◎ Discry Score
emblem ai.com
ai · API
F
0 / 100
DISCOVERY0
COMPREHENSION0
Category leader: 99 (A)
Discry your API →
AI · RANK #42 OF 43

Emblem AI is Not Agent-Ready to agents.

Discry independently scored how well an AI agent can discover and understand the Emblem AI API from what’s public — not whether it’s usable. Below: every signal we checked, what’s costing the score, and what to change.

Discry your API — freeView the docs ↗

SCORED UNDER RUBRIC 1.2 · A full re-launch under Discry Score 2.5 — a new behavioral instrument, not comparable to these scores — is in progress.

Discovery

45% of score · 26/100
OpenAPI specA machine-readable OpenAPI/Swagger spec agents can parse.Fail
llms.txtAn llms.txt index that points agents to the docs that matter.Partial
llms.txt qualityThe llms.txt is focused, current, and well under the size budget.Fail
llms-full.txtA full-text bundle agents can load in one request.Fail
AGENTS.mdAn AGENTS.md that tells coding agents how to build on the API.Fail
.well-known/mcp.jsonA discoverable MCP manifest at a well-known path.Fail
MCP registryThe API is listed in a public MCP registry.Fail
robots.txt AI directivesrobots.txt allows (or explicitly guides) AI crawlers.Pass
SitemapA sitemap so agents can enumerate the docs surface.Partial

Comprehension

55% of score · 0/100
Task-oriented descriptionsEndpoints described by what they accomplish, not just their shape.Fail
Realistic examplesRunnable, real-world request/response examples.Fail
Multi-step workflowsDocs that chain calls into complete jobs an agent can follow.Fail
Error-recovery guidanceDocumented failure modes and how to recover from them.Fail
Answer-first formatThe answer leads; preamble does not bury it.Fail
Capability boundariesClear limits — what the API can and cannot do.Fail
Naming consistencyConsistent, predictable naming across endpoints.Fail
Heading hierarchyClean heading structure agents can navigate.Fail
Markdown docsDocs available as clean markdown, not JS-rendered HTML only.Fail
Token efficiencyDocs are concise enough to fit an agent context window.Fail

What we found

  • emblem.ai is effectively a parked/placeholder domain, not a live API product. The homepage and its only sitemap entry (/lander) both return empty content across four scraping engines, so an agent arriving here finds no capabilities to act on.
  • The domain is crawler-friendly on paper — robots.txt allows all agents and advertises an LLM-Policy and sitemap — but that openness leads nowhere: the sitemap lists a single non-documentation lander URL.
  • The file served at /llms.txt is not an llms.txt at all; it is a training-opt-out policy stub ('Disallow-Training: /') with no title, description, or links to any API documentation, so it gives an agent zero usable context.
  • No OpenAPI/Swagger spec, no /.well-known/mcp.json, no llms-full.txt, no AGENTS.md, and no MCP registry listing exist. There is no discoverable machine-readable surface of any kind.
  • Comprehension is unscorable and scores 0 because no documentation pages exist to evaluate — an agent cannot learn what Emblem AI does, let alone how to call it.

What to change

Prioritized by impact on discoverability. You (or your docs platform) deploy these — Discry never touches your API.

  1. 01Publish actual API documentation. Before any agent-readiness work matters, emblem.ai needs a real product surface: an overview page describing what the API does and at least a few endpoint reference pages.
  2. 02Replace the /llms.txt policy stub with a genuine llms.txt: a titled, described index that links to the API overview, authentication, and key endpoint docs so agents can orient in one fetch.
  3. 03Expand sitemap.xml beyond the single /lander URL to include documentation pages once they exist, so crawlers and agents can discover the real content.
  4. 04Publish a public OpenAPI/Swagger spec at a stable path (e.g. /openapi.json) — the single highest-weighted discovery signal and the fastest way for an agent to understand the full API surface.
  5. 05Once docs exist, add task-oriented endpoint descriptions, realistic multi-language code examples, and end-to-end workflow guides so an agent can chain operations rather than reading endpoints in isolation.

Execution coverage · INFORMATIONAL, UNSCORED

Whether an agent can actually complete a call and recover from errors is the deeper Audit layer — documented here, but not part of the Discry Score.

Error format documented Rate limits documented Pagination documented Idempotency documented

No execution characteristics are documented. emblem.ai resolves to a single empty lander page with no API, no endpoints, and no reference material — there is nothing for an agent to read about auth, errors, rate limits, pagination, or idempotency.

See your own Discry Score.

Drop your API docs URL. See what an agent sees — in 60 seconds, free.

Discry your API — free