{
  "fixes": {
    "slug": "zoho-people",
    "name": "Zoho People",
    "listing": "https://www.anchorterminal.com/tools/zoho-people",
    "markdown": "# Fix list: Zoho People\n\nFrom Anchor Terminal's listing at https://www.anchorterminal.com/tools/zoho-people, the October 2026 research run, assessed 8 October 2026. Grade C, 55 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 Zoho People: 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. Schema \u0026 documentation, 43 out of 100, up to 9.3 more on the total\n\nWhy it scored 43: No OpenAPI or other machine-readable contract was found in the docs or under Zoho's GitHub organisation (0). An llms.txt at `/people/api/llms.txt` lists 339 reference pages, each served as Markdown (10). Each page opens with a one-line purpose and few say when to use one endpoint over another, such as the form, v2 and v3 routes to leave records (9 of 20). v3 pages have parameter tables with types, allowed values and defaults. Form endpoints take an `inputData` JSON string keyed by form label names, and search is a string grammar (7 of 15). Pages carry sample requests in up to five languages, sample responses and error tables, plus global lists of status and error codes. One curl sample includes session cookies (12 of 15). Versions sit in the path for v2 and v3, and no dated API changelog was found (5 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## 2. Payments \u0026 pricing, 30 out of 100, up to 8.8 more on the total\n\nWhy it scored 30: No x402, MPP or L402 (0). Plan prices are public in the pricing page's own feed, $1.25 to $4.50 a user a month billed yearly, and the daily API allowance per plan is published. There's no per-call price, so we scored it between plan-only and per-unit (15). A 30-day trial of any paid plan is self-serve. The Free plan has no API, and no page read says whether signup needs a card. The signup form's script asks for name, email and phone only (15 of 20). A person signs up in a browser, registers an OAuth client in the API console and approves scopes (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. Agent ergonomics, 48 out of 100, up to 8.5 more on the total\n\nWhy it scored 48: Graded on the REST API. `limit` caps a page at 200 records and views narrow the columns, but no field selection parameter was found and form records return their tabular sections (12 of 25). `sIndex` and `limit` on forms, `offset`, `limit` and `sort` on v3, `searchParams` with about 50 operators, and `modifiedtime` for changes since a timestamp. Parameter names differ between the three URL styles (16 of 20). Form endpoints return numeric codes with a published cause list, and v3 returns a named code, a message and the field at fault. The two formats coexist (13 of 20). No idempotency key or documented safe-retry method for writes (2 of 20). No official SDK found. The one-hour token, per-region hosts and the lookup of form and field label names add setup (5 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## 4. Security \u0026 auth, 60 out of 100, up to 7 more on the total\n\nWhy it scored 60: OAuth 2.0 with scopes by area and operation, one-hour access tokens and refresh tokens that last until revoked (30). Less 10 because the documented refresh call carries the refresh token and client secret in the URL query string (20 of 30). READ scopes exist for forms and leave. Employee, attendance, time tracker, dashboard and automation scopes are listed only as ALL. Permission errors (7037 to 7040) show calls are bound by the user's access, and no approval step for deletes was found (11 of 20). Records hold text written by employees and candidates, and no prompt-injection guidance was found (3 of 15). The product has activity logs and field audit history. Whether API calls appear in them isn't stated (6 of 15). security.txt valid to 30 June 2028, a bug bounty, SOC 2 Type 2 and ISO/IEC 27001, 27701, 27017 and 27018 (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## 5. Reliability, 77 out of 100, up to 4.6 more on the total\n\nWhy it scored 77: Graded on the REST API, read as a hosted service. status.zoho.com redirects to us.zohostatus.com, which lists Zoho People as a component with status and incident history (20). The status feed shows the People component last changed state on 28 March 2026, and the page's seven days of incident history name only a mail component. The older incident list loads by script and wasn't read, and only the US page was read (25 of 30). Daily caps per plan and a per-minute threshold on each reference page are published with numbers (15). 429 is documented for the daily and concurrency limits, and each page states a five-minute lock period after the threshold. No Retry-After header, backoff guidance or idempotency key was found (7 of 15). No SLA found (0). The API is the current documented surface, with no beta label (10).\n\nThe checklist (https://www.anchorterminal.com/benchmark/#checklist-reliability):\n\nHosted APIs, MCP servers, models and platforms.\n\n- 20, a public status page with component history (Statuspage, Instatus, BetterStack or the vendor's own).\n- 0 to 30, the incident record for the last 90 days on that page. 30 for a clean record or trivial incidents only, 20 for minor incidents only, 10 for one major outage (an hour or more of a core API down, or errors across the board), 0 for several. 5 when there's no history we could read, and the note says so.\n- 15, rate limits documented with numbers.\n- 15, documented 429 or overload handling (Retry-After, backoff guidance), and idempotency keys or safe-retry guidance where writes are involved.