URL of the Rippling MCP isn't in the public docs. It is copied from the product, so tool annotations and schemas couldn't be read - Whether rest.ripplingapis.com is registered to People Center, Inc. wasn't checked beyond the vendor's own docs naming it ## Weaknesses - No public price, free tier or trial. rippling.com/pricing is a quote form, and endpoints name a paid package such as API Tier 1 - Five incidents marked critical and three marked major on status.rippling.com between 16 July and 29 September 2026 - The changelog labels 14 changes breaking since October 2025 while the reference still shows one version, 2024-08-01 - No downloadable OpenAPI file found, and the documentation site renders only with JavaScript - One official SDK, JavaScript at 0.2.0-alpha.106, and the documented @rippling/rippling-sdk-mcp package returned 404 on npm ## 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. - Call https://rest.ripplingapis.com with a Bearer token and pin `Rippling-Api-Version`. Use V1 at api.rippling.com only for resources that exist nowhere else - Treat a null field as possibly hidden. Check `__meta.redacted_fields`, the token's scopes and whether `expand` was sent - Follow `next_link` until it is null. The default page is 50 records and a `limit` above 100 returns 400 - Stay under 300 requests per IP in any 10 seconds. Going over rejects every request for the next 10 seconds - Send an `Idempotency-Key` on POST /hires/ and POST /draft-transitions/, then poll the request until it reaches a final status ## 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.