{
  "fixes": {
    "slug": "travelport",
    "name": "Travelport TripServices APIs",
    "listing": "https://www.anchorterminal.com/tools/travelport",
    "markdown": "# Fix list: Travelport TripServices APIs\n\nFrom Anchor Terminal's listing at https://www.anchorterminal.com/tools/travelport, the October 2026 research run, assessed 8 October 2026. Grade E, 45.9 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 Travelport TripServices 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, 19 out of 100, up to 16.2 more on the total\n\nWhy it scored 19: Graded as a hosted API. No public status page found. None is linked from the developer portal or the support page, and status.travelport.com did not answer (0). No readable incident history, so 5 by the rubric (5). The only published limit is 50 token requests a second per IP address. No limit for the Flights, Stays or Pay calls was found (4 of 15). No 429, Retry-After or backoff guidance and no idempotency key for booking or ticketing was found in the docs or the three OpenAPI files, whose responses list 400, 401, 402, 403, 404, 500 and 503 only (0). No SLA published, and the test terms disclaim availability (0). Version 11 is in production and the docs say TripServices is ready today (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, 20 out of 100, up to 10 more on the total\n\nWhy it scored 20: No x402, MPP or L402 (0). No public price. The terms say charges are specified in each Developer Contract, and the docs send new customers to sales (0). A trial with no payment is advertised on the portal, with credentials sent by email after a form (20). A person fills in the form with a name, work email and company, and production needs a contract and certification (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, 47 out of 100, up to 9.3 more on the total\n\nWhy it scored 47: OAuth 2.0 password grant, with a username, password, client id and client secret exchanged for a 24-hour Bearer token. The Credential Access Manager creates, rotates and disables identities. No scopes were found, and the long-lived secret is a password (20 of 30). Access groups limit a credential to one point of sale and its content, managed identities give third parties their own credentials, and pre-production is a separate host. No read-only credential or approval step for ticketing was found (8 of 20). Responses are mostly structured supplier data, with free text in hotel descriptions, fare rules and remarks and no injection guidance (8 of 15). Every response has an `E2ETrackingId` and a transaction id, and callers can send a `TraceId`. No operator log or audit export is documented (5 of 15). A Responsible Disclosure Policy dated June 2025 with a 10 business day acknowledgement and no bug bounty. Both security.txt paths return 404, and no SOC 2, ISO 27001 or PCI attestation was found on the pages read (6 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, 51 out of 100, up to 8 more on the total\n\nWhy it scored 51: `offersPerPage`, `maxNumberOfUpsellsToReturn`, detail-view flags and reference payloads (an identifier in place of the full fare) size a request, but responses are large nested documents with no field selection found (15 of 25). Stays paginates with a `nextIdentifier`, Flights caps results per page, and search filters cover carriers, cabins and content source (15 of 20). Errors carry StatusCode, Message, SourceID, SourceCode and Category with documented ranges. Some failures arrive as HTTP 200 with COMMUNICATION ERROR in the body, Stays has two error formats, and a wrong version returns only `faultstring` (13 of 20). No idempotency key or retry guidance was found. The workbench is a two-step build then commit, which keeps a booking uncommitted until the last call (5 of 20). Each call needs a token, an access group or PCC header, compression and often two version headers. There is no SDK, only Postman collections (3 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. Transparency \u0026 trust, 52 out of 100, up to 4.2 more on the total\n\nMade of editorial 47, provenance 57.\n\nWhy it scored 52: Closed service. The API and SDK Terms of Use and the test system terms are public, but the Developer Contract that sets charges, liability and the contracting entity is not (13 of 30). The GDS privacy notice, last updated 3 January 2025, lists the traveller data held, says it is destroyed no more than 36 months after the last travel transaction, and states Data Privacy Framework certification for Travelport, LP. No public DPA was found (20 of 30). The API reference marks seven Flights operations as deprecated with no dates, the terms promise reasonable advance notice of changes, and retirement dates go out in Developer Advisories behind a login (8 of 20). No subprocessor list was found. The terms say data may be stored in the United States or any country where Travelport or its agents have facilities, the FAQ says the platform runs on AWS, and a global operator list names