\n- 10, an SLA published for any paid tier.\n- 10, the surface agents use is generally available, not beta or preview.\n\nLocal packages, SDKs, frameworks and stdio MCP servers.\n\n- 20, installs from an official package with supported runtimes stated.\n- 25, a public CI and test suite, passing on the default branch.\n- 0 to 25, open crash or regression issues relative to activity (25 for few and handled, 0 for many, old and unanswered).\n- 15, semver discipline and breaking changes called out in a changelog.\n- 15, version 1.0 or later, or declared stable.\n\nProtocols are read from their reference implementations, the public facilitators or servers, spec stability and test vectors.\n\n## 6. Maintenance \u0026 community, 48 out of 100, up to 4.6 more on the total\n\nWhy it scored 48: Closed service, read from the product's What's New page, which is dated by month. The newest entries are for August 2026, between 38 and 68 days before this check (20). August lists nine entries and July ten (20). No API changelog. Support is by email on every plan, and a community forum exists on help.zoho.com, which we did not test for replies (8 of 25). No official SDK for Zoho People was found (0 of 15). No packages to assess (0 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. Transparency \u0026 trust, 73 out of 100, up to 2.4 more on the total\n\nMade of editorial 51, provenance 95.\n\nWhy it scored 73: Closed service under the Zoho Terms of Service, last updated 2 March 2022 (15 of 30). The privacy policy of 22 December 2025 says Zoho does not sell personal information, and that data is deleted from the active database within six months of account termination and from backups three months later. A Zoho People privacy notice covers facial recognition and location data. The DPA is sent on request through a form (24 of 30). No API deprecation policy or dated notices found, and the legacy authentication token page linked from the docs returns 404 with no notice (0). A sub-processor page exists, but its directory loads by script and we could not read the list. The OAuth page names six data centre regions (12 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: read, states 6 of the 7 things a reader expects, and has 1 clause that costs points (7.1 of 10)\n- Privacy policy: read, states 8 of the 8 things a reader expects, and has 1 clause that costs points (8 of 10)\n\n## What we couldn't check\n\nWhat we couldn't read counted as absent. Publishing it on a page a plain HTTP fetch can read (not only in a browser) lets the next check count it.\n\n- unchecked: the incident list on us.zohostatus.com beyond the seven days shown. It loads by script, so the 90-day record rests on the status feed's last state change for Zoho People (28 March 2026)\n- unchecked: status pages for data centres other than the US\n- unchecked: the sub-processor directory, which loads by script\n- unchecked: whether the trial signup asks for a card. No page read says either way\n- unchecked: whether Zoho MCP has Zoho People tools. The MCP home page names Zoho People and the MCP pricing page's supported services list does not\n- unchecked: replies on the Zoho People community forum at help.zoho.com\n- unchecked: API hosts for regions other than the US. The docs use people.zoho.com throughout and people.zoho.in once\n- The price feed also holds entries named `zapi-addon` ($750 a month) and `zus-api-addon` ($375 a month). No page read explains them, so they are not on the listing\n- The United States plan prices ($3 Essential HR, $5 Workforce, $5 Talent, $8 Enterprise, billed yearly) are matched to plan names by their order on the pricing page\n- What's New entries carry a month, not a day, and none is listed for September 2026. `lastRelease` is set to the first day of August 2026\n- Whether API calls appear in the product's activity logs. Not found in the reviewed documentation\n- The lead was right about OAuth and employee and form records. It had not read the leave endpoints, which exist in v2 and v3. It did not mention that the Free plan has no API\n- No terms specific to the API were found. The Zoho Terms of Service govern the product\n\n## Weaknesses\n\n- No OpenAPI spec, official SDK or dated API changelog found. The product What's New page has no API entries for 2026\n- The Free plan has no API access. Paid plans cap calls at 5,000 to 25,000 a day\n- Employee, attendance, time tracker, dashboard and automation scopes are listed only as ALL, with no read-only form\n- Three URL styles coexist (unversioned form endpoints, v2 and v3), with different parameter names, paging and error formats\n- The documented token refresh call carries the refresh token and client secret in the URL query string\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- Use the accounts host and API host of the organisation's data centre. Tokens issued in one region fail in another\n- Stay under each page's threshold, often 30 calls a minute. Exceeding it locks that endpoint for five minutes\n- Page form records with `sIndex` and `limit`, at most 200 a call, and use `modifiedtime` to fetch only changes\n- Look up form and field label names with `/api/forms` before writing. `inputData` takes label names, and lookup fields take record IDs\n- Send the refresh token and client secret in the POST body, not the query string, and store the refresh token, which never expires\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": "C",
    "score": 55,
    "assessed": "2026-10-08",
    "run": "October 2026 research run",
    "categories": [
      {
        "key": "schema",
