BankruptcyWatch
BankruptcyWatch is the proven creditor bankruptcy platform built with machine learning and intelligent automation to elevate every bankruptcy interaction. The PACER API provides access to US bankruptcy court data enabling creditors, lenders, and legal teams to search for cases, retrieve dockets, manage claims, file Proof of Claim documents, and automate bankruptcy monitoring across all federal bankruptcy court districts.
Real signal across most facets with visible, nameable gaps — the contract exists but is thin, or the portal is good while governance and commercial terms are absent.
API Evangelist profiles BankruptcyWatch the way a machine reads it — 68 machine-readable artifacts across 4 APIs, pulled from the provider's own public surface and indexed so a developer, an analyst, or an AI agent can evaluate it against every other provider on the network.
Every provider in the network is reduced to the same set of machine-readable artifacts — OpenAPI contracts, event specifications, GraphQL schemas, runnable collections, pricing and rate-limit signals, security posture, OAuth scopes, and the agent surfaces (MCP servers and skills) that let software drive the API on its own. We profile them because the interface is the part of a company you can actually inspect: it is a truer signal of what a provider does than any marketing page. From those artifacts we compute the Kin Score — BankruptcyWatch scores 55.9/100 (developing), with a separate agent-readiness read of 48/100 (agent ready). The full breakdown is below, followed by every artifact we hold — each card links through to its machine-readable definition on apis.io.
Kin Score
This is the API Evangelist rating — a single, repeatable read computed from the artifacts on this page. Green fill is points earned; the red track is points possible, so every bar shows earned-versus-possible at a glance.
Kin Score
How this is scored →scored 2026-07-27 · rubric v0.5
How we profile BankruptcyWatch
Each block below is one kind of artifact we hold for BankruptcyWatch. For each we say what it is and why it earns a place in the profile, then list every one we've indexed — capped at two rows, scroll within the panel for the rest.
APIs 4
Each API is captured as its own OpenAPI definition — every operation, parameter, and response. This is the single most useful machine-readable description of what an API does, and it's what lets us score, lint, mock, and generate against it without asking the provider for anything.
Individual APIs this provider publishes, each with its own machine-readable definition.
BankruptcyWatch Cases API
The Cases API from BankruptcyWatch — 2 operation(s) for cases.
BankruptcyWatch Claims API
The Claims API from BankruptcyWatch — 1 operation(s) for claims.
BankruptcyWatch Docket API
The Docket API from BankruptcyWatch — 1 operation(s) for docket.
BankruptcyWatch Monitoring API
The Monitoring API from BankruptcyWatch — 2 operation(s) for monitoring.
Open Collections 1
Open, tool-agnostic collections carry the same runnable value as Postman without locking you to one client — the portable, forkable form of the same exercise.
Open, tool-agnostic API collections (OpenAPI-derived and Bruno).
BankruptcyWatch PACER API
OPEN COLLECTIONPricing Plans 1
Pricing is part of the interface. Machine-readable plans tell you what a tier costs and includes before you commit — one of the six things the Kin Score reads for commercial clarity.
Published pricing tiers and plan structures.
Rate Limits 1
Rate limits are the difference between a demo that works and a production integration that doesn't fall over. Publishing them is an operational-transparency signal — and a hard requirement for any agent that plans its own throughput.
Documented rate limits and quota policies.
Bankruptcywatch Rate Limits
RATE LIMITSFinOps 1
Cost, billing, and metering signals let a buyer model the financial operations of an API before it's live. We profile them for the same reason we profile pricing: the money is part of the contract.
Cost, billing, and metering signals for API financial operations.
Bankruptcywatch Finops
FINOPSFeatures 8
The notable capabilities this provider advertises, captured as structured features so they can be searched and compared instead of read one landing page at a time.
Notable capabilities this provider offers.
Case Search
Search for bankruptcy cases across all US federal bankruptcy court districts.
Docket Retrieval
Retrieve case docket entries and court filings via PACER.
Claims Register
Access the full claims register for any bankruptcy case.
Proof of Claim Filing
Programmatically file Proof of Claim documents with bankruptcy courts.
Bankruptcy Monitoring
Automated alerts when monitored debtors or entities file for bankruptcy.
Machine Learning
ML-powered document parsing and case classification.
No-Code Integrations
Native integrations with Zapier, Salesforce, and Google Sheets.
Webhooks
Real-time webhook notifications for bankruptcy events.
Scroll within the panel for all 8 ·
Semantic Vocabularies 1
JSON-LD contexts give the data shared meaning across APIs. We profile them because semantics are what let a machine reconcile 'customer' here with 'customer' somewhere else.
JSON-LD contexts and semantic vocabularies used across these APIs.
