Alloy

# Fix list: Alloy

From Anchor Terminal's listing at https://www.anchorterminal.com/tools/alloy, the October 2026 research run, assessed 14 October 2026. Grade D, 52.4 out of 100.

This is everything the published grade says the listing lacks, the biggest possible gain to the total first. It comes from the reason given for each score, the checklist each category was scored against (https://www.anchorterminal.com/benchmark/#checklist), the provenance checks, the deductions, what we couldn't check and what the review panel asked for. A fix counts at the next check, once it's public.

For a coding agent working on Alloy: work through the items below in the product, its docs and its public pages. Each category gives the reason for its score, with the points each checklist item earned, and the checklist itself, so the gap is the items that earned less than their points. Change the product, not the wording, and keep a note of what you changed and where it's published.

## 1. Payments & pricing, 0 out of 100, up to 12.5 more on the total

Why it scored 0: Read with the hosted rubric. No x402, MPP or L402 (0). No public prices. www.alloy.com/pricing returns 404 and the site asks visitors to schedule a demo (0). No trial or free tier found. Sandbox mode exists for customers (0). Access is through sales (0).

The checklist (https://www.anchorterminal.com/benchmark/#checklist-payments):

The published rubric, also on the [x402 page](https://www.anchorterminal.com/x402/).

- 40, a machine payment protocol (x402, MPP or L402) on the tool's own endpoints. 10 to 30 when it covers only some endpoints or only goes through a third party, and the note says which.
- 20, per-call or per-unit pricing published without a login. 10 for public plan-only pricing, 0 for "contact sales" or prices behind a login.
- 20, a free tier or trial that doesn't need a card.
- 20, autonomous onboarding, meaning an agent can get access without a person signing up in a browser (keyless use, x402, a programmatic key API).

Payment platforms and agent wallets rarely charge for their own API over a machine protocol, so the first line has steps for them, and the highest one that applies counts. 40 when x402, MPP or L402 runs on all their own endpoints, 30 when it runs on part of their own API, 25 when their merchants can accept one, 20 for running a facilitator, 15 for paying as a buyer, and 0 when the only protocol is their own. Merchant acceptance sits above a facilitator because the platform's own customers can charge agents through it, while a facilitator settles for sellers who wire up the protocol themselves. The counter-argument (a facilitator does more for the protocol as a whole) has a point. Each note says which step applied.

Open-source software you run yourself is scored on its hosted or paid option if it has one. A free, self-hosted package with nothing to buy gets 20, 20 and 20 for the last three lines, and 0 to 40 for the first only if it ships a payment protocol.

## 2. Security & auth, 49 out of 100, up to 8.9 more on the total

Why it scored 49: An account-level token and secret sent as HTTP basic auth, or exchanged for a one-hour OAuth bearer token through client credentials. Up to five active secrets per key, with rotation and revocation in the dashboard. No scopes were found, and the bearer token has the same access as the key (20 of 30). An IP allowlist exists (error 4016) and dashboard roles govern who manages keys. No read-only key (7 of 20). Responses carry data returned by third-party vendors and AI analysis summaries, with no injection guidance (3 of 15). Webhook logs and dashboard records, with no API audit log found (7 of 15). The security page says Alloy is SOC 2 Type 2 certified, runs yearly penetration tests and takes vulnerability reports by email. security.txt returns 404 and no bug bounty was found (12 of 20).

The checklist (https://www.anchorterminal.com/benchmark/#checklist-security):

- 0 to 30, the credential model. 30 for OAuth 2.1 with scopes, or scoped and revocable keys with rotation. 20 for plain revocable API keys. 10 for one all-powerful key. 10 off when a secret can travel in a URL query string as a documented option.
- 0 to 20, read-only or least-privilege modes, and confirmation or approval for destructive actions.
- 0 to 15, prompt-injection posture where the tool returns untrusted content (documented mitigations or guidance). A tool that returns no untrusted content gets 10.
- 0 to 15, audit logs or per-call visibility for the operator.
- 0 to 20, a security programme. security.txt or a disclosure policy, a bug bounty, SOC 2 or ISO 27001, advisories handled in public.

Models are read for retention, whether API data trains models (and whether that's off by default), zero-retention options and certifications. Frameworks for telemetry defaults, approval hooks, guardrails and sandboxing.

