Conversation
…search desk 2026-08-09)
![greptile-apps[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/867647?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
nish3451 has reached the 50-credit limit for trial accounts. To continue receiving code reviews, upgrade your plan.
|
Warning Review limit reached
Next review available in: 40 minutes Enable usage-based reviews in Billing to review now. Otherwise, wait until the next included review is available. How can I continue?After more reviews become available, a review can be triggered using the To avoid repeated limits, reduce automatic review volume by pausing incremental auto-reviews earlier, using label-based review opt-in, excluding WIP or generated PR titles, or requesting reviews manually when the PR is ready. If your team needs uninterrupted high-volume reviews, an organization admin can enable usage-based reviews. How do review limits work?CodeRabbit enforces per-developer PR review limits for each organization. Most developers receive the normal plan review availability. For paid Pro and Pro+ PR reviews, CodeRabbit uses adaptive limits for sustained high-volume activity. When a developer's recent PR review activity reaches the 95th percentile or higher among CodeRabbit users, additional reviews become available more gradually as earlier reviews age out of the rolling window. Please refer docs for additional details. Review details⚙️ Run configurationConfiguration used: defaults Review profile: CHILL Plan: Pro Plus Run ID: 📒 Files selected for processing (1)
Comment |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
nish3451 has reached the 50-credit limit for trial accounts. To continue receiving code reviews, upgrade your plan.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
nish3451 has reached the 50-credit limit for trial accounts. To continue receiving code reviews, upgrade your plan.
![chatgpt-codex-connector[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/1144995?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codex Review
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: 68acedd1ee
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub
Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
- Open a pull request for review
- Mark a draft as ready
- Comment "@codex review".
If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.
Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".
| | --- | --- | --- | | ||
| | Profile type | Free profile request via G2's public request form. No paid placement, no advertising purchase, no paid upgrade. | Packet: "Nish manually requests a free G2 service profile"; sell.g2.com/create-a-profile "you can claim your profile for free" | | ||
| | Vendor / company name | `TinyStudio` (exact product name; no "Inc", "LLC", "Studios", or a city — G2 copy rules forbid suffixes in the company name). | Packet: exact product name; llms.txt Identity; G2 Profile Guidelines "Do not include suffixes in the company name" | | ||
| | Service name | `The Website Appraisal` — the exact service name shown on the website. G2 guidelines require the product or service name to match the name on the vendor's website. If the form accepts only one name and asks for the product or service, use this name. | Packet acceptance: "under the exact service name shown on the website"; llms.txt "Current Offer: The Website Appraisal"; index.html / audit.html titles; G2 Profile Guidelines | |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
When G2 presents only one product/company-name field, this instruction tells Nish to submit The Website Appraisal, even though the verified FAQ summarized at lines 38–41 says service providers receive one profile per vendor. That can create or request a vendor-level profile under an individual offer name, conflicting with the duplicate-profile check in the runbook and making future TinyStudio services share a misnamed profile. Use TinyStudio for the single profile-name field and describe The Website Appraisal in the overview/category.
Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
nish3451 has reached the 50-credit limit for trial accounts. To continue receiving code reviews, upgrade your plan.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
nish3451 has reached the 50-credit limit for trial accounts. To continue receiving code reviews, upgrade your plan.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codex Review
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: a61c934818
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub
Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
- Open a pull request for review
- Mark a draft as ready
- Comment "@codex review".
If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.
Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".
| 4. Submit. Expect the official flow: conditional approval, verification by the G2 | ||
| research team "in about 3-5 business days", the profile live and ready to be | ||
| claimed, then a claim request reviewed "for final approval within 1-3 business | ||
| days". |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
When G2 publishes the requested profile, step 4 only says to expect a claim request to be reviewed; no step tells Nish to initiate that separate request. Step 5 nevertheless assumes the profile will be claimed, and the rollback procedure later relies on access through the claimed profile, so an operator following this runbook can leave the listing unmanaged and be unable to correct rewritten or unsupported copy. Add an explicit manual claim step and capture its approval or rejection.
Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.
| | Category | Leave to G2's research team — the create-a-profile flow places the profile "in the right category" after verification. If the form asks for a suggested category, choose the one that truthfully names the service: the free leak audit of high-ticket service homepages and the desk that closes the leaks. Do not pick a category whose definition implies guarantees, ad buying, or the retired Agent Desk product. | sell.g2.com/create-a-profile; constraint from packet: final category must describe the Website Appraisal / human-reviewed desk | | ||
| | Contact | `hello@tinystudio.io` — only if the form offers a contact field separate from the description. Never inside the description text. | llms.txt Contact; G2 Profile Guidelines (no email in description) | | ||
| | Screenshot / video | Only a real capture of a public tinystudio.io surface (for example, the homepage or the specimen audit page), if G2 asks for one. G2's screenshot rules forbid stock images; if no real capture is available, submit without media rather than inventing one. | G2 Profile Guidelines "Screenshot and Video Guidelines"; specimen.html | | ||
| | Location | Leave blank or choose the remote / no-location option if offered. The site states no base city or office address; never enter a city. If the form requires a city, stop and report (reject condition, below). | llms.txt Identity; audit.html q3 truth | |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
If the form offers a distinct Remote choice rather than a neutral no-location option, this instruction authorizes an unsupported location claim: the cited first-party sources establish only that no city or office address is stated, not that the business is remote. That contradicts the document's own reject condition for inventing location; permit only blank/no-location here and stop if G2 requires choosing Remote or a city.
Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.
1 participant
Prepared handoff for a truthful manual G2 service profile for TinyStudio's human-reviewed Website Appraisal, matching the backlog packet
g2-service-profile.md(research desk 2026-08-09, risk: green, traction).What this adds:
docs/service/g2-service-profile-2026-08-09.md: copy-paste profile content and a manual-only submission runbook for G2's free profile request flow, every field sourced to live first-party surfaces (llms.txt,offer.md,audit.html,pricing.html,index.html).site:g2.com tinystudio.io TinyStudioreturns no TinyStudio profile — unrelated entities only; stated as a baseline, not proof of non-existence.No site code, no marketing copy, no claims of results. Validation:
npm run checkpasses,git diff --checkclean.