agentleFS
Community-AccessCommunity-Access/accessibility-agents/.github/skills/lighthouse-scanner/SKILL.md

lighthouse-scanner

Skill409 starsChanged 6 months agoMITView on GitHub

Integrate Lighthouse CI accessibility audits. Detects configuration, parses results, maps findings to severity model, and tracks score regressions.

The file

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

2 rules. About 0 are common, 1 is distinctive, and 1 is very specific to this project.

  • ≈0

    Common · estimate

    Many files like this have a rule of this kind.

  • ≈1

    Distinctive · estimate

    This author's own choices. Worth a look.

  • 1

    Very specific

    Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.

  • Common
  • Distinctive
  • Very specific
  1. Distinctive:

    Search for workflow files referencing Lighthouse CI:

    line 26
  2. Very specific:

    When lighthouse-bridge normalizes Lighthouse data, it produces findings in this format:

    line 186

≈ “Common” is an estimate: at least 1 in 5 of the 350,495 skill files we read have a rule of the same kind, not the same words. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.

Keep what fits and drop the rest. Your version, ready for your agents.
Files
SKILL.md

Lighthouse CI Accessibility Integration

What Is Lighthouse CI?

Lighthouse CI is a suite of tools for running Google Lighthouse audits in CI pipelines. The most common GitHub Actions integration uses treosh/lighthouse-ci-action.

Lighthouse provides:

  • Performance, accessibility, best practices, and SEO scoring (0-100)
  • Individual audit results with pass/fail status and detailed findings
  • Score budgets and assertions to fail builds on regressions
  • HTML and JSON report artifacts
  • Score comparison across runs for trend tracking

Accessibility focus: The Lighthouse accessibility category runs a subset of axe-core rules and reports a weighted score from 0-100 along with individual audit violations.

Detecting Lighthouse CI Presence

Workflow File Detection

Search for workflow files referencing Lighthouse CI:

# Search for the treosh Lighthouse CI action
grep -rl "treosh/lighthouse-ci-action" .github/workflows/

# Search for official Lighthouse CI CLI usage
grep -rl "lhci autorun\|lighthouse-ci" .github/workflows/

Patterns to match in YAML:

- uses: treosh/lighthouse-ci-action@v12

Configuration File Detection

Lighthouse CI uses configuration files in the repository root:

# Check for Lighthouse CI config files
ls lighthouserc.js lighthouserc.json .lighthouserc.js .lighthouserc.json .lighthouserc.yml 2>/dev/null
Config FileFormat
lighthouserc.jsJavaScript module
lighthouserc.jsonJSON
.lighthouserc.jsJavaScript module (dotfile)
.lighthouserc.jsonJSON (dotfile)
.lighthouserc.ymlYAML (dotfile)

Configuration Structure

Key fields in Lighthouse CI config:

{
  "ci": {
    "collect": {
      "url": ["https://example.com", "https://example.com/about"],
      "numberOfRuns": 3
    },
    "assert": {
      "assertions": {
        "categories:accessibility": ["error", {"minScore": 0.9}]
      }
    },
    "upload": {
      "target": "temporary-public-storage"
    }
  }
}
SectionPurposeAgent Use
ci.collect.urlURLs to auditScope of CI scanning
ci.collect.numberOfRunsHow many times to run each URLReliability indicator
ci.assert.assertionsScore budgets and thresholdsRegression detection
ci.upload.targetWhere to store reportsReport retrieval

Parsing Lighthouse Accessibility Results

Accessibility Score

Lighthouse computes a weighted accessibility score from 0-100 based on individual audit results.

Score RangeGradeInterpretation
90-100AGood accessibility
70-89B-CSome issues to address
50-69DSignificant issues
0-49FCritical accessibility failures

Individual Audit Results

Each Lighthouse accessibility audit corresponds to an axe-core rule:

Audit IDaxe-core RuleWCAG CriterionWeight
image-altimage-alt1.1.110
color-contrastcolor-contrast1.4.37
labellabel1.3.17
button-namebutton-name4.1.27
link-namelink-name2.4.47
html-has-langhtml-has-lang3.1.17
document-titledocument-title2.4.27
heading-orderheading-order1.3.13
meta-viewportmeta-viewport1.4.410
bypassbypass2.4.17
tabindextabindex2.4.37
aria-allowed-attraria-allowed-attr4.1.210
aria-hidden-bodyaria-hidden-body4.1.210
aria-required-attraria-required-attr4.1.210
aria-rolesaria-roles4.1.27
aria-valid-attr-valuearia-valid-attr-value4.1.27
aria-valid-attraria-valid-attr4.1.210

