Update README.md

[guibranco]

Closes #

📑 Description

✅ Checks

• My pull request adheres to the code style of this project
• My code requires changes to the documentation
• I have updated the documentation as required
• All the tests have passed

☢️ Does this introduce a breaking change?

• Yes
• No

ℹ Additional Information

Summary by Sourcery

Documentation:

• Revise the README.md to enhance clarity and provide a more engaging introduction to the PHP API and Service/Worker boilerplate template. Add sections detailing key features such as API readiness, service/worker support, and the use of pure PHP without heavy frameworks. Update the license section to clarify the MIT License usage and provide links for further reading.

[semanticdiff-com]

Review changes with  

[sourcery-ai]

Reviewer's Guide by Sourcery

This PR updates the README.md file to enhance its readability and presentation by adding emojis, improving formatting, and expanding the content structure. The changes focus on making the documentation more visually appealing and informative while maintaining the same core information.

No diagrams generated as the changes look simple and do not need a visual representation.

File-Level Changes

Change	Details	Files
Enhanced documentation formatting and structure	Added emojis throughout the document for better visual engagement Improved heading formatting with emoji icons Expanded the project description with better formatting and clarity Added a new 'Key Features' section highlighting main capabilities Restructured the license section with clearer formatting and additional guidance	README.md
Expanded content with additional project information	Added detailed explanation of template's purpose and use cases Included key features list highlighting main functionalities Added encouraging message for developers at the end	README.md

---

Tips and commands

Interacting with Sourcery

• Trigger a new review: Comment @sourcery-ai review on the pull request.
• Continue discussions: Reply directly to Sourcery's review comments.
• Generate a GitHub issue from a review comment: Ask Sourcery to create an
  issue from a review comment by replying to it.
• Generate a pull request title: Write @sourcery-ai anywhere in the pull
  request title to generate a title at any time.
• Generate a pull request summary: Write @sourcery-ai summary anywhere in
  the pull request body to generate a PR summary at any time. You can also use
  this command to specify where the summary should be inserted.

Customizing Your Experience

Access your dashboard to:

• Enable or disable review features such as the Sourcery-generated pull request
  summary, the reviewer's guide, and others.
• Change the review language.
• Add, remove or edit custom review instructions.
• Adjust other review settings.

Getting Help

• Contact our support team for questions or feedback.
• Visit our documentation for detailed guides and information.
• Keep in touch with the Sourcery team by following us on X/Twitter, LinkedIn or GitHub.

[pr-code-reviewer]

👋 Hi there!

Everything looks good!

_{^{Automatically generated with the help of gpt-3.5-turbo.
Feedback? Please don't hesitate to drop me an email at [email protected].}}

[instapr]

Feedback:

1. 📑 Add a brief description of the pull request
2. ✅ Make sure your PR passes the CI checks and update the necessary fields:
   • My pull request adheres to the code style of this project
   • My code requires changes to the documentation
   • I have updated the documentation as required
   • All tests have passed
3. ☢️ No breaking changes introduced
4. ℹ Consider detailing any breaking changes, added dependencies, screenshots, etc.

[coderabbitai]

Warning

Rate limit exceeded

@gstraccini[bot] has exceeded the limit for the number of commits or files that can be reviewed per hour. Please wait 16 minutes and 56 seconds before requesting another review.

⌛ How to resolve this issue?

After the wait time has elapsed, a review can be triggered using the @coderabbitai review command as a PR comment. Alternatively, push new commits to this PR.

We recommend that you space out your commits to avoid hitting the rate limit.

🚦 How do rate limits work?

CodeRabbit enforces hourly rate limits for each developer per organization.

Our paid plans have higher rate limits than the trial, open-source and free plans. In all cases, we re-allow further reviews after a brief timeout.

Please see our FAQ for further information.

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between b905bca and 298a12f.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)

• README.md (1 hunks)

---

Thank you for using CodeRabbit. We offer it for free to the OSS community and would appreciate your support in helping us grow. If you find it useful, would you consider giving us a shout-out on your favorite social media?