        "name": "Schema \u0026 documentation",
        "score": 43,
        "maxGain": 9.3,
        "reason": "No OpenAPI or other machine-readable contract was found in the docs or under Zoho's GitHub organisation (0). An llms.txt at `/people/api/llms.txt` lists 339 reference pages, each served as Markdown (10). Each page opens with a one-line purpose and few say when to use one endpoint over another, such as the form, v2 and v3 routes to leave records (9 of 20). v3 pages have parameter tables with types, allowed values and defaults. Form endpoints take an `inputData` JSON string keyed by form label names, and search is a string grammar (7 of 15). Pages carry sample requests in up to five languages, sample responses and error tables, plus global lists of status and error codes. One curl sample includes session cookies (12 of 15). Versions sit in the path for v2 and v3, and no dated API changelog was found (5 of 15).",
        "checklist": [
          "APIs and MCP servers.",
          "- 25, a machine-readable contract (a public OpenAPI file or similar; for MCP, typed JSON Schema inputs on every tool).\n- 10, llms.txt or Markdown docs served for agents.\n- 0 to 20, descriptions that say what a tool is for, when to use it and when not to, read from the tool definitions in the source or the API reference.\n- 0 to 15, typed inputs with enums, constraints and required fields, and no free-form JSON blobs.\n- 0 to 15, examples and documented error responses.\n- 15, versioning and a public changelog.",
          "Models are read from the API reference, the OpenAPI file, llms.txt, the structured-output and tool-use docs and the model cards. Frameworks from docs a model can follow, typed interfaces, examples and the API reference."
        ],
        "checklistUrl": "https://www.anchorterminal.com/benchmark/#checklist-schema"
      },
      {
        "key": "payments",
        "name": "Payments \u0026 pricing",
        "score": 30,
        "maxGain": 8.8,
        "reason": "No x402, MPP or L402 (0). Plan prices are public in the pricing page's own feed, $1.25 to $4.50 a user a month billed yearly, and the daily API allowance per plan is published. There's no per-call price, so we scored it between plan-only and per-unit (15). A 30-day trial of any paid plan is self-serve. The Free plan has no API, and no page read says whether signup needs a card. The signup form's script asks for name, email and phone only (15 of 20). A person signs up in a browser, registers an OAuth client in the API console and approves scopes (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": "ergonomics",
        "name": "Agent ergonomics",
        "score": 48,
        "maxGain": 8.5,
        "reason": "Graded on the REST API. `limit` caps a page at 200 records and views narrow the columns, but no field selection parameter was found and form records return their tabular sections (12 of 25). `sIndex` and `limit` on forms, `offset`, `limit` and `sort` on v3, `searchParams` with about 50 operators, and `modifiedtime` for changes since a timestamp. Parameter names differ between the three URL styles (16 of 20). Form endpoints return numeric codes with a published cause list, and v3 returns a named code, a message and the field at fault. The two formats coexist (13 of 20). No idempotency key or documented safe-retry method for writes (2 of 20). No official SDK found. The one-hour token, per-region hosts and the lookup of form and field label names add setup (5 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": "security",
        "name": "Security \u0026 auth",
        "score": 60,
        "maxGain": 7,
        "reason": "OAuth 2.0 with scopes by area and operation, one-hour access tokens and refresh tokens that last until revoked (30). Less 10 because the documented refresh call carries the refresh token and client secret in the URL query string (20 of 30). READ scopes exist for forms and leave. Employee, attendance, time tracker, dashboard and automation scopes are listed only as ALL. Permission errors (7037 to 7040) show calls are bound by the user's access, and no approval step for deletes was found (11 of 20). Records hold text written by employees and candidates, and no prompt-injection guidance was found (3 of 15). The product has activity logs and field audit history. Whether API calls appear in them isn't stated (6 of 15). security.txt valid to 30 June 2028, a bug bounty, SOC 2 Type 2 and ISO/IEC 27001, 27701, 27017 and 27018 (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": "reliability",
        "name": "Reliability",
        "score": 77,
        "maxGain": 4.6,
        "reason": "Graded on the REST API, read as a hosted service. status.zoho.com redirects to us.zohostatus.com, which lists Zoho People as a component with status and incident history (20). The status feed shows the People component last changed state on 28 March 2026, and the page's seven days of incident history name only a mail component. The older incident list loads by script and wasn't read, and only the US page was read (25 of 30). Daily caps per plan and a per-minute threshold on each reference page are published with numbers (15). 429 is documented for the daily and concurrency limits, and each page states a five-minute lock period after the threshold. No Retry-After header, backoff guidance or idempotency key was found (7 of 15). No SLA found (0). The API is the current documented surface, with no beta label (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": "maintenance",
        "name": "Maintenance \u0026 community",
        "score": 48,
        "maxGain": 4.6,