## 3. Reliability, 59 out of 100, up to 8.2 more on the total

Why it scored 59: Read with the hosted lines. status.alloy.com is a Statuspage with Production API, Sandbox API, Webhooks, SDK, Customer Dashboard and Third Party Data Integrations components (20). Nine incidents between 17 July and 9 October 2026, four labelled major. Elevated error rates on the Journeys API on 21 July, resolved within about an hour, hit the Production API. The others marked major were a Socure document verification failure through the SDK on 10 September (about 4.5 hours), a Loqate address formatter outage on 20 August and a 9-minute dashboard login problem on 17 July. We scored 10 because only one major touched the API itself (10). Limits are set per endpoint and account with no published numbers, and responses carry `alloy-ratelimit-limit`, `-remaining` and `-reset` headers (7 of 15). A 429 carries `retry-after`, and the retry guide names retryable codes and asks for exponential backoff with jitter. No idempotency key for writes was found (12 of 15). No SLA found (0). The API is generally available (10).

The checklist (https://www.anchorterminal.com/benchmark/#checklist-reliability):

Hosted APIs, MCP servers, models and platforms.

- 20, a public status page with component history (Statuspage, Instatus, BetterStack or the vendor's own).
- 0 to 30, the incident record for the last 90 days on that page. 30 for a clean record or trivial incidents only, 20 for minor incidents only, 10 for one major outage (an hour or more of a core API down, or errors across the board), 0 for several. 5 when there's no history we could read, and the note says so.
- 15, rate limits documented with numbers.
- 15, documented 429 or overload handling (Retry-After, backoff guidance), and idempotency keys or safe-retry guidance where writes are involved.
- 10, an SLA published for any paid tier.
- 10, the surface agents use is generally available, not beta or preview.

Local packages, SDKs, frameworks and stdio MCP servers.

- 20, installs from an official package with supported runtimes stated.
- 25, a public CI and test suite, passing on the default branch.
- 0 to 25, open crash or regression issues relative to activity (25 for few and handled, 0 for many, old and unanswered).
- 15, semver discipline and breaking changes called out in a changelog.
- 15, version 1.0 or later, or declared stable.

Protocols are read from their reference implementations, the public facilitators or servers, spec stability and test vectors.

## 4. Agent ergonomics, 52 out of 100, up to 7.8 more on the total

Why it scored 52: No field selection, and evaluation and journey responses return the full decision payload (10 of 25). Paginated lists for batches, cases and investigations, with filters on cases (14 of 20). Errors carry `status_code`, `minor_code`, `type`, `message`, `details` and an `error_token`, with a documented table (18 of 20). No idempotency key. Journey application reruns are explicit endpoints, and the webhook guide asks receivers to handle duplicates (6 of 20). No server-side SDK. The npm and Android packages are capture SDKs for the end-user document step (4 of 15).

The checklist (https://www.anchorterminal.com/benchmark/#checklist-ergonomics):

- 0 to 25, context cost. For MCP, the number and size of the tool definitions (25 for ten or fewer compact tools, 15 for 11 to 30, 5 for more than 30, plus up to 10 back for toolsets, dynamic loading or read-only subsets). For APIs, whether responses can be sized (field selection, limits, summaries).
- 20, pagination, filtering and output-size controls.
- 20, actionable, documented error responses, codes and messages an agent can recover from.
- 20, idempotency or safe retries, and for MCP the `readOnlyHint` and `destructiveHint` annotations.
- 15, sensible defaults, few required parameters, and official SDKs in at least two languages.

Models are read for tool use, structured output, prompt caching, context length, batch and SDKs. Frameworks for how much code and how many defaults a tool-calling agent with MCP needs.

## 5. Schema & documentation, 73 out of 100, up to 4.4 more on the total

Why it scored 73: Each reference page embeds an OpenAPI 3.0.0 fragment titled Alloy API 1.0.0. No single downloadable spec file was found (20 of 25). llms.txt with 247 entries and a Markdown copy of each page (10). Descriptions explain each endpoint and flag deprecated ones, but the evaluations endpoint says inputs vary with each workflow's configuration (13 of 20). Typed schemas where the payload is fixed, and dynamic bodies for evaluations and journeys (9 of 15). curl examples, and an error table with an HTTP code and a minor code for each case (13 of 15). A v1 path and dated Web SDK changelog entries, with product updates on the marketing site. No API changelog was found (8 of 15).

The checklist (https://www.anchorterminal.com/benchmark/#checklist-schema):

APIs and MCP servers.

- 25, a machine-readable contract (a public OpenAPI file or similar; for MCP, typed JSON Schema inputs on every tool).
- 10, llms.txt or Markdown docs served for agents.
- 0 to 20, descriptions that say what a tool is for, when to use it and when not to, read from the tool definitions in the source or the API reference.
- 0 to 15, typed inputs with enums, constraints and required fields, and no free-form JSON blobs.
- 0 to 15, examples and documented error responses.
- 15, versioning and a public changelog.

Models are read from the API reference, the OpenAPI file, llms.txt, the structured-output and tool-use docs and the model cards. Frameworks from docs a model can follow, typed interfaces, examples and the API reference.

