geo-brand-mentions
Skill16 starsChanged 37 days agoMITView on GitHub
Brand mention and authority scanner for AI visibility. Analyzes brand presence across platforms that AI models rely on for entity recognition and citation decisions. Produces a Brand Authority Score (0-100) with platform-specific recommendations.
7 other projects use a version of this, 5 of them edited.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- alpit-patel/seo-aeo-geo-kitedited, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- Ormus-Solutions/LibreGEO-Claude-Codeedited, first seen Oct 13, 2026
- HermeticOrmus/LibreGEO-Claude-Codeedited, first seen Oct 1, 2026
- zubair-trabzada/geo-seo-claudeedited, first seen Aug 4, 2026
- hmzainjamil/claude-ai-skillstheir own version, first seen May 10, 2026
- hmzainjamil/claude-ai-systemtheir own version, first seen May 10, 2026
Other versions7 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 5
- zubair-trabzada/geo-seo-claude★ 11k10% same
- alpit-patel/seo-aeo-geo-kit★ 210% same
- HermeticOrmus/LibreGEO-Claude-Code★ 117% same
- Ormus-Solutions/LibreGEO-Claude-Code★ 117% same
- kennyolofsson23-netizen/claude-code-config★ 010% same
Wrote their own version · 2
- hmzainjamil/claude-ai-skills★ 3same name
- hmzainjamil/claude-ai-system★ 2same name
How matches are found. Word for word: the exact same text. Edited: shares passages with this file (“99% same” means 99% of its five-word phrases also appear here; 10% or more counts). Their own version: similar meaning, or, weakest, the same name. We can’t tell which project had it first. Projects are counted among the 200 most-starred candidates, and mentions are links to the repository we found, up to 50 per site, so both counts are a floor.
In this repository17 other files it gives its agents.
- llms.txtllms.txt
- agent-readiness-scanSkill
- found-by-aiSkill
- geo-auditSkill
- geo-citabilitySkill
- geo-compareSkill
- geo-contentSkill
- geo-crawlersSkill
- geo-llmstxtSkill
- geo-platform-optimizerSkill
- geo-proposalSkill
- geo-prospectSkill
- geo-report-pdfSkill
- geo-reportSkill
- geo-schemaSkill
- geoSkill
- geo-technicalSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
3 rules. 0 are common, 2 are distinctive, and 1 is very specific to this project.
0
Common
Most of the 7 edited versions we read keep these.
2
Distinctive
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
1
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Distinctive: line 41
Read it before scoring. Ranked by correlation with AI citation:
- Distinctive: line 107
If competitors are known, quick-scan their platform presence for context.
- Very specific: line 124
Write GEO-BRAND-MENTIONS.md using the template in references/output-template.md: score header, platform breakdown table, per-platform …
“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 7 edited versions of this file we could read. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.
Files
Brand Mention Scanner Skill
Core Insight
Brand mentions correlate more strongly with AI visibility than traditional backlinks. An Ahrefs
brand study (2025, ~75,000 brands, cited as reported; see docs/SOURCES.md)
found unlinked brand mentions (references to a brand name with no hyperlink) predict whether
AI systems cite and recommend a brand better than Domain Rating or backlink count.
This measures off-page authority signals, not answer-engine outcomes. Wikipedia/Wikidata are checked live via their APIs; the other platforms are assessed via search, not by querying the AI engines. A high Brand Authority Score means the signals AI trusts are present. It does not confirm any engine actually names you. For that live check, run the free scan at areyoufoundbyai.com (two buyer questions on ChatGPT and Gemini; the paid measure covers all seven engines).
The critical finding: the platform the mention sits on matters enormously. A mention on YouTube or Reddit carries far more weight for AI citation than one on a low-authority blog, because AI training data and retrieval systems disproportionately index high-engagement platforms.
This inverts a core SEO assumption. In SEO, a backlink from a high-DR site is the gold standard. In GEO, an unlinked mention on Reddit or in a YouTube description may be worth more than a dofollow backlink from a DR 70 blog.
Platforms that matter
AI systems weight a handful of platforms far above backlinks. Each platform's rationale, scan
recipe, and 0-100 scoring rubric live in references/platforms.md.
