RRepoGEO

REPOGEO REPORT · LITE

microsoft/fara

Default branch main · commit 9b8af39c · scanned 6/22/2026, 6:06:54 AM

GitHub: 5,886 stars · 571 forks

Scan history for this repo

Score trend below includes all ready runs (older left, newer right; scroll horizontally if needed). The table is collapsed by default—expand for newest-first rows, 10 per page.

Score trend (left → right: older → newer)

2 ready scans. Expand the table below for newest-first rows (10 per page, paginated).

AI VISIBILITY SCORE
35 /100
Critical
Category recall
0 / 2
Not recommended in any query
Rule findings
1 pass · 1 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/fara, 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
    Clarify project purpose with an explicit README introduction

    Why:

    CURRENT
    The README immediately follows the H1 with '## Updates'.
    COPY-PASTE FIX
    Add a concise introductory paragraph immediately after the H1, before '## Updates', that explicitly states Fara-7B's purpose. For example:

"Fara-7B is a state-of-the-art efficient agentic model specifically designed for automating complex computer and browser-based tasks. It provides robust capabilities for interacting with various computer environments, making it ideal for researchers and developers building advanced AI agents."
  • mediumhomepage#2
    Add a homepage URL to the repository metadata

    Why:

    COPY-PASTE FIX
    Set the homepage URL in the repository settings to `https://aka.ms/msaif/fara`.
  • mediumtopics#3
    Expand repository topics for better category matching

    Why:

    CURRENT
    agent, browser-use, computer-use, computer-use-agent, cua
    COPY-PASTE FIX
    Add the following topics: `llm-agent`, `ai-agent`, `agent-evaluation`, `agent-benchmark`, `task-automation`, `web-automation`, `large-language-model`.

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/fara
Avg rank
—
Lower is better. #1 = top recommendation.
Share of voice
0%
Of all named tools, what % are you?
Top rival
AutoGPT
Recommended in 2 of 2 queries
COMPETITOR LEADERBOARD
  1. AutoGPT · recommended 2×
  2. BabyAGI · recommended 2×
  3. SuperAGI · recommended 2×
  4. Playwright · recommended 2×
  5. LangChain Agents · recommended 1×
  • CATEGORY QUERY
    What are effective agentic models for automating complex computer and browser-based tasks?
    you: not recommended
    AI recommended (in order):
    1. AutoGPT
    2. BabyAGI
    3. SuperAGI
    4. LangChain Agents
    5. CrewAI
    6. Microsoft AutoGen
    7. Playwright

    AI recommended 7 alternatives but never named microsoft/fara. This is the gap to close.

    Show full AI answer
  • CATEGORY QUERY
    How can I benchmark and evaluate the performance of AI agents interacting with a computer?
    you: not recommended
    AI recommended (in order):
    1. AgentBench
    2. MiniWoB++
    3. Playwright
    4. Selenium
    5. OpenAI Gym
    6. AutoGPT
    7. BabyAGI
    8. SuperAGI
    9. Amazon Mechanical Turk
    10. Prolific
    11. Grafana
    12. Prometheus
    13. Python's `logging` module

    AI recommended 13 alternatives but never named microsoft/fara. This is the gap to close.

    Show full AI answer

Objective checks

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

  • Metadata completeness
    warn

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

Subscribe to Pro for deep diagnoses

microsoft/fara — 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