## 6. Transparency & trust, 62 out of 100, up to 3.3 more on the total

Made of editorial 38, provenance 86.

Why it scored 62: Closed service under published Terms of Service, which forbid robots, crawlers and scraping of the site or services, including to train AI systems (15 of 30). The privacy policy, dated 29 August 2025, names First Mile Group, Inc. d/b/a Alloy and gives retention criteria without periods. No public DPA was found (10 of 30). Endpoints are marked deprecated in favour of the Events API and Investigations, with no dates (8 of 20). The security page says the data centre is in the United States. No sub-processor list was found (5 of 20).

The checklist (https://www.anchorterminal.com/benchmark/#checklist-transparency):

- 0 to 30, source availability and licence clarity. 30 for open source under an OSI licence, 15 for closed with clear terms, 0 for unclear terms.
- 0 to 30, data handling and retention statements that agree with each other (privacy policy, DPA, retention periods, subprocessors).
- 0 to 20, a deprecation policy or notices with dates.
- 0 to 20, telemetry disclosed with an opt-out (local software), or subprocessors and data locations disclosed (hosted).

The other half of Transparency and trust is the provenance score, computed from checked facts (below). The category score is the mean of the two.

Provenance checks not met in full (half of this category, computed from checked facts):

- Terms of service: read, states 6 of the 7 things a reader expects, and has 1 clause that costs points (7.1 of 10)
- Privacy policy: read, states 7 of the 8 things a reader expects (9.3 of 10)
- security.txt: not found (0 of 10)

## 7. Maintenance & community, 72 out of 100, up to 2.5 more on the total

Why it scored 72: Web SDK 2.16.0 on npm on 5 October 2026, and a product update posted on 23 September 2026 (30). Web SDK 2.12.0, 2.13.0 and 2.14.0 in September plus 2.16.0 in October (20). A closed service with a help centre, a product updates page and an AI support chat added in September. GitHub issue handling not applicable (10 of 15). The only official packages are capture SDKs, current (7 of 15). @alloyidentity/web-sdk is MIT and current. CI wasn't checked (5 of 10).

The checklist (https://www.anchorterminal.com/benchmark/#checklist-maintenance):

- 0 to 30, time since the last release, or the last published model or API change for a closed service. 30 within 30 days, 20 within 90, 10 within 180, 0 older.
- 20, at least three releases or dated changelog entries in the last 90 days.
- 0 to 25, responsiveness. Issues and pull requests answered on GitHub (the open issues and how recent the replies are). For closed services, a public changelog and a support or community channel that answers, 0 to 15.
- 15, presence in the official MCP registry under a verified namespace (MCP servers), or current official SDKs (APIs and models).
- 10, package health, current dependencies and CI.

Models are read for deprecation notice periods and model churn rather than release counts.

## What we couldn't check

What we couldn't read counted as absent. Publishing it on a page a plain HTTP fetch can read (not only in a browser) lets the next check count it.

- Alloy's Terms of Service forbid robots, crawlers and scraping of the site or services, including for training AI. We read public pages, as the brief says, and record the clause here
- Whether any sandbox or trial is open without a contract. None was found on public pages
- Whether an SLA, DPA or sub-processor list exists for customers. None was found on public pages
- No official MCP server. The registry's alloy entries belong to unrelated companies
- The security page's SOC 2 Type 2 statement carries no report date

## Weaknesses

- No public prices, trial or self-serve sign-up. Access starts with a demo request
- Rate limits vary by account and endpoint with no published numbers
- No idempotency key and no server-side SDK
- Evaluation inputs and outputs depend on each customer's workflow, so the contract is loosely typed
- Sandbox and Production are request modes over one data store, so test and live records can collide

## What costs an agent a turn today

The notes we give agents before they call it. Each one is a workaround an agent shouldn't need.

- Get the account's base URL from the customer. Defaults are api.alloy.co and sandbox.alloy.co, and some accounts have their own hosts
- Use unique, prefixed external IDs in sandbox. Sandbox and Production share one data store
- Read `alloy-ratelimit-remaining`, and on 429 or 5xx wait for `retry-after` with exponential backoff and jitter
- Expect `running` after about 25 seconds on journey applications and wait for the webhook instead of resubmitting
- Send the workflow header with account-level keys, since inputs depend on the workflow configured

## When it's done

Send what changed and where it's published as a dispute (https://www.anchorterminal.com/builders/#disputes, or `POST https://www.anchorterminal.com/api/v1/contact` with `"kind": "dispute"`). Disputes are answered in public, and the listing is checked again by the same checklist. Paying for an audit or a listing claim changes nothing here.