RRepoGEO

REPOGEO REPORT · LITE

agavra/tuicr

Default branch main · commit 8bab4238 · scanned 6/7/2026, 12:12:02 PM

GitHub: 886 stars · 90 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 agavra/tuicr, 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 README opening to clarify category and target audience

    Why:

    CURRENT
    # tuicr

**A code review TUI with vim keybindings. Export to GitHub or clipboard.**
    COPY-PASTE FIX
    # tuicr

**A terminal-based code review tool with vim keybindings for Git, Jujutsu, Mercurial, and GitHub Pull Requests.**

`tuicr` brings the full GitHub-style code review experience directly to your terminal, allowing developers to efficiently review code, add PR-style comments, and track changes without leaving their command line. It's designed for those who prefer a fast, keyboard-driven workflow and seamless integration with their existing version control systems.
  • mediumtopics#2
    Refine topics to remove misleading ones and add more specific ones

    Why:

    CURRENT
    ai-tools, code-review, rust, tui
    COPY-PASTE FIX
    code-review, rust, tui, git, github, pull-requests, terminal-ui, vim-keybindings
  • mediumcomparison#3
    Add a 'Comparison' or 'Alternatives' section to the README

    Why:

    COPY-PASTE FIX
    ## Comparison to other tools

While tools like `lazygit` offer a general Git TUI and `delta` enhances diffs, `tuicr` focuses specifically on the *code review workflow*. It provides a complete GitHub-style review experience—including PR-style comments, review tracking, and direct GitHub export—all within your terminal, unlike browser-based solutions or simpler command-line utilities.

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 agavra/tuicr
Avg rank
—
Lower is better. #1 = top recommendation.
Share of voice
0%
Of all named tools, what % are you?
Top rival
Gerrit
Recommended in 1 of 2 queries
COMPETITOR LEADERBOARD
  1. Gerrit · recommended 1×
  2. Phabricator · recommended 1×
  3. Review Board · recommended 1×
  4. GitLab · recommended 1×
  5. zaquestion/lab · recommended 1×
  • CATEGORY QUERY
    Looking for a terminal-based code review tool with efficient keyboard navigation.
    you: not recommended
    AI recommended (in order):
    1. Gerrit
    2. Phabricator
    3. Review Board
    4. GitLab
    5. lab (zaquestion/lab)
    6. glab (gitlab-org/cli)
    7. GitHub
    8. GitHub CLI (cli/cli)
    9. Neovim
    10. Vim
    11. fugitive.vim (tpope/vim-fugitive)
    12. git-messenger.vim (rhysd/git-messenger.vim)
    13. diffview.nvim (sindrets/diffview.nvim)
    14. Meld

    AI recommended 14 alternatives but never named agavra/tuicr. This is the gap to close.

    Show full AI answer
  • CATEGORY QUERY
    What is a good command-line utility for reviewing Git pull requests and local changes?
    you: not recommended
    AI recommended (in order):
    1. lazygit (jesseduffield/lazygit)
    2. delta (dandavison/delta)
    3. tig (jonas/tig)
    4. git-pr (GitHub CLI extension) (mislav/gh-pr)
    5. diff-so-fancy (so-fancy/diff-so-fancy)
    6. Git's built-in `diff` and `log` commands (git/git)

    AI recommended 6 alternatives but never named agavra/tuicr. 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 agavra/tuicr?
    pass
    AI named agavra/tuicr explicitly

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

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

Subscribe to Pro for deep diagnoses

agavra/tuicr — 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