
Readable
A hosted readability service, with an HTTP API, that scores text or a web page with 15 readability formulas, CEFR and IELTS levels, an A–E rating, tone and sentiment, and highlights long sentences, passive voice, clichés and hedge words.
- What it is
- Linters, formatters and type checkers (prose linters)
- Type
- Commercial product
- Made by
- Readable
- License
- Proprietary
- Facts checked
- 23 October 2026
What it is
Readable is a web app for writers and marketers, and its API lets other software ask for the same scores. You POST plain text to /api/text/ or a URL to /api/url/ (optionally extracting just the body copy), and get back JSON with Flesch Reading Ease, Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level, Gunning Fog, Coleman-Liau, SMOG, Automated Readability Index, Dale-Chall, Spache and other formulas, CEFR and IELTS levels, and Readable’s own A–E rating. It also returns word, sentence and syllable counts, reading and speaking time, keyword density for one- to three-word phrases, and 0–100 scores for sentiment, tone (formal to informal), personalism and gender.
A second call, /highlight/, returns the problems behind a score for six hours after scoring: long and very long sentences, hard words, adverbs, clichés, passive voice, hedge words, buzzwords and profanity; /profanity/ checks text at three sensitivity levels. Requests are signed rather than carrying the key: each sends the current UNIX time and an MD5 hash of the API key plus that time, and requests more than 30 seconds old are rejected. A test key returns real-shaped results for a fixed sample text at no charge. The API is sold on Readable’s AgencyPro plans.
Why teams pick it
- Many readability formulas in one call, so you can match whatever metric a client or regulator asks for
- Scores whole web pages by URL, with optional extraction of the main body copy
- Highlights explain a score sentence by sentence, not just a number
Watch out for
- Closed source and hosted: text is sent to Readable’s servers, and API access needs the AgencyPro plan
- Readability formulas measure sentence and word length, not whether the text is accurate or well organised
- No style-guide rules of your own; for house terminology or CI gating, an open-source linter such as Vale fits better
- Requests are signed with an MD5 hash, and the docs publish no rate limits or API prices
Alternatives
What all prose linters have in common →Compare side by side →Scoring text with the API (request signing as documented) · bash
T=$(date +%s)
SIG=$(printf '%s%s' "$READABLE_KEY" "$T" | md5sum | cut -d' ' -f1)
curl -X POST https://api.readable.com/api/text/ \
-H "API_REQUEST_TIME: $T" -H "API_SIGNATURE: $SIG" \
--data-urlencode "text=The quick brown fox jumps over the lazy dog."
# JSON with result, score_id, rating (A-E), flesch_reading_ease,
# flesch_kincaid_grade_level, gunning_fog_score, word_count, sentiment, tone, ...See it in a real stack
No architecture uses Readable yet. Drop it into the playground and wire it up yourself.Open playground →Where it came from2015–2019
Founder Dave Child started readability-score.com in 2015 after coming across Rudolf Flesch’s Reading Ease formula. The company moved to readable.io in 2016, deciding the old name was “ironically hard to read”, launched the paid ReadablePro service in 2018 and settled on readable.com in 2019, where it now sells tools for documents, websites and software, the last through the API.
Why it’s built this way
- Report many formulas instead of one
- Each formula weighs sentence, word and syllable length differently; returning them all lets users pick the measure they already use, and the A–E rating sums them up in one grade.
- Sign requests instead of sending the key
- The key never travels with a request, and the 30-second time window stops a captured request from being replayed later.
Timeline
- 2015
readability-score.com launched
- 2016
Moves to readable.io
- 2018
ReadablePro launches
- 2019
Moves to readable.com