❤️ Share

• X
• Mastodon
• Reddit
• LinkedIn

🪧 Tips

Chat

There are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:

• Review comments: Directly reply to a review comment made by CodeRabbit. Example:
  • I pushed a fix in commit <commit_id>, please review it.
  • Generate unit testing code for this file.
  • Open a follow-up GitHub issue for this discussion.
• Files and specific lines of code (under the "Files changed" tab): Tag @coderabbitai in a new review comment at the desired location with your query. Examples:
  • @coderabbitai generate unit testing code for this file.
  • @coderabbitai modularize this function.
• PR comments: Tag @coderabbitai in a new PR comment to ask questions about the PR branch. For the best results, please provide a very specific query, as very limited context is provided in this mode. Examples:
  • @coderabbitai gather interesting stats about this repository and render them as a table. Additionally, render a pie chart showing the language distribution in the codebase.
  • @coderabbitai read src/utils.ts and generate unit testing code.
  • @coderabbitai read the files in the src/scheduler package and generate a class diagram using mermaid and a README in the markdown format.
  • @coderabbitai help me debug CodeRabbit configuration file.

Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments.

CodeRabbit Commands (Invoked using PR comments)

• @coderabbitai pause to pause the reviews on a PR.
• @coderabbitai resume to resume the paused reviews.
• @coderabbitai review to trigger an incremental review. This is useful when automatic reviews are disabled for the repository.
• @coderabbitai full review to do a full review from scratch and review all the files again.
• @coderabbitai summary to regenerate the summary of the PR.
• @coderabbitai generate docstrings to generate docstrings for this PR. (Beta)
• @coderabbitai resolve resolve all the CodeRabbit review comments.
• @coderabbitai configuration to show the current CodeRabbit configuration for the repository.
• @coderabbitai help to get help.

Other keywords and placeholders

• Add @coderabbitai ignore anywhere in the PR description to prevent this PR from being reviewed.
• Add @coderabbitai summary to generate the high-level summary at a specific location in the PR description.
• Add @coderabbitai anywhere in the PR title to generate the title automatically.

CodeRabbit Configuration File (.coderabbit.yaml)

• You can programmatically configure CodeRabbit by adding a .coderabbit.yaml file to the root of your repository.
• Please see the configuration documentation for more information.
• If your editor has YAML language server enabled, you can add the path at the top of this file to enable auto-completion and validation: # yaml-language-server: $schema=https://coderabbit.ai/integrations/schema.v2.json

Documentation and Community

• Visit our Documentation for detailed information on how to use CodeRabbit.
• Join our Discord Community to get help, request features, and share feedback.
• Follow us on X/Twitter for updates and announcements.

[gooroo-dev]

Please double check the following review of the pull request:

Issues counts

🐞Mistake	🤪Typo	🚨Security	🚀Performance	💪Best Practices	📖Readability	❓Others
0	0	0	0	0	0	0

Changes in the diff

• ➕ Added emojis to section titles for visual enhancement.
• ➕ Introduced a "Key Features" section to highlight the main aspects of the template.
• 📖 Improved readability by rephrasing and restructuring sentences.
• ➕ Added a "Happy coding!" message at the end of the README for a friendly touch.

Identified Issues

ID	Type	Details	Severity	Confidence
1	💪Best Practices	The README lacks a section on how to contribute to the project.	🟡Low	🟡Low
2	📖Readability	The README could benefit from a "Getting Started" section for new users.	🟡Low	🟡Low

Issue Explanations and Fixes

1. Lack of Contribution Section

Explanation:
The README does not include a section that guides potential contributors on how to contribute to the project. This can be important for open-source projects to encourage community involvement.

Fix:
Add a "Contributing" section to the README.

## 🤝 Contributing

We welcome contributions! Please see our [CONTRIBUTING.md](link-to-contributing-guide) for more details.

Explanation of Fix:
This addition provides guidance and encourages community contributions, which can enhance the project's development and reach.

2. Missing "Getting Started" Section

Explanation:
The README could be more user-friendly by including a "Getting Started" section that helps new users quickly set up and run the project.

Fix:
Add a "Getting Started" section to the README.

## 🚀 Getting Started

To get started with this project, clone the repository and follow the setup instructions in the [INSTALL.md](link-to-install-guide).

Explanation of Fix:
This section provides a clear starting point for users, improving the onboarding experience and reducing setup time.

Missing Tests

Since the changes are only related to documentation (README.md), no code tests are required. However, if there were any scripts or code changes, tests should be written to validate the new functionality or changes.

