from: if you have more than X dependencies, you're breaking SRP
to: if you have more than X dependencies, you're probably breaking SRP.
because the description clearly states that "there is no way to automatically check whether a class complies with the SRP..." (If there's no way to check, then we can't automatically say you're in violation based on the dependency count.)
Second, I changed "a class should have only one reason to change" to "a class should have only one responsibility." I couldn't make heads or tails of the former and finally guessed that it must have been a case of "distracted typing." Apologies if I was wrong.
IMO it's bad to use the acronym "SRP" which is not a well-known one, especially in a sentence where "Single Reponsibility Principle" already appears as is.
There must be a way to reformulate to avoid the repeatition.
Using acronyms increases what's known as the "cognitive load", see \http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognitive_load and makes the whole description more complex to understand.
