resend.com
agent readiness score · scanned Aug 17, 2026 · 6s · Developer Tools
#3 of 979 · #1 in category
Resend is an email API for developers to send transactional and marketing emails at scale, offering tools for integration, deliverability, and email creation.
Discovery 20/20
Access 28.8/30
Usability 29.8/40
Payments 10/10
Top fixes
- +3.5
Semantic HTML structure
Add landmark elements and a clean heading hierarchy — missing: <main> landmark, <nav> landmark, no heading-level skips, text-to-markup ratio ≥ 0.10.
- +2.8
agents.md
Add /agents.md: what agents may do on your site, key URLs, auth, rate limits, and who to contact.
- +1.9
Quickstart / getting started
Add a copy-pasteable code example (auth → first API call) to your quickstart — agents follow it literally.
- +1.9
PyPI SDK
Publish an official Python SDK (suggest "resend") with your domain in the project URLs so agents can verify it's official.
- +1.4
Docs quality
Docs scored 1/5 on runnable examples. The documentation heavily relies on external links and a full documentation index, which an agent following the docs literally would not be able to access directly without further instructions.
- +1.4
OpenAPI validity & quality
Spec fails: info.description ≥ 50 chars; ≥ 70% of operations have operationId. Agents generate calls directly from your spec — descriptions and securitySchemes are load-bearing.
1.Can an agent discover and trust you?
12/12
1.Can an agent discover and trust you?
Whether agents can crawl you, find you in the registries and searches they check, and trust what they find.
✓Sitemap present & fresh4/4
Sitemap at https://resend.com/sitemap.xml: 166 entries, freshest <lastmod> 2026-08-12 (5 days ago)
Resolved the sitemap from robots.txt or /sitemap.xml, validated XML, and checked lastmod freshness
spec ↗✓Brand search discoverability4/4
Both searches ("Resend" and "Resend developer tools") cited resend.com: https://resend.com/products/marketing-emails, https://resend.com/features/broadcasts, https://resend.com/docs/api-reference/broadcasts/get-broadcast-metrics, https://www.resend.com/docs/dashboard/webhooks/, https://www.resend.com/docs/dashboard/webhooks/how-to-store-webhooks-data
Ran clean brand-name web searches and checked whether your domain is cited in the results
✓MCP registry listings4/4
/.well-known/mcp/server-card.json serves JSON; searched "resend.com" and "Resend": listed in official MCP registry, Glama, Smithery (3 of 3 reachable registries)
Queried the official MCP registry, Smithery, Glama, and PulseMCP for servers matching your domain
spec ↗
2.Do you welcome agents?
13/16
2.Do you welcome agents?
Whether your robots policy, bot protection, and agent guidance actively admit AI agents instead of blocking them.
✓robots.txt present & parseable2/2
/robots.txt parses: 1 User-agent group(s), 1 Sitemap line(s)
Fetched /robots.txt and validated it parses as a robots policy
spec ↗✓AI crawler policy5/5
All 12 AI crawler user-agents (GPTBot, ClaudeBot, PerplexityBot, …) are allowed at / by robots.txt
Evaluated robots.txt groups for the major AI agent user-agents (GPTBot, ClaudeBot, PerplexityBot, …)
✓Content Signals directives2/2
1 valid Content-Signal line(s) in robots.txt (e.g. `Content-Signal: ai-train=yes, search=yes, ai-input=yes`)
Looked for Content-Signal lines in robots.txt
spec ↗✓Agent user-agent parity4/4
All three UAs get HTTP 200; bot bodies are ClaudeBot 100%, GPTBot 100% of the browser response (410195 bytes)
Compared responses served to browser and AI-agent user-agents (informational while in beta)
✗agents.md0/3
No agents.md: https://resend.com/agents.md → HTTP 404, https://resend.com/AGENTS.md → HTTP 404
fix → Add /agents.md: what agents may do on your site, key URLs, auth, rate limits, and who to contact.
