laravel-best-practices
Enforce Laravel Best Practices when generating code, reviewing code, and writing tests (SRP, skinny controllers, FormRequests, service/action classes, DRY, Eloquent/Collections, Blade query avoidance, eager loading, chunking).
Install with Tessl CLI
npx tessl i github:masterfermin02/laravel-agent-skill --skill laravel-best-practices73
Does it follow best practices?
If you maintain this skill, you can automatically optimize it using the tessl CLI to improve its score:
npx tessl skill review --optimize ./path/to/skillValidation for skill structure
Discovery
67%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 description excels at specificity by listing concrete Laravel patterns and practices, making it highly distinctive within a skill library. However, it lacks an explicit 'Use when...' clause and could benefit from more natural trigger terms that users might actually say when requesting Laravel code help.
Suggestions
Add an explicit 'Use when...' clause, e.g., 'Use when working on Laravel projects, reviewing PHP code in Laravel apps, or when the user mentions Laravel, Eloquent, or Blade templates.'
Include natural language variations users might say: 'Laravel app', 'PHP Laravel', 'clean up Laravel code', 'Laravel refactoring'.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | Lists multiple specific concrete practices: SRP, skinny controllers, FormRequests, service/action classes, DRY, Eloquent/Collections, Blade query avoidance, eager loading, chunking. These are concrete, actionable patterns. | 3 / 3 |
Completeness | Clearly answers 'what' (enforce best practices with specific patterns listed) and mentions contexts (generating code, reviewing code, writing tests), but lacks an explicit 'Use when...' clause with trigger guidance for when Claude should select this skill. | 2 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | Includes 'Laravel' and technical terms like 'FormRequests', 'Eloquent', 'Blade' that Laravel developers would recognize, but missing common variations like 'PHP', 'Laravel app', or natural phrases users might say like 'clean code' or 'refactor'. | 2 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | Highly specific to Laravel framework with distinct technical terms (FormRequests, Eloquent, Blade). Unlikely to conflict with generic code review or other framework-specific skills due to Laravel-specific terminology. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 10 / 12 Passed |
Implementation
70%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
This skill has strong structural organization with clear workflows and good progressive disclosure to external reference files. However, it lacks concrete code examples and executable snippets, relying instead on abstract descriptions of what outputs should contain. The core principles section explains concepts Claude already understands about Laravel patterns.
Suggestions
Add a concrete JSON example showing the expected 'findings' output structure with actual rule_id, evidence, and patch outline values
Include at least one executable code snippet demonstrating the recommended refactor pattern (e.g., extracting controller logic to a service class)
Trim the 'Core principles' section to just the rule names/ids since Claude understands SRP, DRY, etc. - or remove entirely if rulebook.json covers these
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The skill is reasonably efficient but includes some explanatory content Claude already knows (e.g., 'one reason to change per class' for SRP). The core principles section could be more terse since these are standard Laravel patterns. | 2 / 3 |
Actionability | Provides structured workflows and references external rulebook.json, but lacks concrete code examples. The 'patch outline' and 'test plan' outputs are described abstractly rather than with executable templates or copy-paste ready snippets. | 2 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | Clear three-workflow structure (Review, Generate code, Generate tests) with explicit numbered steps. Each workflow has a defined sequence and expected outputs, making the process unambiguous. | 3 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | Excellent structure with clear references to external files (references/rulebook.json, references/inertia-react.md) that are one level deep and well-signaled. The main skill provides overview while pointing to detailed materials appropriately. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 10 / 12 Passed |
Validation
81%Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.
Validation — 9 / 11 Passed
Validation for skill structure
| Criteria | Description | Result |
|---|---|---|
metadata_version | 'metadata.version' is missing | Warning |
metadata_field | 'metadata' should map string keys to string values | Warning |
Total | 9 / 11 Passed | |
- Reviewed
Table of Contents
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.