RRepoGEO

REPOGEO REPORT · LITE

runesleo/claude-code-workflow

Default branch main · commit c014a5ae · scanned 6/11/2026, 4:17:12 AM

GitHub: 684 stars · 78 forks

AI VISIBILITY SCORE
23 /100
Critical
Category recall
0 / 2
Not recommended in any query
Rule findings
1 pass · 0 warn · 1 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 runesleo/claude-code-workflow, 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 README opening to clarify 'workflow template' vs. 'framework/model'

    Why:

    CURRENT
    从多项目日常使用中提炼的 Claude Code 工作流模板——涵盖记忆管理、上下文工程与任务路由。

**不是教程、不是玩具配置。这是一套能真正上线交付的产线工作流。
    COPY-PASTE FIX
    从多项目日常使用中提炼的 Claude Code 工作流模板——涵盖记忆管理、上下文工程与任务路由。**它不是一个LLM框架（如LangChain），也不是一个AI模型（如Claude 3），而是一套能真正上线交付的、针对Claude Code的产线工作流。
  • highlicense#2
    Add a LICENSE file to clarify usage rights

    Why:

    COPY-PASTE FIX
    Create a LICENSE file (e.g., MIT or Apache-2.0) in the repository root.

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 runesleo/claude-code-workflow
Avg rank
—
Lower is better. #1 = top recommendation.
Share of voice
0%
Of all named tools, what % are you?
Top rival
LangChain
Recommended in 2 of 2 queries
COMPETITOR LEADERBOARD
  1. LangChain · recommended 2×
  2. LlamaIndex · recommended 2×
  3. OpenAI GPT-4 · recommended 1×
  4. GPT-3.5 Turbo · recommended 1×
  5. Anthropic Claude 3 · recommended 1×
  • CATEGORY QUERY
    How to build a self-improving AI coding assistant that remembers past interactions?
    you: not recommended
    AI recommended (in order):
    1. OpenAI GPT-4
    2. GPT-3.5 Turbo
    3. Anthropic Claude 3
    4. Google Gemini
    5. Pinecone
    6. Weaviate
    7. Qdrant
    8. LangChain
    9. LlamaIndex
    10. Docker
    11. Jupyter Kernel Gateway
    12. ZeroMQ
    13. PostgreSQL
    14. MongoDB
    15. React
    16. Next.js
    17. Streamlit
    18. Gradio

    AI recommended 18 alternatives but never named runesleo/claude-code-workflow. This is the gap to close.

    Show full AI answer
  • CATEGORY QUERY
    Seeking a structured workflow for AI code generation with task routing and enforced validation.
    you: not recommended
    AI recommended (in order):
    1. LangChain
    2. LlamaIndex
    3. Magentic
    4. Guardrails AI
    5. OpenAI Functions
    6. Pydantic

    AI recommended 6 alternatives but never named runesleo/claude-code-workflow. This is the gap to close.

    Show full AI answer

Objective checks

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

  • Metadata completeness
    fail

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

Subscribe to Pro for deep diagnoses

runesleo/claude-code-workflow — 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