Fetched /agents.md and checked for substantive agent guidance
spec ↗
3.Does an agent understand who you are and what you do?
18/18
3.Does an agent understand who you are and what you do?
Whether your pages carry machine-readable identity: structured data, llms.txt, clear copy an agent can quote.
✓Homepage states what you are3/3
Homepage clarity rated 5/5 — an agent can confidently say what this company does (model's one-sentence read: "Resend is an email API for developers to send transactional and marketing emails at scale, offering tools for integration, deliverability, and email creation.")
An LLM read your homepage as an agent would and rated how confidently it could say what you do
✓OpenGraph / social metadata2/2
Homepage has og:title, og:description, and og:image (twitter:card="summary_large_image" present)
Parsed homepage og:title / og:description / og:image and twitter:card meta tags
spec ↗✓llms.txt4/4
/llms.txt is valid llmstxt.org shape: H1 "Resend", 46 markdown link(s)
Fetched /llms.txt and validated it against the llmstxt.org shape (H1, summary, curated links)
spec ↗✓llms-full.txt2/2
/llms-full.txt serves 8036 chars of markdown
Fetched /llms-full.txt and checked for substantial inline markdown content
spec ↗✓JSON-LD structured data4/4
6 JSON-LD block(s) on homepage and pricing page (types: Organization, WebSite, SoftwareApplication, WebPage, BreadcrumbList, FAQPage); Organization block is well-formed
Extracted and validated application/ld+json blocks on the homepage and pricing page
spec ↗✓Markdown content negotiation3/3
https://resend.com/ returns markdown for `Accept: text/markdown` (content-type text/markdown)
Requested key pages with Accept: text/markdown and probed .md twin URLs
4.Can an agent integrate with you?
watch →19/21
4.Can an agent integrate with you?
Whether the artifacts an agent needs to build on you — docs, API specs, SDKs, MCP servers — exist and are findable.
✓Developer resource discoverability3/3
Search "Resend API documentation" cited your own domain: https://resend.com/docs/llms.txt, https://resend.com/docs/api-reference, https://resend.com/docs/api-reference/introduction, https://resend.com/docs/api-reference/emails, https://resend.com/
Searched for your brand with developer-keyword suffixes and checked which official resources are cited
✓OpenAPI spec discoverable5/5
OpenAPI spec found at https://resend.com/openapi.json (version 3.0.3)
Probed standard OpenAPI locations and docs links for a fetchable, parseable spec
spec ↗✓Docs discoverable4/4
Docs found at https://resend.com/docs/introduction (via homepage link, 1593 chars of readable text)
Followed homepage nav/footer links and probed /docs, /developers, docs.{domain}
✓MCP server discovery5/5
Valid MCP server card at https://resend.com/.well-known/mcp/server-card.json: name "resend", endpoint https://mcp.resend.com/mcp
Probed /.well-known/mcp/server-card.json, mcp.json, and docs mentions for an MCP endpoint
spec ↗✓npm SDK2/2
Official npm package "resend" (verified via repository under the resend GitHub org (git+https://github.com/resend/resend-node.git)): latest 6.20.0 published 2026-08-13
Searched the npm registry for an official, domain-verified SDK package
✗PyPI SDK0/2
No official PyPI SDK found: probed 4 candidate(s) (resend, resend-sdk, resendapi, resend-python) — found but not domain-verified: resend
fix → Publish an official Python SDK (suggest "resend") with your domain in the project URLs so agents can verify it's official.
Searched PyPI for an official, domain-verified SDK package
5.Is your integration well-built?
watch →3/8
5.Is your integration well-built?
Whether your specs, docs, and tools are complete and descriptive enough for an agent to use them without guessing.
◐OpenAPI validity & quality1.5/3
Spec at https://resend.com/openapi.json: 5/7 quality criteria passed (47 paths, 83 operations) — failing: info.description ≥ 50 chars; ≥ 70% of operations have operationId
fix → Spec fails: info.description ≥ 50 chars; ≥ 70% of operations have operationId. Agents generate calls directly from your spec — descriptions and securitySchemes are load-bearing.