the distributor in each country (6 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.travelport.net is not on travelport.com (0 of 15)\n- Terms of service: read, states 3 of the 7 things a reader expects, and has 2 clauses that cost points (2.6 of 10)\n- Privacy policy: read, states 7 of the 8 things a reader expects (9.3 of 10)\n- Status page: not found (0 of 10)\n- security.txt: not found (0 of 10)\n\n## 6. Maintenance \u0026 community, 56 out of 100, up to 3.9 more on the total\n\nWhy it scored 56: The newest dated Flights release is Air Offer 26.11.33W on 12 August 2026, updated 25 August, and the release notes page was last modified on 16 September 2026. That is within 90 days and outside 30 (20 of 30). Four dated Flights releases since 10 July 2026, on 16 July, 27 July, 5 August and 12 August (20). Public release notes, with support cases, the knowledge base and Developer Advisories behind a MyTravelport login and no public forum. The Stays page lists no 2026 release (8 of 15 for a closed service). No SDK. The Postman developer kits are current, at v26.11.1 for GDS flights and August 2026 for Stays (5 of 15). No package to judge. The OpenAPI files are at 11.36.0 with older versions kept alongside (3 of 10).\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## 7. Schema \u0026 documentation, 84 out of 100, up to 2.6 more on the total\n\nWhy it scored 84: Public OpenAPI 3.0 files download without login for Flights (version 11.36.0, 101 operations), Stays (22) and Pay (2) (25). `llms.txt` lists the docs, and every page has a Markdown copy at the same path with `.md` (10). Long guides explain search, pricing, booking, ticketing and exchanges and when each call applies, but 35 of the 101 Flights operations have no description in the spec (13 of 20). Typed schemas with required fields, patterns and length limits, 130 enums in Flights, and polymorphic `@type` objects. Travelport warns the files may hold unmapped roadmap objects, and the Stays FAQ says Postman and the spec disagree on some names (11 of 15). 2,237 examples in the Flights spec and published error lists with code ranges, though Pay has no error list (12 of 15). The version sits in the path with `Accept-Version` and `Content-Version` headers, and release notes are dated per API. The portal's changelog page is empty (13 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## 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 Travelport runs a public status page. status.travelport.com did not answer our request and no status link was found on the portal, so the line is scored as absent\n- unchecked: the trial's limits (which APIs, how long, what volume). The form sits behind a script-drawn page and the docs describe only air shopping\n- unchecked: Developer Advisories, the knowledge base and the Credential Access Manager articles, which need a MyTravelport login\n- Whether written authorisation for AI agent access is granted as a matter of course. The terms bar automated tools without it, while the portal markets TripServices for AI travel\n- Whether production calls are rate limited and what a throttled response looks like. No limit or 429 was found in the docs or the OpenAPI files\n- Security certifications such as PCI DSS, ISO 27001 or SOC 2. None was found on the pages read, which is not evidence that none is held\n- Which Travelport company signs the Developer Contract and under which law. The public terms leave both to the contract\n\n## Weaknesses\n\n- The API and SDK Terms of Use forbid any automated process or tool, such as a bot, without written authorisation from Travelport\n- No public price. Charges sit in a Developer Contract reached through sales, and production needs certification with 15 days' notice\n- No status page, SLA or API rate limit was found. The only published limit is 50 token requests a second per IP\n- Tokens come from the OAuth password grant with a username, password, client id and client secret, and no scopes were found\n- No idempotency key, no SDK and no MCP server. Some failures arrive as HTTP 200 with an error object in the body\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- Request one token and cache it for 24 hours. Travelport declines certification for refreshing more often than every 23 hours without a stated reason\n- Send `Accept-Encoding: gzip, deflate` and `XAUTH_TRAVELPORT_ACCESSGROUP` (or `TVP-PCC-CORE`) on every call. Production traffic without compression is refused\n- Send `offersPerPage` on a journey-based search, or later calls can't reference its results. Cached searches last 12 minutes for GDS content and 34 for NDC\n- Commit a workbench within 30 minutes or it expires, and read `Result/Error` in the body even on HTTP 200\n- Get written authorisation for agent access before production. The terms bar automated tools and speculative or duplicate bookings\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": 45.9,
    "assessed": "2026-10-08",
    "run": "October 2026 research run",
