RRepoGEO

REPOGEO REPORT · LITE

Michaelliv/pi-dynamic-workflows

Default branch main · commit 31b2aca0 · scanned 6/4/2026, 4:17:02 PM

GitHub: 783 stars · 38 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 Michaelliv/pi-dynamic-workflows, 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
  • highabout#1
    Add a concise 'About' description for the repository

    Why:

    COPY-PASTE FIX
    An extension for the `pi` CLI that enables Claude-Code-style dynamic workflows, allowing AI agents to fan out complex tasks across isolated subagents and synthesize results.
  • mediumlicense#2
    Add a LICENSE file to the repository

    Why:

    COPY-PASTE FIX
    Create a `LICENSE` file in the repository root with a standard open-source license (e.g., MIT, Apache-2.0, GPL-3.0) and add a line to the README under a 'License' section stating the chosen license.

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 Michaelliv/pi-dynamic-workflows
Avg rank
—
Lower is better. #1 = top recommendation.
Share of voice
0%
Of all named tools, what % are you?
Top rival
Significant-Gravitas/AutoGPT
Recommended in 1 of 2 queries
COMPETITOR LEADERBOARD
  1. Significant-Gravitas/AutoGPT · recommended 1×
  2. langchain-ai/langchain · recommended 1×
  3. joaomdmoura/crewAI · recommended 1×
  4. OpenDevin/OpenDevin · recommended 1×
  5. gpt-engineer-org/gpt-engineer · recommended 1×
  • CATEGORY QUERY
    How can I coordinate multiple AI agents for complex software development tasks?
    you: not recommended
    AI recommended (in order):
    1. AutoGPT (Significant-Gravitas/AutoGPT)
    2. LangChain (langchain-ai/langchain)
    3. CrewAI (joaomdmoura/crewAI)
    4. OpenDevin (OpenDevin/OpenDevin)
    5. GPT Engineer (gpt-engineer-org/gpt-engineer)
    6. Microsoft AutoGen (microsoft/autogen)
    7. Smol-Developer (smol-ai/smol-developer)

    AI recommended 7 alternatives but never named Michaelliv/pi-dynamic-workflows. This is the gap to close.

    Show full AI answer
  • CATEGORY QUERY
    What tools enable dynamic, distributed workflows for AI assistants to tackle big projects?
    you: not recommended
    AI recommended (in order):
    1. Apache Airflow (apache/airflow)
    2. Kubeflow Pipelines (kubeflow/pipelines)
    3. Metaflow (Netflix/metaflow)
    4. Prefect (PrefectHQ/prefect)
    5. Argo Workflows (argoproj/argo-workflows)
    6. Dagster (dagster-io/dagster)

    AI recommended 6 alternatives but never named Michaelliv/pi-dynamic-workflows. 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 Michaelliv/pi-dynamic-workflows?
    pass
    AI named Michaelliv/pi-dynamic-workflows explicitly

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

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

Subscribe to Pro for deep diagnoses

Michaelliv/pi-dynamic-workflows — 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