{
  "fixes": {
    "slug": "skyscanner",
    "name": "Skyscanner Travel APIs",
    "listing": "https://www.anchorterminal.com/tools/skyscanner",
    "markdown": "# Fix list: Skyscanner Travel APIs\n\nFrom Anchor Terminal's listing at https://www.anchorterminal.com/tools/skyscanner, the October 2026 research run, assessed 8 October 2026. Grade E, 45.6 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 Skyscanner Travel APIs: 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. Reliability, 35 out of 100, up to 13 more on the total\n\nWhy it scored 35: Graded as a hosted API. No status page is linked from the developer docs or the partner site (0). No incident history to read (5). Default rate limits are published for every API per second, minute and hour, for example 100 flight search creates and 500 polls a minute (15). 429 is documented, but the guidance is to contact the account manager, with no `Retry-After` or backoff advice. Calls are searches, so retries are safe (5 of 15). No SLA found (0). Flights are on v3, hotels and car hire on v1, and the car hire beta labels were removed on 25 February 2025 (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## 2. Payments \u0026 pricing, 25 out of 100, up to 9.4 more on the total\n\nWhy it scored 25: No x402, MPP or L402 (0). The help centre says the APIs carry no per-booking, monthly or yearly fee and pay partners a revenue share, without publishing the share (15 of 20). Use is free with no card, but only after an approved application and a commercial agreement, so half (10 of 20). A person applies, is reviewed within two weeks and signs an agreement (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## 3. Security \u0026 auth, 48 out of 100, up to 9.1 more on the total\n\nWhy it scored 48: One API key per partner in the `x-api-key` header, issued by an account manager. Skyscanner can revoke access, and no scopes or self-serve rotation were found (15 of 30). The API is read-only, with no booking or payment calls, so a leaked key cannot spend money (12 of 20). Hotel reviews and supplier content are third-party text, with no injection guidance (5 of 15). Impact reports show redirects and revenue, and no per-call log was found (3 of 15). security.txt valid to 2030, a vulnerability disclosure policy and a public Bugcrowd bounty. Certifications were not checked (13 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## 4. Agent ergonomics, 50 out of 100, up to 8.1 more on the total\n\nWhy it scored 50: Flight results arrive as one large document with no field selection or paging, while hotels take `initialPageSize` and page limits (8 of 25). Hotels live prices and reviews have limit and offset paging, server-side filters and sort. Flights have carrier and agent include and exclude lists only (12 of 20). Status codes are listed and expired sessions return a documented 400 message, but error bodies are a code and a message (10 of 20). Every call is a read, so retries are safe, and sessions can be recreated (14 of 20). Five required fields for a flight search and sensible defaults, but no SDK in any language (6 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. Schema \u0026 documentation, 56 out of 100, up to 7.2 more on the total\n\nWhy it scored 56: A Redoc reference covers 13 APIs and 21 operations with typed request and response schemas, but no OpenAPI file to download was found (10 of 25). `llms.txt` on the docs host returns 403 and no Markdown docs were found (0). Overview pages explain when to use live or indicative prices and how create and poll work, while reference field descriptions are short (12 of 20). Enums for cabin class, status and sort types and stated required fields, with few numeric constraints (10 of 15). Request and response samples per operation and a status code list, with thin error bodies. The FAQ says no code samples are published (9 of 15). Versioned paths and a dated public changelog (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## 6. Transparency \u0026 trust, 52 out of 100, up to 4.2 more on the total\n\nMade of editorial 28, provenance 76.\n\nWhy it scored 52: Closed service. The API terms are in the partner's contract on impact.com and are not public, though the usage guidelines are (8 of 30). The privacy policy names Skyscanner Limited and says data is kept as long as needed, with no periods and no partner DPA found (12 of 30). No deprecation policy. The changelog recorded on 12 November 2025 that flight mash-ups had been unsupported since June 2025, and on 1 April 2026 that they were back (3 of 20). The privacy policy lists processor categories without names or locations (5 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- Terms of service: not found (0 of 10)\n- Privacy policy: read, states 5 of the 8 things a reader expects, and has 1 clause that costs points (5.8 of 10)\n- Status page: not found (0 of 10)\n\n## 7. Maintenance \u0026 community, 60 out of 100, up to 3.5 more on the total\n\nWhy it scored 60: The newest changelog entry is 1 October 2026 (30). Four dated entries in the last 90 days, on 14 July, 19 August, 30 September and 1 October, all documentation changes (20). Public changelog, a partner help centre with articles updated this week and a support request form. Support otherwise runs through account managers (10 of 15). No current official SDK. The `skyscanner` PyPI package dates from April 2020 (0 of 15). No package to assess (0 of 10). We read the responsiveness line at 15 because this is a closed service, as the checklist allows.