    "categories": [
      {
        "key": "reliability",
        "name": "Reliability",
        "score": 19,
        "maxGain": 16.2,
        "reason": "Graded as a hosted API. No public status page found. None is linked from the developer portal or the support page, and status.travelport.com did not answer (0). No readable incident history, so 5 by the rubric (5). The only published limit is 50 token requests a second per IP address. No limit for the Flights, Stays or Pay calls was found (4 of 15). No 429, Retry-After or backoff guidance and no idempotency key for booking or ticketing was found in the docs or the three OpenAPI files, whose responses list 400, 401, 402, 403, 404, 500 and 503 only (0). No SLA published, and the test terms disclaim availability (0). Version 11 is in production and the docs say TripServices is ready today (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": 20,
        "maxGain": 10,
        "reason": "No x402, MPP or L402 (0). No public price. The terms say charges are specified in each Developer Contract, and the docs send new customers to sales (0). A trial with no payment is advertised on the portal, with credentials sent by email after a form (20). A person fills in the form with a name, work email and company, and production needs a contract and certification (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": 47,
        "maxGain": 9.3,
        "reason": "OAuth 2.0 password grant, with a username, password, client id and client secret exchanged for a 24-hour Bearer token. The Credential Access Manager creates, rotates and disables identities. No scopes were found, and the long-lived secret is a password (20 of 30). Access groups limit a credential to one point of sale and its content, managed identities give third parties their own credentials, and pre-production is a separate host. No read-only credential or approval step for ticketing was found (8 of 20). Responses are mostly structured supplier data, with free text in hotel descriptions, fare rules and remarks and no injection guidance (8 of 15). Every response has an `E2ETrackingId` and a transaction id, and callers can send a `TraceId`. No operator log or audit export is documented (5 of 15). A Responsible Disclosure Policy dated June 2025 with a 10 business day acknowledgement and no bug bounty. Both security.txt paths return 404, and no SOC 2, ISO 27001 or PCI attestation was found on the pages read (6 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": 51,
        "maxGain": 8,
        "reason": "`offersPerPage`, `maxNumberOfUpsellsToReturn`, detail-view flags and reference payloads (an identifier in place of the full fare) size a request, but responses are large nested documents with no field selection found (15 of 25). Stays paginates with a `nextIdentifier`, Flights caps results per page, and search filters cover carriers, cabins and content source (15 of 20). Errors carry StatusCode, Message, SourceID, SourceCode and Category with documented ranges. Some failures arrive as HTTP 200 with COMMUNICATION ERROR in the body, Stays has two error formats, and a wrong version returns only `faultstring` (13 of 20). No idempotency key or retry guidance was found. The workbench is a two-step build then commit, which keeps a booking uncommitted until the last call (5 of 20). Each call needs a token, an access group or PCC header, compression and often two version headers. There is no SDK, only Postman collections (3 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": "transparency",
        "name": "Transparency \u0026 trust",
        "score": 52,
        "maxGain": 4.2,
        "reason": "Closed service. The API and SDK Terms of Use and the test system terms are public, but the Developer Contract that sets charges, liability and the contracting entity is not (13 of 30). The GDS privacy notice, last updated 3 January 2025, lists the traveller data held, says it is destroyed no more than 36 months after the last travel transaction, and states Data Privacy Framework certification for Travelport, LP. No public DPA was found (20 of 30). The API reference marks seven Flights operations as deprecated with no dates, the terms promise reasonable advance notice of changes, and retirement dates go out in Developer Advisories behind a login (8 of 20). No subprocessor list was found. The terms say data may be stored in the United States or any country where Travelport or its agents have facilities, the FAQ says the platform runs on AWS, and a global operator list names the distributor in each country (6 of 20).",
        "blend": "editorial 47, provenance 57",
        "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": 56,
        "maxGain": 3.9,