Linted the spec: descriptions, operationIds, securitySchemes, servers
◐Docs quality1.5/3
Docs at https://resend.com/docs/introduction scored clarity 4/5, completeness 3/5, runnable examples 1/5, agent-friendliness 2/5 (mean 2.5/5)
fix → Docs scored 1/5 on runnable examples. The documentation heavily relies on external links and a full documentation index, which an agent following the docs literally would not be able to access directly without further instructions.
An LLM rated your docs for clarity, completeness, runnable examples, and agent-friendliness
✗Quickstart / getting started0/2
Quickstart page https://resend.com/docs#quickstart exists but contains no code block (<pre> or fenced code)
fix → Add a copy-pasteable code example (auth → first API call) to your quickstart — agents follow it literally.
Looked for a quickstart/getting-started guide containing code blocks
—MCP tool qualityna
MCP endpoint is auth-gated — tools could not be listed unauthenticated
Linted listed tools for descriptions, typed input schemas, and naming
6.Can an agent use you reliably in production?
watch →3/4
6.Can an agent use you reliably in production?
Response hygiene, TLS and redirect discipline, and security contact channels agents depend on at runtime.
✓TLS & redirect hygiene2/2
http://resend.com/ upgrades to https in 1 hop(s), 1 redirect(s) total, final HTTP 200; HSTS present
Checked http→https redirect behavior, chain length, and TLS health
✓Response speed & weight1/1
Homepage TTFB 282ms, payload 401KB, Content-Encoding: br
Measured homepage TTFB, payload size, and compression
✗security.txt0/1
security.txt present at https://resend.com/.well-known/security.txt but missing required field(s): Expires
fix → Add Expires to your security.txt — both are required by RFC 9116.
Fetched /.well-known/security.txt and validated Contact + Expires
spec ↗
7.Can an agent authenticate to you?
watch →7/7
7.Can an agent authenticate to you?
Whether agents can discover your auth model machine-readably (OAuth metadata) and follow documented steps to credentials.
✓OAuth authorization server metadata3/3
Valid RFC 8414 metadata at https://resend.com/.well-known/oauth-authorization-server: issuer https://api.resend.com, PKCE S256, dynamic client registration at https://api.resend.com/oauth/register
Fetched /.well-known/oauth-authorization-server (and openid-configuration fallback)
spec ↗✓OAuth protected resource metadata2/2
Valid RFC 9728 metadata at https://resend.com/.well-known/oauth-protected-resource: resource https://api.resend.com, 1 authorization server(s) (https://api.resend.com)
Fetched /.well-known/oauth-protected-resource
spec ↗✓Auth documentation2/2
Auth documentation found at https://resend.com/auth.md (4686 chars, with code examples)
Looked for /auth.md or an authentication docs page with code examples
8.Can an agent transact with you?
watch →10/15
8.Can an agent transact with you?
Whether pricing is discoverable and machine-readable, and whether you support agent payment protocols.
✓Pricing discoverable5/5
Pricing page found at https://resend.com/pricing (via homepage link) with legible price signals ("$20 / moYour plan already come").
Followed nav/footer links and probed /pricing for a page with legible price signals
✓Machine-readable pricing5/5
LLM extracted 3 numerically-priced plan(s) from https://resend.com/pricing at confidence 0.90: Domains Add-on $ 20/month; Dedicated IPs Add-on $ 30/month; Free $ 0/month; Pro (no listed price); Scale (no listed price); Enterprise (contact sales).
Looked for Offer JSON-LD, then had an LLM attempt structured extraction of your plans
spec ↗✗x402 payment support0/2
/.well-known/x402 returned HTTP 404. API probe GET https://api.resend.com/emails returned HTTP 401 without x402 payment requirements. No x402 support detected (bonus check — absence costs nothing).
fix → Support x402: serve payment requirements at /.well-known/x402, or answer unauthenticated API calls with HTTP 402 plus an x402 payment-requirements payload (x402Version, accepts[]).
