RRepoGEO

REPOGEO REPORT · LITE

cisco-ai-defense/defenseclaw

Default branch main · commit ee969897 · scanned 6/12/2026, 8:36:42 AM

GitHub: 732 stars · 127 forks

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 cisco-ai-defense/defenseclaw, 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

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

OVERALL DIRECTION
  • highreadme#1
    Reposition the README's opening sentence to clarify its role as an active security tool

    Why:

    CURRENT
    <strong>Security governance for OpenClaw and agentic AI runtimes.</strong><br /> Scan capabilities before use, inspect runtime traffic, and export durable audit evidence.
    COPY-PASTE FIX
    <strong>DefenseClaw is an open-source security governance tool designed to actively defend OpenClaw and other agentic AI runtimes.</strong> It scans capabilities before use, inspects runtime traffic, and exports durable audit evidence.
  • mediumabout#2
    Expand the 'About' description to emphasize active defense and tool functionality

    Why:

    CURRENT
    Security Governance for Agentic AI
    COPY-PASTE FIX
    An open-source security governance tool for actively defending agentic AI runtimes, scanning capabilities, and auditing traffic.

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 cisco-ai-defense/defenseclaw
Avg rank
—
Lower is better. #1 = top recommendation.
Share of voice
0%
Of all named tools, what % are you?
Top rival
NIST AI Risk Management Framework (AI RMF)
Recommended in 1 of 2 queries
COMPETITOR LEADERBOARD
  1. NIST AI Risk Management Framework (AI RMF) · recommended 1×
  2. OWASP Top 10 for Large Language Model Applications (LLM Top 10) · recommended 1×
  3. Microsoft Azure AI Security Best Practices · recommended 1×
  4. Google Cloud Responsible AI Toolkit · recommended 1×
  5. IBM Watson AI Governance · recommended 1×
  • CATEGORY QUERY
    How to implement security governance for AI agents and their capabilities?
    you: not recommended
    AI recommended (in order):
    1. NIST AI Risk Management Framework (AI RMF)
    2. OWASP Top 10 for Large Language Model Applications (LLM Top 10)
    3. Microsoft Azure AI Security Best Practices
    4. Google Cloud Responsible AI Toolkit
    5. IBM Watson AI Governance
    6. OpenSSF (Open Source Security Foundation) AI/ML Security Working Group
    7. DataRobot MLOps Platform

    AI recommended 7 alternatives but never named cisco-ai-defense/defenseclaw. This is the gap to close.

    Show full AI answer
  • CATEGORY QUERY
    Tool for monitoring and auditing AI agent runtime traffic and actions?
    you: not recommended
    AI recommended (in order):
    1. LangSmith
    2. Arize AI
    3. Whylogs (whylabs/whylogs)
    4. WhyLabs
    5. Weights & Biases
    6. Grafana
    7. Prometheus
    8. Datadog

    AI recommended 8 alternatives but never named cisco-ai-defense/defenseclaw. 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 cisco-ai-defense/defenseclaw?
    pass
    AI named cisco-ai-defense/defenseclaw explicitly

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

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

Subscribe to Pro for deep diagnoses

cisco-ai-defense/defenseclaw — 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