\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## 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: whether a status page exists. None is linked from the docs or partner site, and status.skyscanner.net did not connect from our network, so the status page is scored as absent\n- unchecked: the Skyscanner API Terms and Conditions, which are available only inside a partner's contract on impact.com. `provenance.terms` is left out for that reason\n- unchecked: `llms.txt`, `robots.txt` and security.txt on developers.skyscanner.net, which all return 403 Access Denied\n- unchecked: Skyscanner's security certifications, and whether the Bugcrowd scope includes partners.api.skyscanner.net\n- The revenue share paid to API partners is not published\n- What the MCP server exposes (endpoint, tools, auth) is not published. It is recorded as a fact and not graded\n- Whether an AI agent acting for a user counts as a user-generated request under the usage guidelines is not stated\n- Whether keys can be rotated or scoped by the partner. Nothing in the public docs says so\n- The changelog entries of the last 90 days are documentation changes. Whether the API itself changed in that time is not recorded publicly\n\n## Weaknesses\n\n- Keys are issued only after an application review and a commercial agreement, with a stated minimum of 100,000 monthly active users\n- The usage guidelines say live pricing calls are made only on user-generated requests, and automated calls without a user action are not permitted\n- No booking, change or cancel calls. Every result carries a deep link and the traveller books on the supplier's site\n- No downloadable OpenAPI file, SDK or code samples were found, and `llms.txt` on the docs host returns 403\n- No status page, SLA or public API terms were found. The API terms sit in the partner's contract on impact.com\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- Send the key in the `x-api-key` header on every call to `https://partners.api.skyscanner.net`. CORS is not supported, so call from a server\n- Create a live search only when a user has given origin, destination and exact dates. Use the indicative price endpoints for open-ended questions\n- Poll `/search/poll/{sessionToken}` until `status` is `RESULT_STATUS_COMPLETE`, and replace earlier results only when `action` is `RESULT_ACTION_REPLACED`\n- Start a new session when a poll returns 400. Flight session tokens last about an hour and hotel sessions at most 15 minutes\n- Pass each `deepLink` to the traveller unchanged, since altered encoding breaks Impact tracking, and never put personal data in `subid2`\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": "E",
    "score": 45.6,
    "assessed": "2026-10-08",
    "run": "October 2026 research run",
    "categories": [
      {
        "key": "reliability",
        "name": "Reliability",
        "score": 35,
        "maxGain": 13,
        "reason": "Graded as a hosted API. No status page is linked from the developer docs or the partner site (0). No incident history to read (5). Default rate limits are published for every API per second, minute and hour, for example 100 flight search creates and 500 polls a minute (15). 429 is documented, but the guidance is to contact the account manager, with no `Retry-After` or backoff advice. Calls are searches, so retries are safe (5 of 15). No SLA found (0). Flights are on v3, hotels and car hire on v1, and the car hire beta labels were removed on 25 February 2025 (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": "payments",
        "name": "Payments \u0026 pricing",
        "score": 25,
        "maxGain": 9.4,
        "reason": "No x402, MPP or L402 (0). The help centre says the APIs carry no per-booking, monthly or yearly fee and pay partners a revenue share, without publishing the share (15 of 20). Use is free with no card, but only after an approved application and a commercial agreement, so half (10 of 20). A person applies, is reviewed within two weeks and signs an agreement (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": "security",
        "name": "Security \u0026 auth",
        "score": 48,
        "maxGain": 9.1,
        "reason": "One API key per partner in the `x-api-key` header, issued by an account manager. Skyscanner can revoke access, and no scopes or self-serve rotation were found (15 of 30). The API is read-only, with no booking or payment calls, so a leaked key cannot spend money (12 of 20). Hotel reviews and supplier content are third-party text, with no injection guidance (5 of 15). Impact reports show redirects and revenue, and no per-call log was found (3 of 15). security.txt valid to 2030, a vulnerability disclosure policy and a public Bugcrowd bounty. Certifications were not checked (13 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": "ergonomics",
        "name": "Agent ergonomics",
        "score": 50,
        "maxGain": 8.1,
        "reason": "Flight results arrive as one large document with no field selection or paging, while hotels take `initialPageSize` and page limits (8 of 25). Hotels live prices and reviews have limit and offset paging, server-side filters and sort. Flights have carrier and agent include and exclude lists only (12 of 20). Status codes are listed and expired sessions return a documented 400 message, but error bodies are a code and a message (10 of 20). Every call is a read, so retries are safe, and sessions can be recreated (14 of 20). Five required fields for a flight search and sensible defaults, but no SDK in any language (6 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": "schema",
        "name": "Schema \u0026 documentation",
