Find developers looking for what you’ve built.
Orviqa reads a GitHub repository — the source, not just the README — works out who the project is actually for, and gives you specific places to show up with the words to use.
- Findings
- Not scores. What is missing, and what to change.
- Your approval
- Drafts stay drafts. Nothing posts on a schedule.
- Evidence
- Written from the repository, with claims listed.
- Dashboard
- Growth Inbox6
- Audience
- Analytics
- Settings
What to do next
6Show HN: a local SQLite waterfall tracer for Python agents
The project is a tracer, and the audience reads Show HN.
High fit· Hacker News
Ship v0.1.2 — fix the quickstart, link the examples
The quickstart fails on a clean install. Fix before promoting.
High fit· Your repository
How contextvars, not globals, keep agent traces correct
A real implementation detail this subreddit argues about.
Medium fit· r/Python
Questions worth asking first
How is this different from Claude Code, or any coding agent?
A coding agent reads your repository and changes it. It is better at that than Orviqa is, and if what you need is “fix my README”, that is one prompt and you are done.
Orviqa is not a session. It keeps watching: it notices a release and drafts something about it, it tracks what a project looks like to someone who has never seen it, and it holds a plan across weeks rather than a conversation. A chat ends and its context dies.
It also does the half that happens outside your editor — who the project is for, which communities those people are in, what to say there, and a public project page that search engines can find. No agent in a terminal gives you a page that ranks.
Does it post anything on my behalf?
Only when you press publish on a draft you approved. Nothing is scheduled, nothing goes out automatically, and every publish records who approved it and who sent it. Drafts stay drafts — that is enforced in the code, not in a setting you could forget to check.
What does it do with my GitHub access?
Signing in asks for the narrowest scope that covers public repositories. GitHub bundles write access into that scope, so the token can do more than Orviqa does with it: analysis only ever reads.
Anything that writes — posting a release, opening a pull request against your README — uses a separate token you connect yourself, so revoking the ability to post does not also end analysis. Tokens are encrypted at rest and never sent to the browser.
Will it make things up about my project?
It is written from repository evidence, and where a number is needed and does not exist you get a placeholder and a list of claims to verify rather than an invented figure. If it would have to guess at an install command or a benchmark, it says so instead of guessing.
What does it cost?
Tokens, and nothing else. No subscription, no renewal, no card until you choose to buy. New workspaces start with enough credit to see a complete report first, and re-analysing an unchanged repository costs nothing because it reuses the stored snapshot.