phpcs-check-fix

Fix PHP coding style issues using PHPCS and PHPCBF. Use this skill whenever the user mentions PHPCS, code style, coding standard, cs:fix, cs:check, PHP formatting, or asks to fix/check PHP code style. Also activate when you notice PHP files have been modified and need style compliance, or when a CI PHPCS check has failed.

Quality

83%

Does it follow best practices?

Impact

—

No eval scenarios have been run

Securityby

Passed

No known issues

Quality

Discovery

89%

Based on the skill's description, can an agent find and select it at the right time? Clear, specific descriptions lead to better discovery.

This is a strong skill description with excellent trigger term coverage and completeness. It clearly states what the skill does and provides explicit, detailed guidance on when to activate it, including proactive scenarios like CI failures. The only minor weakness is that the capability description could list more specific actions beyond fixing and checking.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	Names the domain (PHP coding style) and the tools (PHPCS, PHPCBF), and mentions fixing and checking, but doesn't list multiple distinct concrete actions beyond 'fix' and 'check' — e.g., no mention of specific operations like auto-formatting, generating reports, configuring rulesets.	2 / 3
Completeness	Clearly answers both 'what' (fix PHP coding style issues using PHPCS and PHPCBF) and 'when' (explicit 'Use this skill whenever...' clause with multiple trigger scenarios including CI failure and modified PHP files).	3 / 3
Trigger Term Quality	Excellent coverage of natural trigger terms: 'PHPCS', 'PHPCBF', 'code style', 'coding standard', 'cs:fix', 'cs:check', 'PHP formatting', 'fix/check PHP code style', 'CI PHPCS check has failed'. These are terms users would naturally use.	3 / 3
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	Highly distinctive — targets a specific niche (PHP code style with PHPCS/PHPCBF tools) with tool-specific trigger terms like 'cs:fix', 'cs:check', 'PHPCS', making it very unlikely to conflict with other skills.	3 / 3
	Total	11 / 12 Passed

Implementation

77%

Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.

This is a solid, actionable skill with a clear workflow and good project-specific details like complexity thresholds, line length limits, and phpcs.xml exclusions. The main weakness is moderate verbosity—some explanatory text could be trimmed (CI section, descriptions of what auto-fix handles) and the common issues section could be referenced rather than fully inline. Overall it provides strong practical guidance that Claude can follow effectively.

Suggestions

Trim the CI Integration section to a single line or remove it—Claude doesn't need to understand the GitHub Actions pipeline to fix code style locally.

Remove explanatory phrases like 'This handles spacing, bracket placement, import ordering, and other mechanical fixes' that describe what the tool does rather than what Claude should do.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	Mostly efficient but includes some unnecessary context like explaining what PHPCBF handles ('spacing, bracket placement, import ordering') and the CI integration section which describes GitHub Actions behavior Claude doesn't need explained. The common issues section is valuable project-specific knowledge though.	2 / 3
Actionability	Provides concrete, executable commands (`composer cs:fix`, `composer cs:check`, `vendor/bin/phpcs --standard=phpcs.xml path/to/File.php`), specific code examples for inline ignores and type hints, and precise thresholds (complexity 7/10, line length 160/200). Fully actionable guidance throughout.	3 / 3
Workflow Clarity	Clear four-step sequence with explicit validation (re-run cs:check after manual fixes), a feedback loop ('If new issues appear, fix those too'), and logical progression from auto-fix to check to manual fix to re-verify. The workflow is well-structured for an iterative fix-validate cycle.	3 / 3
Progressive Disclosure	Content is well-organized with clear sections and headers, but the common issues section is quite detailed inline. The CI integration section could be omitted or referenced externally. For a skill of this length (~80 lines of content), the inline detail is borderline acceptable but could benefit from splitting the common violations into a separate reference file.	2 / 3
	Total	10 / 12 Passed

Validation

100%

Warnings & errors only

Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.

Validation — 11 / 11 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Repository: figlabhq/agent-skills
Commit: 533a35f

Reviewed: 24 days ago

Table of Contents

Discovery Implementation Validation

Is this your skill?

If you maintain this skill, you can claim it as your own. Once claimed, you can manage eval scenarios, bundle related skills, attach documentation or rules, and ensure cross-agent compatibility.