Summon me to re-review when updated! Yours, Gooroo.dev
I'd love to hear your feedback! Add a reaction or reply.

[codara-ai-code-review]

Potential issues, bugs, and flaws that can introduce unwanted behavior:

1. Ambiguity in License Replacement
   /README.md - The statement suggesting users can "replace the license with one that better suits your project's needs" could lead to confusion. Users might not understand the implications of changing the license on a template repository.

Code suggestions and improvements for better exception handling, logic, standardization, and consistency:

1. Consistent Terminology
   /README.md - Referring to "API" as "API-ready" may confuse some readers. Consider keeping terminology consistent by just using "API" throughout or clearly defining the term "API-ready" before use.

2. Clarification on "Service/Worker" usage
   /README.md - The usage of the term "Service/Worker" is introduced but not defined. It could be helpful to clarify the difference between "Service" and "Worker" in practical terms or examples to guide users unfamiliar with the terminology.

3. Formatting Considerations
   /README.md - Ensure consistent emoji usage throughout the document. The readability of the document could be improved by keeping a standard approach for using symbols; ideally, they should complement the text and not distract from the core message.

4. Link Visibility for License
   /README.md - Consider highlighting the license information with a disclaimer about how users can check the license file more clearly. Phrasing like "Ensure to check the LICENSE file for details" might guide users better.

5. Engagement with Users
   /README.md - While the final message "Happy coding!" is inviting, consider adding a call to action or a section providing guidance on what steps users should take next after cloning or utilizing the boilerplate, such as links to further documentation or a roadmap on how to extend the boilerplate.

6. Redundant use of "boilerplate"
   /README.md - The phrase "boilerplate template" is somewhat redundant. Review and revise the text for clarity by either keeping it as "boilerplate" or changing it to "template" for better conciseness.

7. Use of Markdown for Clarity
   /README.md - In the "Key Features" section, consider using bulleted markdown with clear spacing. This can improve readability and organization, creating a clearer overview of features.

[korbit-ai]

I've completed my review and didn't find any issues.

Need a new review? Comment /korbit-review on this PR and I'll review your latest changes.

Korbit Guide: Usage and Customization

Interacting with Korbit

• You can manually ask Korbit to review your PR using the /korbit-review command in a comment at the root of your PR.
• You can ask Korbit to generate a new PR description using the /korbit-generate-pr-description command in any comment on your PR.
• Too many Korbit comments? I can resolve all my comment threads if you use the /korbit-resolve command in any comment on your PR.
• Chat with Korbit on issues we post by tagging @korbit-ai in your reply.
• Help train Korbit to improve your reviews by giving a 👍 or 👎 on the comments Korbit posts.

Customizing Korbit

• Check out our docs on how you can make Korbit work best for you and your team.
• Customize Korbit for your organization through the Korbit Console.

Current Korbit Configuration

General Settings

​

Setting	Value
Review Schedule	Automatic excluding drafts
Max Issue Count	10
Automatic PR Descriptions	✅

Issue Categories

​

Category	Enabled
Naming	✅
Database Operations	✅
Documentation	✅
Logging	✅
Error Handling	✅
Systems and Environment	✅
Objects and Data Structures	✅
Readability and Maintainability	✅
Asynchronous Processing	✅
Design Patterns	✅
Third-Party Libraries	✅
Performance	✅
Security	✅
Functionality	✅

Feedback and Support

• Tell us what you think of Korbit
• Schedule a call with our team
• Email us @ [email protected]

[sourcery-ai]

Hey @guibranco - I've reviewed your changes and they look great!

Here's what I looked at during the review

• 🟢 General issues: all looks good
• 🟢 Security: all looks good
• 🟢 Testing: all looks good
• 🟢 Complexity: all looks good
• 🟢 Documentation: all looks good

---

Sourcery is free for open source - if you like our reviews please consider sharing them ✨

• X
• Mastodon
• LinkedIn
• Facebook

_{Help me be more useful! Please click 👍 or 👎 on each comment and I'll use the feedback to improve your reviews.}

[github-actions]

Infisical secrets check: ✅ No secrets leaked!

💻 Scan logs

10:50AM INF scanning for exposed secrets...
10:50AM INF 64 commits scanned.
10:50AM INF scan completed in 67.8ms
10:50AM INF no leaks found