agentleFS
Sign inStart free
RealTaskRealTask/MAX-DESIGN/skills/accessibility-audit/SKILL.md

accessibility-audit

Skill4 starsChanged 23 days agoMITView on GitHub

Audit and improve interface accessibility across semantics, keyboard use, focus, forms, contrast, zoom, touch, and reduced-motion behavior.

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

5 rules. 0 are common, 5 are distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.

  • 0

    Common

    Most of the 43 edited versions we read keep these.

  • 5

    Distinctive

    This author's own choices. Worth a look.

  • 0

    Very specific

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

  • Common
  • Distinctive
  • Very specific
  1. Distinctive:

    Use before shipping UI, when building custom controls, reviewing forms or navigation, working from design screenshots, or changing focus, …

    line 10
  2. Distinctive:

    Test zoom and narrow layouts.

    line 36
  3. Distinctive:

    Use automated checks for detectable problems, then manually inspect keyboard flow and semantics.

    line 44
  4. Distinctive:

    All functionality is keyboard-operable and focus is visible.

    line 53
  5. Distinctive:

    Test coverage, tools, and limitations are reported honestly.

    line 59

“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 43 edited versions of this file we could read. “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

Accessibility audit

When to use

Use before shipping UI, when building custom controls, reviewing forms or navigation, working from design screenshots, or changing focus, motion, contrast, or responsive access.

Workflow

1. Inspect the implementation

Review the actual DOM and source when available. Determine whether controls use native semantic elements, landmarks and headings communicate structure, and labels, descriptions, and validation are programmatically connected. A screenshot alone cannot establish semantic or screen-reader behavior.

2. Check keyboard operation

Navigate without a pointer. Confirm logical tab order, visible focus, working activation, escape behavior for dismissible overlays, and focus return after a dialog closes. Ensure users cannot become trapped unintentionally and sticky UI does not cover focused elements.

3. Check names, roles, and state

Interactive controls need accessible names and correct semantics. Prefer native buttons, links, inputs, selects, and checkboxes where possible. Custom widgets must implement expected keyboard patterns and expose state. Do not add ARIA roles that conflict with native semantics.

4. Check text and contrast

Review text resizing, wrapping, readable line lengths, color contrast, focus indicators, non-text boundaries, and status messages. Do not communicate meaning through color alone. Verify important combinations against applicable WCAG success criteria rather than judging by eye.

5. Check forms and feedback

Provide persistent labels, clear instructions, associated error messages, correction guidance, and appropriate announcements for asynchronous results. Errors should identify the affected field and explain how to resolve the issue. Do not erase user input unnecessarily after failure.

6. Check responsive and input modes

Test zoom and narrow layouts. Look for clipped content, unnecessary horizontal scrolling, overlapping controls, tiny or crowded targets, hover-only information, and gestures without alternatives. Ensure touch and pointer interaction do not block keyboard access.

7. Check motion and media

Respect reduced-motion preferences. Provide captions or text alternatives for meaningful media, and appropriate alternative text for informative images. Decorative images should not add redundant announcements. Avoid disruptive autoplay.

8. Verify with layered methods

Use automated checks for detectable problems, then manually inspect keyboard flow and semantics. Test with real assistive technology when the risk and environment justify it. Automated tools cannot prove conformance. Report tools, scope, conditions, and untested areas.

9. Prioritize fixes

Fix barriers that block core tasks first. Give each issue a location, evidence, impact, remediation, and verification method. Distinguish observed failures from risk hypotheses. Do not make blanket conformance claims without appropriate evaluation.

Quality gates

  • Semantic structure and accessible names are understandable.
  • All functionality is keyboard-operable and focus is visible.
  • Custom controls expose correct role, name, value, and state.
  • Text, controls, boundaries, and focus meet applicable contrast expectations.
  • Zoom, text wrapping, errors, and status feedback remain usable.
  • Color is not the sole source of meaning.
  • Reduced-motion settings and text alternatives are handled.
  • Test coverage, tools, and limitations are reported honestly.

Download now (ZIP)

  • Other versions51 projects use a version of this.

    Word for word · 0

    None found.

    Edited · 0

    None found.

    Wrote their own version · 51

    1. me2resh/apexyard★ 542same name
    2. github/replica★ 117same name
    3. cuellarfr/design-skills★ 94same name
    4. adityareddy-dev/deskstudio★ 42same name
    5. launchapp-dev/animus-cli★ 39same name
    6. kumaran-is/claude-code-onboarding★ 35same name
    7. 5throck/ai-workspace-standards★ 23same name
    8. Indium-AI-Labs/indium-agentkit★ 18same name
    9. Ionate-Technologies/indium-agentkit★ 17same name
    10. brayandiazc/project-starter-template-es-ai★ 15same name

    41 more not listed

    How matches are found. Word for word: the exact same text. Edited: shares passages with this file (“99% same” means 99% of its five-word phrases also appear here; 10% or more counts). Their own version: similar meaning, or, weakest, the same name. We can’t tell which project had it first. Projects are counted among the 200 most-starred candidates, and mentions are links to the repository we found, up to 50 per site, so both counts are a floor.

  • Used alongsideProjects with it also use design-system-audit, flaky-test-triage and 9 more.

    Other files people use alongside this one.

    Files found in the same public projects as a version of this one, more often than they turn up anywhere else. Each project counts once, large collections count for less, and this file's own repository is left out.
    • jpoindexterSkill

      design-system-audit

      Audit code for design system violations - grid spacing, tokens, existing components

      Also in 4 projects that use this

    • SUDARSHANCHAUDHARISkill

      flaky-test-triage

      Diagnoses inconsistent test results by separating product nondeterminism, automation defects, shared data, timing, infrastructure, environment, order, and concurrency effects.

      Also in 3 projects that use this

    • BufferoverflovvSkill

      observability-setup

      Add production observability to a FastMCP server: request IDs, slow-request logging, structured log fields, and optional Prometheus metrics. Use when: hardening logging for production, adding request tracing or correlation IDs, setting up slow-request alerts, adding a /metrics endpoint, or improving structured log output beyond the base middleware.

      Also in 3 projects that use this

    • mmondoraSkill

      infrastructure-as-code

      Infrastructure as Code with Terraform and Pulumi. State management, modularity, drift detection, secrets handling. Use when provisioning cloud resources, writing Terraform/Pulumi modules, or managing infrastructure configuration.

      Also in 3 projects that use this

    • Sagargupta16Skill

      upgrade-dependencies

      Upgrade a project's dependencies one at a time, running the test suite after each bump and reverting the ones that break it. Use it during routine dependency maintenance, when a batch of updates has accumulated; before a major release, to go into it on current and patched dependencies; when Renovate or Dependabot PRs have piled up and you want them resolved locally in one sitting; when a security advisory means you need the patched version in, and you need to know what it breaks.

      Also in 3 projects that use this

    • OpenAISkill

      design-qa

      Internal prototype QA helper. Use only after a Product Design prototype, URL-to-code build, or image-to-code build has a source visual target and a rendered implementation to compare before handoff. Do not use for broad UX critique, design critique, product audits, or flow reviews; route those user-facing requests to audit.

      Also in 3 projects that use this

  • In this repository13 other files it gives its agents.

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.

Check your setup, free