Liquid M
LiquidM Technology GmbH is a Berlin-based demand-side platform for programmatic advertising, backed by Earlybird. Its platform at platform.liquidm.com exposes two developer surfaces: a Reporting API that returns the same data as the platform's Visual Reports UI, split across more than thirty dimensions (campaign, ad, site, domain, device, geo, audience) and thirty-plus metrics (impressions, bids, bid requests, clicks, CTR, win rate, eCPM, conversion funnels, video quartiles); and a campaign Management API covering campaigns, budgets and ads. LiquidM publishes a first-party MIT-licensed JavaScript client for the Management API and an example Ruby client for the Reporting API from a 100-repo public GitHub organization. The liquidm.com marketing domain now redirects to Equativ, though the platform host and its APIs remain reachable.
Limited machine-readable signal and partial portal coverage — documentation a human can read, but little a machine or agent can consume without scraping.
API Evangelist profiles Liquid M the way a machine reads it — 10 machine-readable artifacts across 5 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 — Liquid M scores 37.7/100 (thin), with a separate agent-readiness read of 62/100 (agent native). 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 Liquid M
Each block below is one kind of artifact we hold for Liquid M. 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 5
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.
Liquid M Ads API
The Ads API from Liquid M — 1 operation(s) for ads.
Liquid M Authentication API
Auth token issuance for the Reporting API.
Liquid M Budgets API
The Budgets API from Liquid M — 1 operation(s) for budgets.
Liquid M Campaigns API
The Campaigns API from Liquid M — 1 operation(s) for campaigns.
Liquid M Reporting API
Visual report queries across dimensions and metrics.
MCP Servers 1
Model Context Protocol servers expose these APIs directly to AI agents. We profile them because agent-native access is the fastest-growing way this provider's capabilities actually get used.
Model Context Protocol servers that expose these APIs to AI agents.
liquid-m-mcp.yml
MCP SERVERJSON Schema 1
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.
LiquidM Visual Report
JSON SCHEMAExamples 1
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.
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.
Resources
Every other property we hold for Liquid M — 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.
Get Started 2
Portal, sign-up, and the first successful call
Documentation 1
Reference material describing how the API behaves
Agent Surfaces 4
MCP servers, agent skills, and machine-readable catalogs
Design & Contract 6
Pagination, idempotency, versioning, errors, and events
Build 4
SDKs, sample code, and the tooling you integrate with
Access & Security 2
Authentication, authorization, and security posture
Company 1
The organization behind the API
← All providers · Data indexed from github.com/api-evangelist/liquid-m · machine-readable index on apis.io