# Your gateway's public model list is a contract. Most of them break it quietly. > Source: > Published: 2026-09-29 08:09:31+00:00 Every LLM gateway publishes an endpoint that lists what you can call. Clients read it, pricing pages quote it, comparison articles count it, and nobody treats it as an interface that can change. That is the mistake. I spent a day calling four of them and comparing what came back against what the vendors' own documentation says. On 29 September 2026 I called the public model list of each gateway, twice, twenty minutes apart, with no API key, and compared the response against whatever the vendor documents about it. Nothing here needed an account, which is the point — a list that requires a key to read is not a public list. Five things, in the order they tend to bite: This is the cheapest check and the one that fails most often, because it costs nothing to verify and almost nobody does. An OpenAI-compatible client appends its own path. The Python SDK takes `base_url="https://example.com/v1"` and then calls `/chat/completions` on top of it; the `OPENAI_BASE_URL` environment variable behaves the same way, which the [openai-python README](https://github.com/openai/openai-python) documents. An Anthropic client appends `/v1/messages` to whatever base you hand it, as the [Messages API reference](https://docs.anthropic.com/en/api/messages) shows. So the base URL is half of a path, and if the vendor writes the wrong half the client gets a 404 that reads like an auth problem. On my own site I had this backwards in one place and right in another: the OpenAI base was correct on the SDK page and wrong in the file written specifically for agents to read, because both were generated from a single JSON registry and the stale value sat in that registry. One wrong entry, two surfaces, one of them broken. The test takes one request, and the status code is the whole answer: ``` curl -s -o /dev/null -w '%{http_code} ' -X POST https://example.com/v1/chat/completions ``` A `401` means the route exists and wants a key. A `404` means the route does not exist, and no key will help. That distinction is the entire test. Run it against the Anthropic base too (`POST /v1/messages`), because the two dialects are usually mounted at different prefixes and only one of them is documented carefully. Model counts move. Mine moved a lot: the same public endpoint returned 477 models on 22 September and 199 models on 29 September. OpenRouter's public list returned 460 models when I called it on 29 September, against 445 models in a snapshot taken ten days earlier. Neither number is a lie. Both are dated observations that somebody froze into a sentence and walked away from. The consequence is narrower than it sounds and more annoying: a page that says it serves 477 models gets checked by a reader who sees a different number, and the reader concludes the page is inventing things. The fix is not to update the number more often. It is to stop putting a moving number in a sentence with no date on it. Any figure that comes from an endpoint should carry the date it was read and the exact endpoint it came from, so a reader can reproduce or refute it in one request. This is the one that costs real time and that no checklist covers. A model list is not a fixed schema. In the case I hit, a response carrying `id`, `context_length`, `max_output_tokens`, `capabilities` and `owned_by` came back a week later with `id`, `object`, `created`, `owned_by`, `tier` and `modality`, and no `capabilities` at all. Every derived number built on those fields silently became uncomputable. Shares of models supporting tool calling, shares accepting image input, counts of combination routes: all computed from a field that had stopped being returned. The pages kept rendering, the percentages kept being quoted, and nothing failed, because nothing checked. If you build against one of these lists, the fields you read are the contract: `capabilities?.tool_calling` survives a missing key. `capabilities.tool_calling` is a crash waiting for a release. [OpenRouter's FAQ](https://openrouter.ai/docs/faq) states plainly that it charges a fee when you purchase credits, and that free-model rate limits are determined by how much credit you have bought. The specific figures, the percentage and the minimum and the requests per day, are filled in at render time, so a plain HTTP fetch returns those sentences with the numbers missing. The prose is the contract. The numbers are configuration. That is not a criticism, it is a warning about how gateways get compared. If you are writing the comparison, link the sentence you can actually cite and state the figure as a dated observation. If you are picking a gateway, a number in a blog post from three months ago is not a specification, and it was probably read out of the same bundle you could have read yourself. The most useful thing a gateway model list can tell you is which entries are safe to pin and which are aliases that move underneath you. Almost none of them say. A route named `auto/best-coding` is a policy, not a model, and pinning it in production is a different decision from pinning a specific model id. If the response does not distinguish the two, you find out by shipping. All of the above collapses into five requests you can run before pointing production at anything: `POST /chat/completions` and `POST /v1/messages`. Expect 401, not 404.` GET /models` twice, twenty minutes apart. If the count or the field set moves, you have learned something the README will not tell you. None of this needs a key, an account, or anyone's permission. It takes 10 minutes, and it is the difference between integrating with a gateway and betting on one. *I work on [FreeModel by Aiglade](https://freemodel.online/), an AI model gateway, and the 477-to-199 case in section three is my own endpoint. It is why I ran these checks on everyone else rather than fixing my own and moving on. Every number here was read on 29 September 2026 from endpoints that need no key, and the [model list I checked](https://freemodel.online/v1/models) is one of them.*