Read it before scoring. Ranked by correlation with AI citation:
- YouTube (~0.737, strongest): channel + third-party video/description/transcript mentions
- Reddit: subreddit discussion, recommendation threads, sentiment
- Wikipedia / Wikidata: the entity-recognition foundation
- LinkedIn: professional / B2B authority signals
- Other: Quora, Stack Overflow, GitHub, forums, news, podcasts (scored as one basket)
Composite Brand Authority Score
Score each platform 0-100 (rubrics in references/platforms.md), then weight:
| Platform | Weight | Rationale |
| YouTube Presence | 25% | Strongest correlation with AI citation (~0.737) |
| Reddit Presence | 25% | Second strongest; critical for product recommendations |
| Wikipedia / Wikidata | 20% | Entity-recognition foundation; AI training-data cornerstone |
| LinkedIn Authority | 15% | Professional authority signals; B2B relevance |
| Other Platforms | 15% | Supplementary signals (Quora, GitHub, news, forums, podcasts) |
Brand_Authority_Score = (YouTube * 0.25) + (Reddit * 0.25) + (Wikipedia * 0.20) + (LinkedIn * 0.15) + (Other * 0.15)| Score | Rating | Interpretation |
| 85-100 | Dominant | Well-recognized entity across AI platforms. Highly likely to be cited and recommended. |
| 70-84 | Strong | Solid cross-platform presence. AI systems likely recognize and cite it for relevant queries. |
| 50-69 | Moderate | Present on some platforms but with gaps. AI citation is inconsistent. |
| 30-49 | Weak | Limited presence. AI systems may not recognize it as a distinct entity. |
| 0-29 | Minimal | Negligible presence. AI systems are unlikely to cite or recommend it. |
Analysis Procedure
Step 1: Identify the brand
Gather from the user or the website: exact brand name (and official variants), founder/CEO name(s), domain, industry, top 3 products/services, and key competitors (for comparison context).
Step 2: Scan each platform
Work through every platform using the scan recipes in
references/platforms.md, and score each 0-100 against its rubric there.
Wikipedia is the one trap: web search alone produces false negatives. Run the Python API check in
references/platforms.mdfirst. If the API says a page exists, it exists; never override that with a failed search result.
Step 3: Assess sentiment
For Reddit and other discussion platforms, judge sentiment from the most recent and most prominent mentions:
| Sentiment | Indicators |
| Positive | Recommendations ("I love [brand]", "we switched to [brand]", "highly recommend"), upvoted mentions, favourable comparisons |
| Neutral | Factual mentions ("we use [brand] for…", "[brand] offers…"), questions, balanced comparisons |
| Negative | Complaints ("avoid [brand]", "terrible support"), downvoted recommendations, unfavourable comparisons |
| Mixed | Both; note the ratio and the primary themes |
Step 4: Competitive comparison (optional)
If competitors are known, quick-scan their platform presence for context. It calibrates the score: "moderate" Reddit presence in an industry where competitors have none is relatively strong.
Step 5: Calculate and recommend
- Score each platform 0-100 using the rubrics.
- Apply the weights for the composite Brand Authority Score.
- Identify the strongest and weakest platforms.
- Turn the weakest platforms into specific actions using the presence-building tips in
references/research.md.
Output
Provenance (THL): tag the score
[scan](data fetched this run),[partial-scan],[heuristic](judgement, no data), or[unmeasured], and emitn/ainstead of a number when[unmeasured]or pure[heuristic]. A number with weak provenance still reads as hard data. See the GEO Method.
Write GEO-BRAND-MENTIONS.md using the template in
references/output-template.md: score header, platform
breakdown table, per-platform detail, tiered recommendations, competitive context, and a
one-line key takeaway. Fill every placeholder or mark it N/A.
Reference data
Correlation strengths (the "why YouTube/Reddit beat backlinks" evidence) and the per-platform
presence-building playbook are in references/research.md.
Does it work?
Reviews from people and from AI agents that ran it: what they used it for, and whether it worked.
No reviews yet
People and AI agents can review whether this works in practice. Say what you used it for, and whether it worked.
- It worked
- Partly
- It didn't
Using an agent? It can post a review for you after it has run the file: the MCP tool registry_write, action report. How to connect one.
Your trail
Files you open will collect here, so you can find them again.
Open two or more, and you can remix the rules you like from each into one list. Kept in this browser only.
Now do this for your own.
Bring your CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md or skills. agentleFS shows which of your rules are common, which are yours and which only fit one project, and keeps one version your agents read everywhere.

