RRepoGEO

REPOGEO REPORT · LITE

microsoft/ToRA

Default branch main · commit 213c1c99 · scanned 5/14/2026, 5:52:21 AM

GitHub: 1,116 stars · 79 forks

AI VISIBILITY SCORE
40 /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
3 / 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 microsoft/ToRA, 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
    Update the main README heading to emphasize mathematical problem-solving

    Why:

    CURRENT
    <h1 align="center">

<br>
ToRA: A Tool-Integrated Reasoning Agent
</h1>
    COPY-PASTE FIX
    <h1 align="center">

<br>
ToRA: A Tool-Integrated Reasoning Agent for Mathematical Problem Solving
</h1>
  • hightopics#2
    Add more specific topics to highlight the mathematical reasoning and tool-use focus for LLMs

    Why:

    CURRENT
    autonomous-agents, language-model, llm, mathematical-reasoning, tool-learning
    COPY-PASTE FIX
    autonomous-agents, language-model, llm, mathematical-reasoning, tool-learning, llm-agents-for-math, math-llm, tool-use-llm, reasoning-llm
  • mediumreadme#3
    Add a 'Comparison' section to clarify ToRA's unique position

    Why:

    COPY-PASTE FIX
    Add a new section, e.g., "## 🆚 ToRA's Unique Approach" or "## 🎯 How ToRA Differs", explaining how ToRA specifically focuses on *mathematical reasoning* with *tool integration* for LLMs, distinguishing it from general LLM frameworks (e.g., LangChain, LlamaIndex) and general mathematical libraries (e.g., SymPy, NumPy). This section should highlight its specialized architecture for complex, multi-step mathematical problems.

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 microsoft/ToRA
Avg rank
—
Lower is better. #1 = top recommendation.
Share of voice
0%
Of all named tools, what % are you?
Top rival
Wolfram Alpha
Recommended in 1 of 2 queries
COMPETITOR LEADERBOARD
  1. Wolfram Alpha · recommended 1×
  2. Wolfram Language · recommended 1×
  3. sympy/sympy · recommended 1×
  4. numpy/numpy · recommended 1×
  5. scipy/scipy · recommended 1×
  • CATEGORY QUERY
    How to enhance LLMs for complex mathematical problem-solving using external tools?
    you: not recommended
    AI recommended (in order):
    1. Wolfram Alpha
    2. Wolfram Language
    3. SymPy (sympy/sympy)
    4. NumPy (numpy/numpy)
    5. SciPy (scipy/scipy)
    6. Mathematica
    7. SageMath (sagemath/sage)
    8. MATLAB
    9. Z3 Theorem Prover (Z3Prover/z3)

    AI recommended 9 alternatives but never named microsoft/ToRA. This is the gap to close.

    Show full AI answer
  • CATEGORY QUERY
    Seeking an LLM agent framework to improve mathematical reasoning through tool integration.
    you: not recommended
    AI recommended (in order):
    1. LangChain (langchain-ai/langchain)
    2. LlamaIndex (run-llama/llama_index)
    3. AutoGPT (Significant-Gravitas/AutoGPT)
    4. CrewAI (joaomdmoura/crewAI)
    5. Microsoft Guidance (microsoft/guidance)

    AI recommended 5 alternatives but never named microsoft/ToRA. 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 microsoft/ToRA?
    pass
    AI named microsoft/ToRA explicitly

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

  • If a team adopts microsoft/ToRA in production, what risks or prerequisites should they evaluate first?
    pass
    AI named microsoft/ToRA 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 microsoft/ToRA solve, and who is the primary audience?
    pass
    AI named microsoft/ToRA 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 microsoft/ToRA. 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/microsoft/ToRA.svg)](https://repogeo.com/en/r/microsoft/ToRA)
HTML
<a href="https://repogeo.com/en/r/microsoft/ToRA"><img src="https://repogeo.com/badge/microsoft/ToRA.svg" alt="RepoGEO" /></a>
Pro

Subscribe to Pro for deep diagnoses

microsoft/ToRA — 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