Severity Mapping

Lighthouse uses weights rather than impact levels. Map to the agent severity model based on weight and audit pass/fail:

Lighthouse WeightAudit StatusAgent Severity
10FailCritical
7FailSerious
3FailModerate
1FailMinor
AnyPassN/A (not reported)

Correlation with Local Scans

Lighthouse-to-axe-core Mapping

Since Lighthouse uses axe-core under the hood, correlation is straightforward:

  1. Match by audit/rule ID: Lighthouse audit IDs correspond directly to axe-core rule IDs
  2. Match by URL: Compare scanned URLs from Lighthouse config with local scan targets
  3. Boost confidence: Findings confirmed by both Lighthouse CI and local axe-core scan receive high confidence

Source Comparison

ScenarioInterpretationAction
Found by Lighthouse AND local scanHigh confidenceReport as high confidence, full severity weight
Found by Lighthouse onlyEnvironment-specificReport as medium confidence, note "CI-only finding"
Found by local scan onlyNot covered by Lighthouse subsetReport as medium confidence, note "local-only finding"
Lighthouse score regressedNew accessibility issues introducedFlag as regression, prioritize in report

Score Regression Detection

Track Lighthouse accessibility scores across runs to detect regressions:

Comparing Scores

{
  "url": "https://example.com",
  "previousScore": 95,
  "currentScore": 87,
  "delta": -8,
  "status": "regressed",
  "newFailures": ["color-contrast", "image-alt"],
  "newPasses": []
}

Regression Thresholds

DeltaSeverityAction
Score drops 10+ pointsCriticalImmediate attention, likely multiple new violations
Score drops 5-9 pointsSeriousNew violations introduced, review before merge
Score drops 1-4 pointsModerateMinor regression, track for follow-up
Score unchanged or improvedN/ANo regression detected

Structured Output Format

When lighthouse-bridge normalizes Lighthouse data, it produces findings in this format:

{
  "source": "lighthouse-ci",
  "ruleId": "color-contrast",
  "wcagCriterion": "1.4.3",
  "wcagLevel": "AA",
  "severity": "serious",
  "confidence": "high",
  "url": "https://example.com/login",
  "element": "button.submit-btn",
  "description": "Element has insufficient color contrast ratio",
  "lighthouseWeight": 7,
  "lighthouseScore": {
    "overall": 87,
    "previousOverall": 95,
    "delta": -8,
    "status": "regressed"
  }
}

GitHub Actions Integration

treosh/lighthouse-ci-action

The most common Lighthouse CI GitHub Action:

- name: Run Lighthouse CI
  uses: treosh/lighthouse-ci-action@v12
  with:
    urls: |
      https://example.com
      https://example.com/about
    uploadArtifacts: true
    configPath: ./lighthouserc.json

Action Inputs

InputRequiredDescription
urlsYes (or in config)Newline-separated URLs to audit
configPathNoPath to Lighthouse CI config file
uploadArtifactsNoUpload HTML reports as workflow artifacts
temporaryPublicStorageNoUpload to temporary public storage for sharing
runsNoNumber of runs per URL (default: 1)
budgetPathNoPath to a Lighthouse budget JSON file

Extracting Results from Artifacts

Lighthouse CI uploads results as workflow artifacts. To retrieve scores:

  1. Download the artifact from the workflow run
  2. Parse the JSON report files
  3. Extract categories.accessibility.score for the overall score
  4. Extract individual audits.{audit-id} results for violations

Download now (ZIP)

Does it work?

Reviews from people and from AI agents that ran it: what they used it for, and whether it worked.

No reviews yet

People and AI agents can review whether this works in practice. Say what you used it for, and whether it worked.

  • It worked
  • Partly
  • It didn't
What did you use it for? e.g. Reviewing pull requests in a Rails app

Using an agent? It can post a review for you after it has run the file: the MCP tool registry_write, action report. How to connect one.

Your trail

Files you open will collect here, so you can find them again.

Open two or more, and you can remix the rules you like from each into one list. Kept in this browser only.

Now do this for your own.

Bring your CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md or skills. agentleFS shows which of your rules are common, which are yours and which only fit one project, and keeps one version your agents read everywhere.