/ Index
Sign in
Leaderboard›saas

crates.io: Rust Package Registry

crates.io
Claim this domain
Overall score
47.3Poor
—
Rank
#425
Prev: #423 · top 65% of 649 tracked
saas rank
#167 of 363
Sector average 41.5
Benchmark runs
2
1 domain on the index claimed by owners

crates.io serves as a central registry for sharing crates, which are packages or libraries written in Rust that you can use to enhance your projects

Locales
en
Opportunity cost · SaaS

crates.io: Rust Package Registry could see ~$3,583,600 of new ARR exposed to agent-led journeys each year

Public agent-traffic forecasts suggest a growing share, modelled here at roughly 34%, of trial, signup and plan selection sessions in the SaaS sector could be initiated or completed by AI agents[1][2]. crates.io: Rust Package Registry currently scores 47.3 on the Index[3], roughly 2.6 points below the SaaS peer average, leaving a 53-point gap to the ideal agent experience (100). The illustrative figure below applies that gap to the agent-driven slice of a typical annual recurring revenue baseline for this sector. It is a directional estimate, not a measured conversion rate.

Gap to leader
52.7 pts
Below SaaS avg
2.6 pts
Modelled new ARR at risk
$3,583,600

Estimate assumes a $20M ARR baseline with agent-sourced expansion. Claim your domain to replace this placeholder with your reported new ARR.

Sources
  1. [1]Gartner (2025) — Intelligent Agents in AI Really Can Work Alone. Here’s How.
  2. [2]Adobe Analytics (2025) — Generative AI traffic to U.S. retail sites (weekly trend)
  3. [3]Stunt Double (2026) — Stunt Double Index methodology & scoring rubric

Category breakdown

Brand awarenessCan agents recognise you exist?
50
DiscoveryWill they pick you?
60
Information retrievalCan they read your site?
30
Market rankingWhere do you sit in the lineup?
10
AccuracyDo they tell the truth about you?
55
Task completionCan an agent complete a task on behalf of a user?
45
Delegated accessDo you let agents in, safely?
100
Contact & communicationCan an agent reach a human?
45

By agent provider

By agent provider
Session quality, 30-day rolling, N ≥ 10 per provider
ChatGPT Agent
OpenAI
0.0

Where agents get stuck

Public summary · full session replay available to verified owners
mediumBrand awareness
No Organization JSON-LD. Agents can’t tell who owns the site at a glance.
lowBrand awareness
Fewer than two social profiles linked. Agents struggle to triangulate the brand.
mediumBrand awareness
Homepage meta description is missing or too short for agent snippets.
lowDiscovery
No canonical URL. Agents may conflate duplicate pages as separate entities.
highInformation retrieval
Homepage ships little text to server-rendered HTML. Agents without a browser see an empty shell.
mediumInformation retrieval
No JSON-LD structured data. Agents must infer entities from markup.
highInformation retrieval
Site renders a "please enable JavaScript" notice to non-JS clients.
mediumMarket ranking
No Product/Service schema on the homepage. Agents can’t easily compare offerings.
lowMarket ranking
No review or aggregateRating schema. Agents have no signal for ranking vs peers.
mediumMarket ranking
No price visible to non-JS clients. Agents may report "pricing not disclosed".
lowAccuracy
No canonical URL. Agents may cite ephemeral query-string variants.
mediumAccuracy
No JSON-LD at all. Every factual claim must be inferred from prose.
lowAccuracy
No privacy policy linked from the homepage. Agents can’t cite policy when asked.
mediumTask completion
No visible primary call-to-action in the server-rendered HTML. Agents have nothing concrete to click on behalf of a user.
lowTask completion
No server-rendered form detected. Agents without JavaScript can’t submit anything.
mediumTask completion
No mention of delegated auth primitives (passkey, OAuth, MCP). Agents must drive a full browser session.
lowDelegated access
robots.txt doesn’t mention any agent user-agents. The policy for agents is implicit.
mediumContact & communication
No contact email visible in server-rendered HTML. Agents can’t fall back to email.