UGC Reactions from Real Creators
실제 크리에이터 영상은 11달러, 이미지 8달러. 맞춤 제작은 영상당 25달러부터, 최소 250달러, 상업 라이선스 포함
귀사의 AI 후보 여부를 확인하고, 구매자가 물을 때 ChatGPT·Gemini·Google AI가 언급한 기업을 실제 답변 기반으로 확인하세요
Is your business on AI's shortlist? See which businesses ChatGPT, Gemini and Google's AI name when buyers ask, counted from real answers. Never bought.
마케팅GitHub @aivisibilitycensus온라인운영자 미확인
써 보셨어요? 한 번만 눌러 주세요. 로그인은 필요 없어요.
저장소 정보는 아직 수집하지 않았습니다.
아직 감지된 업데이트가 없습니다. GitHub 릴리스가 나오면 여기에 보입니다.
9 open Claude skills for GEO / AEO: check if AI search can read a page, collect and analyze how often AI engines name a brand (with confidence ranges), plus schema parity, AI crawler log checks and migration guards. From the AI Visibility Census.
README 전체를 불러오는 중입니다.
README 전문 보기 ↗Your GEO audit says 87 out of 100. Can ChatGPT's crawler even reach the page?
A score cannot tell you. These nine free skills can: they list what blocks a page from AI search, count how often AI engines actually name you, and say when the numbers are too thin to mean anything. For Claude and other AI assistants, and every script also runs on its own from the command line.
Built on the published method of the AI Visibility Census.
| What a score gives you | What these skills give you |
|---|---|
| One number out of 100 | Findings in order of what blocks you, each with what to do |
| A number nobody has tested against AI answers. We searched nine open-source GEO audit repositories on 10 November 2026 and found no published test | No score. And we are testing in public whether scores go with being named at all, with the result published either way |
| "Up 17 points this month", with no way to tell a real change from chance | "Up 17 points, and that is inside the noise": every rate comes with a 95% range and the number of answers behind it |
Also here, and not common:
What you get is less flattering than a score and more useful: the three things to fix, the count you can defend to a client, and a plain "we can't tell yet" when that is the truth.
When another tool is the better choice: if you want a full SEO suite, client-ready PDF reports or content generation, the larger repositories do far more than this one, and several are very good at it. This repo does one job: honest measurement.
Check one page, no account and nothing to install beyond Python 3:
git clone https://github.com/aivisibilitycensus/geo-skills
python3 geo-skills/geo-check/scripts/geo_check.py https://example.com/your-page
You get a short list of what stops AI search engines from reading that page, each item with the evidence behind it. Example output. There is no score out of 100, on purpose: whether audit scores go with being named by AI is an open question, and we are testing it in public.
As a GitHub Action (on GitHub Marketplace), with the findings in the job summary:
- uses: aivisibilitycensus/[email protected]
with:
urls: |
https://example.com/
https://example.com/pricing
The job fails if a page has a blocking finding, such as a noindex that shipped from staging or a robots.txt rule against a search crawler. When nothing blocks, --badge prints a README badge that states the count and the date, not a score:
The answer log analyzer on its worked example (a fictional Dublin accounting firm, 108 logged answers a month on three engines):
| Engine | Named, September | Named, October |
|---|---|---|
| chatgpt | 28% (16-44%), n=36 | 33% (20-50%), n=36 |
| copilot | 14% (6-29%), n=36 | 19% (10-35%), n=36 |
| perplexity | 31% (18-47%), n=36 | 47% (32-63%), n=36 |
A nearly 17-point jump on one engine, and the report says it is not outside the noise. That is the point of these skills: counts with ranges, not a score. Full output: answer-log-analyzer/examples/example-report.md.
여기까지가 README 앞부분입니다. 나머지는 원문에서 읽을 수 있습니다. README 전문 보기 ↗