Probed /.well-known/x402 and API endpoints for HTTP 402 payment-required envelopes
spec ↗✗AP2 readiness0/1
No AP2 hints found — scanned llms.txt, docs page (https://resend.com/docs/introduction), OpenAPI spec (https://resend.com/openapi.json); /.well-known/ap2 returned HTTP 404.
fix → Adopt AP2 to accept delegated agent payments — see https://ap2-protocol.org.
Scanned fetched artifacts and well-known paths for AP2 hints
spec ↗✗Agentic Commerce Protocol0/1
No Agentic Commerce Protocol hints found — scanned llms.txt, docs page (https://resend.com/docs/introduction), OpenAPI spec (https://resend.com/openapi.json); /.well-known/acp returned HTTP 404.
fix → Adopt the Agentic Commerce Protocol so agent checkouts can complete against your store — see https://developers.openai.com/commerce.
Scanned docs and specs for agentic checkout endpoints
spec ↗✗Other agent payment protocols0/1
No UCP/MPP hints found — scanned llms.txt, docs page (https://resend.com/docs/introduction), OpenAPI spec (https://resend.com/openapi.json).
fix → Track emerging agent payment protocols (UCP, MPP) and adopt the ones your buyers' agents use.
Scanned fetched artifacts for UCP/MPP protocol hints
9.Can a user act through an agent?
4/4
9.Can a user act through an agent?
Whether an end user's agent can operate on their behalf: working MCP tools, published skills, agent configs.
—Agent skill publishedna
Requires the analysis phase — not yet evaluated
Checked /skill.md, /.well-known/skills/, and skills.sh for published agent skills
✓MCP handshake & tools list4/4
MCP endpoint https://mcp.resend.com/mcp is auth-gated (HTTP 401) and advertises resolvable RFC 9728 resource metadata in WWW-Authenticate — properly advertised auth gate
Performed a streamable-HTTP initialize + tools/list against the MCP endpoint
spec ↗—Agent configs in public repona
Requires the analysis phase — not yet evaluated
Checked your public GitHub org's main repos for AGENTS.md / .claude / .cursor configs
10.Can an agent operate your website directly?
4/9
10.Can an agent operate your website directly?
Whether the site itself is legible to non-rendering and browser agents: semantic HTML, no JS walls, accessibility.
✗NLWeb endpoint0/1
No NLWeb endpoint detected: /.well-known/nlweb.json returned HTTP 404 (text/html); GET /ask?query=hello returned HTTP 404 (text/html)
fix → Consider exposing an NLWeb /ask endpoint (and /.well-known/nlweb.json) for conversational access to your content.
Probed /.well-known/nlweb.json and the /ask endpoint
spec ↗✗Semantic HTML structure0/3
Only 2/6 semantic signals present on the homepage (missing: <main> landmark, <nav> landmark, no heading-level skips, text-to-markup ratio ≥ 0.10)
fix → Add landmark elements and a clean heading hierarchy — missing: <main> landmark, <nav> landmark, no heading-level skips, text-to-markup ratio ≥ 0.10.
Scored landmark elements, heading hierarchy, and text-to-markup ratio on the homepage
✓Content readable without JavaScript2/2
Homepage raw HTML contains 13636 chars of visible text without JavaScript
Measured visible text in the raw, unrendered homepage HTML
✓Accessibility basics2/2
Homepage accessibility: 4/5 checks passed — failing: labeled inputs (3/3 unlabeled)
Static checks: lang attribute, title, alt coverage, labeled inputs, landmarks
✗WebMCP0/1
No WebMCP evidence on homepage: no application/webmcp script and no navigator.modelContext reference
fix → Consider WebMCP to expose page actions as tools to browser agents.
Looked for WebMCP script declarations on the homepage
spec ↗