        "reason": "The newest dated Flights release is Air Offer 26.11.33W on 12 August 2026, updated 25 August, and the release notes page was last modified on 16 September 2026. That is within 90 days and outside 30 (20 of 30). Four dated Flights releases since 10 July 2026, on 16 July, 27 July, 5 August and 12 August (20). Public release notes, with support cases, the knowledge base and Developer Advisories behind a MyTravelport login and no public forum. The Stays page lists no 2026 release (8 of 15 for a closed service). No SDK. The Postman developer kits are current, at v26.11.1 for GDS flights and August 2026 for Stays (5 of 15). No package to judge. The OpenAPI files are at 11.36.0 with older versions kept alongside (3 of 10).",
        "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": 84,
        "maxGain": 2.6,
        "reason": "Public OpenAPI 3.0 files download without login for Flights (version 11.36.0, 101 operations), Stays (22) and Pay (2) (25). `llms.txt` lists the docs, and every page has a Markdown copy at the same path with `.md` (10). Long guides explain search, pricing, booking, ticketing and exchanges and when each call applies, but 35 of the 101 Flights operations have no description in the spec (13 of 20). Typed schemas with required fields, patterns and length limits, 130 enums in Flights, and polymorphic `@type` objects. Travelport warns the files may hold unmapped roadmap objects, and the Stays FAQ says Postman and the spec disagree on some names (11 of 15). 2,237 examples in the Flights spec and published error lists with code ranges, though Pay has no error list (12 of 15). The version sits in the path with `Accept-Version` and `Content-Version` headers, and release notes are dated per API. The portal's changelog page is empty (13 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"
      }
    ],
    "provenance": [
      {
        "label": "Endpoint on the vendor's domain",
        "value": "api.travelport.net is not on travelport.com",
        "points": 0,
        "max": 15
      },
      {
        "label": "Terms of service",
        "value": "read, states 3 of the 7 things a reader expects, and has 2 clauses that cost points",
        "points": 2.6,
        "max": 10
      },
      {
        "label": "Privacy policy",
        "value": "read, states 7 of the 8 things a reader expects",
        "points": 9.3,
        "max": 10
      },
      {
        "label": "Status page",
        "value": "not found",
        "points": 0,
        "max": 10
      },
      {
        "label": "security.txt",
        "value": "not found",
        "points": 0,
        "max": 10
      }
    ],
    "unchecked": [
      "unchecked: whether Travelport runs a public status page. status.travelport.com did not answer our request and no status link was found on the portal, so the line is scored as absent",
      "unchecked: the trial's limits (which APIs, how long, what volume). The form sits behind a script-drawn page and the docs describe only air shopping",
      "unchecked: Developer Advisories, the knowledge base and the Credential Access Manager articles, which need a MyTravelport login",
      "Whether written authorisation for AI agent access is granted as a matter of course. The terms bar automated tools without it, while the portal markets TripServices for AI travel",
      "Whether production calls are rate limited and what a throttled response looks like. No limit or 429 was found in the docs or the OpenAPI files",
      "Security certifications such as PCI DSS, ISO 27001 or SOC 2. None was found on the pages read, which is not evidence that none is held",
      "Which Travelport company signs the Developer Contract and under which law. The public terms leave both to the contract"
    ],
    "weaknesses": [
      "The API and SDK Terms of Use forbid any automated process or tool, such as a bot, without written authorisation from Travelport",
      "No public price. Charges sit in a Developer Contract reached through sales, and production needs certification with 15 days' notice",
      "No status page, SLA or API rate limit was found. The only published limit is 50 token requests a second per IP",
      "Tokens come from the OAuth password grant with a username, password, client id and client secret, and no scopes were found",
      "No idempotency key, no SDK and no MCP server. Some failures arrive as HTTP 200 with an error object in the body"
    ],
    "agentNotes": [
      "Request one token and cache it for 24 hours. Travelport declines certification for refreshing more often than every 23 hours without a stated reason",
      "Send `Accept-Encoding: gzip, deflate` and `XAUTH_TRAVELPORT_ACCESSGROUP` (or `TVP-PCC-CORE`) on every call. Production traffic without compression is refused",
      "Send `offersPerPage` on a journey-based search, or later calls can't reference its results. Cached searches last 12 minutes for GDS content and 34 for NDC",
      "Commit a workbench within 30 minutes or it expires, and read `Result/Error` in the body even on HTTP 200",
      "Get written authorisation for agent access before production. The terms bar automated tools and speculative or duplicate bookings"
    ],
    "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"
  }
}