RRepoGEO

REPOGEO REPORT · LITE

anc95/ChatGPT-CodeReview

Default branch main · commit 1e3df152 · scanned 6/20/2026, 12:01:18 PM

GitHub: 4,444 stars · 462 forks

Scan history for this repo

Score trend below includes all ready runs (older left, newer right; scroll horizontally if needed). The table is collapsed by default—expand for newest-first rows, 10 per page.

Score trend (left → right: older → newer)

2 ready scans. Expand the table below for newest-first rows (10 per page, paginated).

AI VISIBILITY SCORE
27 /100
Critical
Category recall
0 / 2
Not recommended in any query
Rule findings
2 pass · 0 warn · 0 fail
Objective metadata checks
AI knows your name
1 / 3
Direct prompts that named your repo
HOW TO READ THIS REPORT

Action plan is what to do next — copy-pasteable changes prioritized by impact. Category visibility is the real GEO test: when a user asks an AI a brand-free question that should surface anc95/ChatGPT-CodeReview, does the AI actually recommend you — or your competitors? Objective checks verify the metadata signals AI engines weight first. Self-mention check detects whether AI even knows you exist by name.

Action plan — copy-paste fixes

3 prioritized changes generated by gemini-2.5-flash. Mark items done after you ship the fix.

OVERALL DIRECTION
  • highreadme#1
    Reposition README H1 and tagline to emphasize GitHub integration

    Why:

    CURRENT
    # CodeReview BOT
> A code review robot powered by ChatGPT
    COPY-PASTE FIX
    # ChatGPT CodeReview BOT: Automated Pull Request Reviews for GitHub
> A GitHub bot powered by ChatGPT, deployable as a GitHub App or GitHub Action.
  • hightopics#2
    Expand repository topics with specific GitHub integration keywords

    Why:

    CURRENT
    chatgpt, codereview, probot
    COPY-PASTE FIX
    chatgpt, codereview, probot, github-app, github-actions, pull-request, ai-code-review
  • mediumcomparison#3
    Add a "Comparison" or "Why Choose This Bot?" section to the README

    Why:

    COPY-PASTE FIX
    Add a new section to the README, such as "## Why Choose ChatGPT CodeReview BOT?" or "## Comparison", to clearly articulate its unique value as a lightweight, self-hostable GitHub App/Action for PR reviews using ChatGPT, differentiating it from broader static analysis tools or fully integrated commercial solutions.

Category GEO backends resolved for this scan: google/gemini-2.5-flash, deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash

Category visibility — the real GEO test

Brand-free queries asked to google/gemini-2.5-flash. Did AI recommend you, or someone else?

Same questions for every model — switch tabs to compare answers and rankings.

Recall
0 / 2
0% of queries surface anc95/ChatGPT-CodeReview
Avg rank
—
Lower is better. #1 = top recommendation.
Share of voice
0%
Of all named tools, what % are you?
Top rival
GitHub Copilot for Pull Requests
Recommended in 2 of 2 queries
COMPETITOR LEADERBOARD
  1. GitHub Copilot for Pull Requests · recommended 2×
  2. DeepSource · recommended 2×
  3. CodeGuru Reviewer · recommended 1×
  4. SonarQube · recommended 1×
  5. SonarCloud · recommended 1×
  • CATEGORY QUERY
    How can I automate pull request code reviews using an AI assistant?
    you: not recommended
    AI recommended (in order):
    1. GitHub Copilot for Pull Requests
    2. CodeGuru Reviewer
    3. DeepSource
    4. SonarQube
    5. SonarCloud
    6. SonarLint
    7. GitLab Duo Code Suggestions
    8. Reviewdog (reviewdog/reviewdog)
    9. OpenAI API

    AI recommended 9 alternatives but never named anc95/ChatGPT-CodeReview. This is the gap to close.

    Show full AI answer
  • CATEGORY QUERY
    Looking for a bot to provide AI-powered code suggestions on GitHub pull requests.
    you: not recommended
    AI recommended (in order):
    1. GitHub Copilot for Pull Requests
    2. CodeRabbit
    3. DeepSource
    4. Codiga
    5. CodiumAI
    6. GitGuardian

    AI recommended 6 alternatives but never named anc95/ChatGPT-CodeReview. This is the gap to close.

    Show full AI answer

Objective checks

Rule-based audits of metadata signals AI engines weight most.

  • Metadata completeness
    pass

  • README presence
    pass

Self-mention check

Does AI even know your repo exists when asked about it directly?

  • Compared to common alternatives in this category, what is the core differentiator of anc95/ChatGPT-CodeReview?
    pass
    AI did not name anc95/ChatGPT-CodeReview — likely talking about a different project

    AI answers can be confidently wrong. Read for accuracy: does it match your actual tech stack, audience, and differentiator?

  • If a team adopts anc95/ChatGPT-CodeReview in production, what risks or prerequisites should they evaluate first?
    pass
    AI named anc95/ChatGPT-CodeReview explicitly

    AI answers can be confidently wrong. Read for accuracy: does it match your actual tech stack, audience, and differentiator?

  • In one sentence, what problem does the repo anc95/ChatGPT-CodeReview solve, and who is the primary audience?
    pass
    AI did not name anc95/ChatGPT-CodeReview — likely talking about a different project

    AI answers can be confidently wrong. Read for accuracy: does it match your actual tech stack, audience, and differentiator?

Embed your GEO score

Drop this badge into the README of anc95/ChatGPT-CodeReview. It auto-updates whenever the report is rescanned and links back to the latest report — easy public proof that you care about AI discoverability.

RepoGEO badge previewLive preview
MARKDOWN (README)
[![RepoGEO](https://repogeo.com/badge/anc95/ChatGPT-CodeReview.svg)](https://repogeo.com/en/r/anc95/ChatGPT-CodeReview)
HTML
<a href="https://repogeo.com/en/r/anc95/ChatGPT-CodeReview"><img src="https://repogeo.com/badge/anc95/ChatGPT-CodeReview.svg" alt="RepoGEO" /></a>
Pro

Subscribe to Pro for deep diagnoses

anc95/ChatGPT-CodeReview — Lite scans stay free; this card itemizes Pro deep limits vs Lite.

  • Deep reports10 / month
  • Brand-free category queries5 vs 2 in Lite
  • Prioritized action items8 vs 3 in Lite