        "score": 56,
        "maxGain": 7.2,
        "reason": "A Redoc reference covers 13 APIs and 21 operations with typed request and response schemas, but no OpenAPI file to download was found (10 of 25). `llms.txt` on the docs host returns 403 and no Markdown docs were found (0). Overview pages explain when to use live or indicative prices and how create and poll work, while reference field descriptions are short (12 of 20). Enums for cabin class, status and sort types and stated required fields, with few numeric constraints (10 of 15). Request and response samples per operation and a status code list, with thin error bodies. The FAQ says no code samples are published (9 of 15). Versioned paths and a dated public changelog (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": "transparency",
        "name": "Transparency \u0026 trust",
        "score": 52,
        "maxGain": 4.2,
        "reason": "Closed service. The API terms are in the partner's contract on impact.com and are not public, though the usage guidelines are (8 of 30). The privacy policy names Skyscanner Limited and says data is kept as long as needed, with no periods and no partner DPA found (12 of 30). No deprecation policy. The changelog recorded on 12 November 2025 that flight mash-ups had been unsupported since June 2025, and on 1 April 2026 that they were back (3 of 20). The privacy policy lists processor categories without names or locations (5 of 20).",
        "blend": "editorial 28, provenance 76",
        "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"
      },
      {
        "key": "maintenance",
        "name": "Maintenance \u0026 community",
        "score": 60,
        "maxGain": 3.5,
        "reason": "The newest changelog entry is 1 October 2026 (30). Four dated entries in the last 90 days, on 14 July, 19 August, 30 September and 1 October, all documentation changes (20). Public changelog, a partner help centre with articles updated this week and a support request form. Support otherwise runs through account managers (10 of 15). No current official SDK. The `skyscanner` PyPI package dates from April 2020 (0 of 15). No package to assess (0 of 10). We read the responsiveness line at 15 because this is a closed service, as the checklist allows.",
        "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"
      }
    ],
    "provenance": [
      {
        "label": "Terms of service",
        "value": "not found",
        "points": 0,
        "max": 10
      },
      {
        "label": "Privacy policy",
        "value": "read, states 5 of the 8 things a reader expects, and has 1 clause that costs points",
        "points": 5.8,
        "max": 10
      },
      {
        "label": "Status page",
        "value": "not found",
        "points": 0,
        "max": 10
      }
    ],
    "unchecked": [
      "unchecked: whether a status page exists. None is linked from the docs or partner site, and status.skyscanner.net did not connect from our network, so the status page is scored as absent",
      "unchecked: the Skyscanner API Terms and Conditions, which are available only inside a partner's contract on impact.com. `provenance.terms` is left out for that reason",
      "unchecked: `llms.txt`, `robots.txt` and security.txt on developers.skyscanner.net, which all return 403 Access Denied",
      "unchecked: Skyscanner's security certifications, and whether the Bugcrowd scope includes partners.api.skyscanner.net",
      "The revenue share paid to API partners is not published",
      "What the MCP server exposes (endpoint, tools, auth) is not published. It is recorded as a fact and not graded",
      "Whether an AI agent acting for a user counts as a user-generated request under the usage guidelines is not stated",
      "Whether keys can be rotated or scoped by the partner. Nothing in the public docs says so",
      "The changelog entries of the last 90 days are documentation changes. Whether the API itself changed in that time is not recorded publicly"
    ],
    "weaknesses": [
      "Keys are issued only after an application review and a commercial agreement, with a stated minimum of 100,000 monthly active users",
      "The usage guidelines say live pricing calls are made only on user-generated requests, and automated calls without a user action are not permitted",
      "No booking, change or cancel calls. Every result carries a deep link and the traveller books on the supplier's site",
      "No downloadable OpenAPI file, SDK or code samples were found, and `llms.txt` on the docs host returns 403",
      "No status page, SLA or public API terms were found. The API terms sit in the partner's contract on impact.com"
    ],
    "agentNotes": [
      "Send the key in the `x-api-key` header on every call to `https://partners.api.skyscanner.net`. CORS is not supported, so call from a server",
      "Create a live search only when a user has given origin, destination and exact dates. Use the indicative price endpoints for open-ended questions",
      "Poll `/search/poll/{sessionToken}` until `status` is `RESULT_STATUS_COMPLETE`, and replace earlier results only when `action` is `RESULT_ACTION_REPLACED`",
      "Start a new session when a poll returns 400. Flight session tokens last about an hour and hotel sessions at most 15 minutes",
      "Pass each `deepLink` to the traveller unchanged, since altered encoding breaks Impact tracking, and never put personal data in `subid2`"
    ],
    "recheck": "https://www.anchorterminal.com/builders/#disputes"
  },
  "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"
  }
}