RRepoGEO

REPOGEO REPORT · LITE

mims-harvard/TxAgent

Default branch main · commit 8c24ad9e · scanned 6/13/2026, 5:48:02 AM

GitHub: 634 stars · 102 forks

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 mims-harvard/TxAgent, 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 core value proposition at README's start

    Why:

    CURRENT
    # TxAgent: An AI agent for therapeutic reasoning across a universe of tools
    
    [](https://zitniklab.hms.harvard.edu/TxAgent)
    [](https://arxiv.org/pdf/2503.10970)
    [](https://pypi.org/project/txagent/)
    COPY-PASTE FIX
    # TxAgent: An AI agent for therapeutic reasoning across a universe of tools
    
    TxAgent is an AI agent framework specifically designed for therapeutic reasoning in precision medicine, enabling complex medical decision-making and tool utilization. It provides a robust environment for developing and evaluating agents that navigate a universe of biomedical tools.
    
    [](https://zitniklab.hms.harvard.edu/TxAgent)
    [](https://arxiv.org/pdf/2503.10970)
    [](https://pypi.org/project/txagent/)
  • highreadme#2
    Review and update/remove 'not actively maintained' statement

    Why:

    CURRENT
    This project is no longer actively maintained.
    COPY-PASTE FIX
    Review the README for the statement 'This project is no longer actively maintained.' If this is outdated or incorrect, remove it. If it is accurate, consider adding context about its status or future plans to manage user expectations.
  • mediumreadme#3
    Add a 'Key Differentiators' section to the README

    Why:

    COPY-PASTE FIX
    Add a new section to the README titled 'Key Differentiators' or similar, with content like:
    
    ### Key Differentiators
    
    Unlike general-purpose agent frameworks (e.g., LangChain, LlamaIndex), TxAgent is purpose-built for the unique challenges of therapeutic reasoning in precision medicine. It is not a biomedical language model (like BioGPT or Med-PaLM 2) but rather a framework for building agents that leverage such models and a diverse set of tools to make complex medical decisions.

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 mims-harvard/TxAgent
Avg rank
Lower is better. #1 = top recommendation.
Share of voice
0%
Of all named tools, what % are you?
Top rival
BioGPT
Recommended in 1 of 2 queries
COMPETITOR LEADERBOARD
  1. BioGPT · recommended 1×
  2. Med-PaLM 2 · recommended 1×
  3. GatorTron · recommended 1×
  4. ClinicalBERT · recommended 1×
  5. GPT-4 · recommended 1×
  • CATEGORY QUERY
    AI agent for therapeutic reasoning in precision medicine applications using language models.
    you: not recommended
    AI recommended (in order):
    1. BioGPT
    2. Med-PaLM 2
    3. GatorTron
    4. ClinicalBERT
    5. GPT-4

    AI recommended 5 alternatives but never named mims-harvard/TxAgent. This is the gap to close.

    Show full AI answer
  • CATEGORY QUERY
    Seeking an intelligent agent framework for complex medical decision-making and tool utilization.
    you: not recommended
    AI recommended (in order):
    1. LangChain
    2. LlamaIndex
    3. Haystack
    4. AutoGPT
    5. OpenAI Assistants API
    6. Microsoft Semantic Kernel

    AI recommended 6 alternatives but never named mims-harvard/TxAgent. 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 mims-harvard/TxAgent?
    pass
    AI did not name mims-harvard/TxAgent — 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 mims-harvard/TxAgent in production, what risks or prerequisites should they evaluate first?
    pass
    AI did not name mims-harvard/TxAgent — 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?

  • In one sentence, what problem does the repo mims-harvard/TxAgent solve, and who is the primary audience?
    pass
    AI named mims-harvard/TxAgent explicitly

    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 mims-harvard/TxAgent. 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/mims-harvard/TxAgent.svg)](https://repogeo.com/en/r/mims-harvard/TxAgent)
HTML
<a href="https://repogeo.com/en/r/mims-harvard/TxAgent"><img src="https://repogeo.com/badge/mims-harvard/TxAgent.svg" alt="RepoGEO" /></a>
Pro

Subscribe to Pro for deep diagnoses

mims-harvard/TxAgent — 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