Bankruptcywatch Context
JSON-LDSpectral Rules 2
Governance rulesets we run against this provider's specs — the automated checks behind parts of the score. Profiling them makes the quality bar explicit and re-runnable, not a matter of opinion.
BankruptcyWatch API Rules
SPECTRALBankruptcyWatch API Rules
SPECTRALJSON Schema 12
Standalone JSON Schema definitions describe the data models behind the API. We profile them so the shapes are validatable on their own — useful long after a single request is forgotten.
Standalone JSON Schema definitions for this provider's data models.
Case
JSON SCHEMACaseSearchResponse
JSON SCHEMAClaim
JSON SCHEMAClaimsResponse
JSON SCHEMADocketEntry
JSON SCHEMADocketResponse
JSON SCHEMAErrorResponse
JSON SCHEMAMonitor
JSON SCHEMAMonitorListResponse
JSON SCHEMAMonitorRequest
JSON SCHEMAProofOfClaimRequest
JSON SCHEMAProofOfClaimResponse
JSON SCHEMAScroll within the panel for all 12 ·
JSON Structure 12
JSON Structure captures the data shapes in a form built for tooling — a complement to JSON Schema that keeps the model machine-legible.
JSON Structure definitions describing this provider's data shapes.
Case Structure
JSON STRUCTURECasesearchresponse Structure
JSON STRUCTUREClaim Structure
JSON STRUCTUREClaimsresponse Structure
JSON STRUCTUREDocketentry Structure
JSON STRUCTUREDocketresponse Structure
JSON STRUCTUREErrorresponse Structure
JSON STRUCTUREMonitor Structure
JSON STRUCTUREMonitorlistresponse Structure
JSON STRUCTUREMonitorrequest Structure
JSON STRUCTUREProofofclaimrequest Structure
JSON STRUCTUREProofofclaimresponse Structure
JSON STRUCTUREScroll within the panel for all 12 ·
Examples 12
Real request and response payloads are what turn a spec from abstract into obvious — and they're one of the twelve things an agent needs to call an API correctly on the first try.
Example request and response payloads for these APIs.
Case Example
EXAMPLECasesearchresponse Example
EXAMPLEClaim Example
EXAMPLEClaimsresponse Example
EXAMPLEDocketentry Example
EXAMPLEDocketresponse Example
EXAMPLEErrorresponse Example
EXAMPLEMonitor Example
EXAMPLEMonitorlistresponse Example
EXAMPLEMonitorrequest Example
EXAMPLEProofofclaimrequest Example
EXAMPLEProofofclaimresponse Example
EXAMPLEScroll within the panel for all 12 ·
Security Posture 2
Authentication, domain security, vulnerability disclosure, and trust-center signals — the evidence that a provider takes security seriously enough to document it. We profile it because you can't govern what you can't see.
Authentication, domain security, vulnerability disclosure, and trust-center signals.
Agentic Access 1
An x-agentic-access contract marks which operations are safe for an agent to run on its own and which need a human in the loop. It is the difference between an API an agent can use and one it can use safely.
Recommended x-agentic-access execution contracts for AI agents.
Use Cases 6
What developers actually build with this provider — captured so the catalogue answers 'what is this for', not just 'what does this expose'.
What developers build with this provider.
Creditor Bankruptcy Management
Automate detection, research, and response to customer bankruptcy filings.
Loan Portfolio Monitoring
Monitor loan portfolios for borrower bankruptcy filings in real time.
Proof of Claim Automation
Automatically file Proof of Claim documents when debtors file bankruptcy.
Legal Case Management
Manage multiple client creditor representations in bankruptcy proceedings.
Debt Portfolio Acquisition
Research and evaluate bankruptcy debt for acquisition or restructuring.
Compliance Reporting
Automated bankruptcy event detection for regulatory compliance.
Integrations 4
Pre-built integrations with other platforms tell you where this provider already fits in a stack.
Pre-built integrations with other platforms and tools.
Zapier
Salesforce
Google Sheets
PACER (US Federal Courts)
Resources
Every other property we hold for BankruptcyWatch — documentation, portals, status pages, policies, and corporate surface — grouped by the job it does, following the integrator's arc from getting started to running in production.
Documentation 1
Reference material describing how the API behaves
Agent Surfaces 1
MCP servers, agent skills, and machine-readable catalogs
Design & Contract 3
Pagination, idempotency, versioning, errors, and events
Build 1
SDKs, sample code, and the tooling you integrate with
Access & Security 2
Authentication, authorization, and security posture
Commercial 1
Pricing, plans, and the legal terms of use
Company 3
The organization behind the API
← All providers · Data indexed from github.com/api-evangelist/bankruptcywatch · machine-readable index on apis.io