        "reason": "Closed service, read from the product's What's New page, which is dated by month. The newest entries are for August 2026, between 38 and 68 days before this check (20). August lists nine entries and July ten (20). No API changelog. Support is by email on every plan, and a community forum exists on help.zoho.com, which we did not test for replies (8 of 25). No official SDK for Zoho People was found (0 of 15). No packages to assess (0 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": "transparency",
        "name": "Transparency \u0026 trust",
        "score": 73,
        "maxGain": 2.4,
        "reason": "Closed service under the Zoho Terms of Service, last updated 2 March 2022 (15 of 30). The privacy policy of 22 December 2025 says Zoho does not sell personal information, and that data is deleted from the active database within six months of account termination and from backups three months later. A Zoho People privacy notice covers facial recognition and location data. The DPA is sent on request through a form (24 of 30). No API deprecation policy or dated notices found, and the legacy authentication token page linked from the docs returns 404 with no notice (0). A sub-processor page exists, but its directory loads by script and we could not read the list. The OAuth page names six data centre regions (12 of 20).",
        "blend": "editorial 51, provenance 95",
        "checklist": [
          "- 0 to 30, source availability and licence clarity. 30 for open source under an OSI licence, 15 for closed with clear terms, 0 for unclear terms.\n- 0 to 30, data handling and retention statements that agree with each other (privacy policy, DPA, retention periods, subprocessors).\n- 0 to 20, a deprecation policy or notices with dates.\n- 0 to 20, telemetry disclosed with an opt-out (local software), or subprocessors and data locations disclosed (hosted).",
          "The other half of Transparency and trust is the provenance score, computed from checked facts (below). The category score is the mean of the two."
        ],
        "checklistUrl": "https://www.anchorterminal.com/benchmark/#checklist-transparency"
      }
    ],
    "provenance": [
      {
        "label": "Terms of service",
        "value": "read, states 6 of the 7 things a reader expects, and has 1 clause that costs points",
        "points": 7.1,
        "max": 10
      },
      {
        "label": "Privacy policy",
        "value": "read, states 8 of the 8 things a reader expects, and has 1 clause that costs points",
        "points": 8,
        "max": 10
      }
    ],
    "unchecked": [
      "unchecked: the incident list on us.zohostatus.com beyond the seven days shown. It loads by script, so the 90-day record rests on the status feed's last state change for Zoho People (28 March 2026)",
      "unchecked: status pages for data centres other than the US",
      "unchecked: the sub-processor directory, which loads by script",
      "unchecked: whether the trial signup asks for a card. No page read says either way",
      "unchecked: whether Zoho MCP has Zoho People tools. The MCP home page names Zoho People and the MCP pricing page's supported services list does not",
      "unchecked: replies on the Zoho People community forum at help.zoho.com",
      "unchecked: API hosts for regions other than the US. The docs use people.zoho.com throughout and people.zoho.in once",
      "The price feed also holds entries named `zapi-addon` ($750 a month) and `zus-api-addon` ($375 a month). No page read explains them, so they are not on the listing",
      "The United States plan prices ($3 Essential HR, $5 Workforce, $5 Talent, $8 Enterprise, billed yearly) are matched to plan names by their order on the pricing page",
      "What's New entries carry a month, not a day, and none is listed for September 2026. `lastRelease` is set to the first day of August 2026",
      "Whether API calls appear in the product's activity logs. Not found in the reviewed documentation",
      "The lead was right about OAuth and employee and form records. It had not read the leave endpoints, which exist in v2 and v3. It did not mention that the Free plan has no API",
      "No terms specific to the API were found. The Zoho Terms of Service govern the product"
    ],
    "weaknesses": [
      "No OpenAPI spec, official SDK or dated API changelog found. The product What's New page has no API entries for 2026",
      "The Free plan has no API access. Paid plans cap calls at 5,000 to 25,000 a day",
      "Employee, attendance, time tracker, dashboard and automation scopes are listed only as ALL, with no read-only form",
      "Three URL styles coexist (unversioned form endpoints, v2 and v3), with different parameter names, paging and error formats",
      "The documented token refresh call carries the refresh token and client secret in the URL query string"
    ],
    "agentNotes": [
      "Use the accounts host and API host of the organisation's data centre. Tokens issued in one region fail in another",
      "Stay under each page's threshold, often 30 calls a minute. Exceeding it locks that endpoint for five minutes",
      "Page form records with `sIndex` and `limit`, at most 200 a call, and use `modifiedtime` to fetch only changes",
      "Look up form and field label names with `/api/forms` before writing. `inputData` takes label names, and lookup fields take record IDs",
      "Send the refresh token and client secret in the POST body, not the query string, and store the refresh token, which never expires"
    ],
    "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"
  }
}