Iterable

# Fix list: Iterable

From Anchor Terminal's listing at https://www.anchorterminal.com/tools/iterable, the October 2026 research run, assessed 8 October 2026. Grade C, 55.2 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 Iterable: 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: No x402, MPP or L402 (0). No public prices. iterable.com/pricing redirects to the home page, which asks for a demo (0). No free tier or trial was found (0). A person has to buy through sales and create a key in the app (0). Total 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, 55 out of 100, up to 7.9 more on the total

Why it scored 55: API keys come in five types and each operation lists the types it accepts. A read-only type works on 30 operations, and the key travels only in a header. Rotation and expiry are unchecked because the key guide couldn't be read (22). The read-only key type, and an MCP server that starts with PII, writes and sends all off and stores those settings per key. Neither surface has a confirmation step, and the README leaves review of each call to the person (16). Profiles, events and templates hold customer-written text. The README warns about irreversible actions but gives no injection guidance (3). No audit log or per-call record for the operator was found in the pages we could read (0). Responsible disclosure policy with a reply in one to three business days, no bug bounty, no security.txt, SOC 2 Type 2, ISO 27001 and HIPAA on the trust centre, and CodeQL on the open repositories (14). Total 55.

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. Agent ergonomics, 57 out of 100, up to 7 more on the total

Why it scored 57: API list calls take `page` and `pageSize`, and the MCP server shows 31 of its 118 tools by default, with three flags that add the rest (15). `nextPageUrl` paging on campaigns, catalogues, journeys and templates, state and sort filters on campaigns, and `limit` on events, but list member reads are capped at 5 requests a minute (14). Errors carry a `code` from a 26-value enum, a message and `params`, with reset seconds on some 429s (15). No idempotency keys. User updates merge and catalogue PUT replaces, so those retries are safe, but sends aren't. The MCP tools have no readOnlyHint or destructiveHint, and an issue asking for them has been open since 4 June 2026 (6). Most calls need few parameters. The one server-side SDK is the TypeScript client, which its README calls experimental (7). Total 57.

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.

## 4. Reliability, 66 out of 100, up to 6.8 more on the total

Why it scored 66: Graded on the REST API, with the hosted lines. Statuspage site at status.iterable.com with component history (20). Five incidents between 10 July and 8 October 2026. One was marked critical, on 16 July, when the application and API in the US data centre failed for about 40 minutes. Four were minor, among them API user update timeouts on 22 September (about 70 minutes) and EU gateway errors on 10 September (about 110 minutes). That sits between the minor-only and one-major lines (15). 53 of 159 operations state a numeric limit (15). Only 6 operations document 429, two of them with `rateLimitReset` in the body. No Retry-After header or idempotency key was found in the specification, and backoff guidance on the support centre couldn't be read (6). No SLA was found in the Master Services Agreement or the product-specific terms (0). The REST API is generally available. The MCP server is beta (10). Total 66.

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.

## 5. Schema & documentation, 65 out of 100, up to 5.7 more on the total

Why it scored 65: Public Swagger 2.0 specification at api.iterable.com/api-docs, 159 operations and 210 schemas (25). iterable.com/llms.txt exists but describes the company and links the documentation without carrying it, and no Markdown docs were found (4). All 159 operations have a summary and 147 a description, several with cautions such as the 60-second wait after a user update and the suppression list rule on campaign creation (14). Required fields are marked and there are 35 enums, while `dataFields` and template content stay free-form objects (11). The specification has 21 examples. 400 and 401 appear on nearly every operation, and the error body has a 26-value `code` enum (8). The specification is labelled version 1.8 with no version in the path. Release notes sit on the support centre, which we couldn't read, so only 3 of 15 here. Total 65.

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, 68 out of 100, up to 2.8 more on the total

Made of editorial 57, provenance 79.

Why it scored 68: Closed service with a published Master Services Agreement, and MIT licences on the MCP server and API client (18). The agreement deletes customer confidential information within 30 days of expiry and the privacy notice sets out retention by data type, but the notice is dated 14 July 2023 and no public DPA was found (18). No API deprecation policy was found. The website terms let Iterable change or discontinue the services at any time, and the specification marks some fields deprecated without dates (3). Sub-processor list updated August 2026 with processing locations, and US and EU data centres (18). Total 57.

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 (9.1 of 10)
- Changelog: not found (0 of 10)
- security.txt: not found (0 of 10)

## 7. Maintenance & community, 75 out of 100, up to 2.2 more on the total

Why it scored 75: @iterable/mcp 1.9.0 and @iterable/api 0.13.0 were published on 30 September 2026 (30). Six package releases since 10 July, counting @iterable/web-sdk 2.3.0 to 2.3.3 (20). The MCP repository has two open issues, one answered once in April and one unanswered since 4 June. Pull requests are merged by staff. Support is the support centre and email under the Master Services Agreement, and release notes there couldn't be read (7). The MCP server isn't in the official MCP registry. Official packages are current, though the API client is declared experimental (10). CI runs on Node 20, 22 and 24 on Ubuntu and Windows with a frozen lockfile and CodeQL (8). Total 75.

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.

- unchecked: support.iterable.com (API guides, API key guide, MCP server articles, release notes) answered with a Cloudflare check for both curl and WebFetch, so key rotation, backoff guidance, audit logs and the changelog are scored from the specification and repositories alone
- unchecked: whether a public DPA or an SLA exists outside the Master Services Agreement and product-specific terms, for example in order forms
- unchecked: 90-day uptime percentages on status.iterable.com, which weren't in the page text we read
- No official server-side SDK other than the TypeScript client was found. The vendor's GitHub organisation listing wasn't read
- The MCP server is local stdio and beta. Scores follow the generally available REST API, with the MCP server counted where the checklist asks about tools

## Weaknesses

- No public price, trial or self-serve signup. iterable.com/pricing redirects to the home page, which asks for a demo
- No idempotency keys in the specification, and only 6 of 159 operations document a 429 response
- The MCP server is in beta under terms that allow change or withdrawal without notice, and carries no tool annotations
- No published SLA or API deprecation policy was found in the Master Services Agreement or the product-specific terms
- The API can create static lists and read list members, but no operation builds a dynamic segment or edits a journey

## 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.

- Send the key in the `Api-Key` header, and use api.eu.iterable.com for projects in the EU data centre
- Wait at least 60 seconds after `POST /api/users/update` before a dependent call such as `POST /api/email/target`, as the specification advises
- Keep the MCP server on its default read-only setup unless a person reviews each call. Writes and sends act on real users and can't be undone
- Pass `suppressionListIds` to `POST /api/campaigns/create`. Global suppression lists aren't added automatically
- Read `rateLimitReset` in the 429 `params` on user update calls for the seconds to wait. List member reads allow 5 requests a minute per project

## 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.