RRepoGEO

REPOGEO REPORT · LITE

anthropics/claude-code-security-review

Default branch main · commit 0c6a49f1 · scanned 6/24/2026, 1:13:00 AM

GitHub: 5,324 stars · 550 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
28 /100
Critical
Category recall
0 / 2
Not recommended in any query
Rule findings
1 pass · 1 warn · 0 fail
Objective metadata checks
AI knows your name
2 / 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 anthropics/claude-code-security-review, 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

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

OVERALL DIRECTION
  • lowreadme#1
    Add a 'Why Choose This?' or 'Key Differentiators' section to the README

    Why:

    COPY-PASTE FIX
    ## Why Choose Claude Code Security Reviewer?

Unlike traditional SAST tools, this GitHub Action provides a structured methodology and prompt engineering examples specifically designed to leverage Anthropic's Claude LLM for deep semantic code security review, focusing on context-aware analysis for pull requests.

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 anthropics/claude-code-security-review
Avg rank
—
Lower is better. #1 = top recommendation.
Share of voice
0%
Of all named tools, what % are you?
Top rival
Snyk Code
Recommended in 1 of 2 queries
COMPETITOR LEADERBOARD
  1. Snyk Code · recommended 1×
  2. GitHub Advanced Security (CodeQL) · recommended 1×
  3. SonarQube · recommended 1×
  4. Checkmarx SAST (CxSAST) · recommended 1×
  5. Veracode Static Analysis · recommended 1×
  • CATEGORY QUERY
    Need an AI tool to automatically detect security vulnerabilities in new code changes.
    you: not recommended
    AI recommended (in order):
    1. Snyk Code
    2. GitHub Advanced Security (CodeQL)
    3. SonarQube
    4. Checkmarx SAST (CxSAST)
    5. Veracode Static Analysis
    6. GitLab Ultimate (SAST)
    7. OWASP Dependency-Check

    AI recommended 7 alternatives but never named anthropics/claude-code-security-review. This is the gap to close.

    Show full AI answer
  • CATEGORY QUERY
    Looking for a GitHub Action to perform automated security reviews on pull requests.
    you: not recommended
    AI recommended (in order):
    1. Snyk (snyk/actions)
    2. CodeQL (github/codeql-action)
    3. Trivy (aquasecurity/trivy-action)
    4. Semgrep (returntocorp/semgrep-action)
    5. Bandit
    6. ESLint

    AI recommended 6 alternatives but never named anthropics/claude-code-security-review. This is the gap to close.

    Show full AI answer

Objective checks

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

  • Metadata completeness
    warn

    Suggestion:

  • 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 anthropics/claude-code-security-review?
    pass
    AI named anthropics/claude-code-security-review explicitly

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

  • If a team adopts anthropics/claude-code-security-review in production, what risks or prerequisites should they evaluate first?
    pass
    AI named anthropics/claude-code-security-review 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 anthropics/claude-code-security-review solve, and who is the primary audience?
    pass
    AI did not name anthropics/claude-code-security-review — 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 anthropics/claude-code-security-review. 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/anthropics/claude-code-security-review.svg)](https://repogeo.com/en/r/anthropics/claude-code-security-review)
HTML
<a href="https://repogeo.com/en/r/anthropics/claude-code-security-review"><img src="https://repogeo.com/badge/anthropics/claude-code-security-review.svg" alt="RepoGEO" /></a>
Pro

Subscribe to Pro for deep diagnoses

anthropics/claude-code-security-review — 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