agentleFS
dev-ikdev-ik/ai-design-rules/skills/accessibility-check/SKILL.md

accessibility-check

Skill3 starsChanged 37 days agoMITView on GitHub

Use when implemented interactive UI needs practical checks of keyboard navigation, visible focus, accessible names, form labels and errors, dialog focus, touch targets, color-only status, or reduced motion. Skip legal certification and backend-only work.

3 other projects use a version of this.

Adopted by

Most recently taken up by

The file

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

1 rule. 0 are common, 1 is distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.

  • 0

    Common

    Most of the 3 edited versions we read keep these.

  • 1

    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:

    When interaction motion exists, exercise the available reduced-motion preference and confirm equivalent function and feedback.

    line 19

“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 3 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 Check

Exercise the user's flow and inspect semantics as well as pixels. This execution skill complements accessibility-reviewer; it is not a conformance certificate.

Retrieve matching graph context and read applicable research, particularly A11Y-001 through A11Y-004. Record the actual browser, viewport, data, states, and tools. If only source or a screenshot is available, identify that limited scope and mark behavioral checks unverified.

Check the implemented flow

  • Inspect semantic elements and accessible names. Buttons perform actions; links navigate. Inputs have associated labels. Icon-only controls have meaningful names or decorative icons are hidden. Prefer native elements; inspect existing custom controls without adding unnecessary ARIA.
  • Use keyboard input to follow the primary journey. Check Tab and Shift+Tab order, visible focus, Enter/Space where relevant, and access to actions that also work with a pointer. For dialogs and sheets, observe initial focus, containment when modal, Escape behavior where supported, and focus restoration after closing. A role locator alone does not establish keyboard behavior.
  • Trigger input errors and recovery. Observe specific textual messages, association with the affected input, retained values, and retry. Check applicable loading, success, and disabled states for understandable feedback and remaining navigation.
  • Measure clickable target bounds, not just visible icons, when applying the graph's A11Y-001. Inspect responsive collision risks with responsive-check.
  • Inspect focus and status in screenshots. For contrast, use actual foreground/background values and a suitable measurement tool; a visual impression cannot prove a numeric contrast ratio. State the applicable criterion and report unknown composite/translucent colors as unresolved. Status must remain understandable without color alone.
  • When interaction motion exists, exercise the available reduced-motion preference and confirm equivalent function and feedback. Record any assistive-technology testing actually performed; browser DOM/role inspection does not prove screen-reader behavior.

For authorized fixes, preserve business logic, use the existing component system, and repeat the failed keyboard/error/state interaction. Capture focused evidence before and after where visible behavior is involved.

Output

Return scoped verdict | tools and conditions | confirmed findings | coverage gaps. A finding includes severity, affected control/state, keyboard or pointer reproduction, measured/observed evidence, user impact, applicable graph rule or external criterion, fix, verified component/file, and retest status. Distinguish checked, unverified, and not applicable for labels/semantics, keyboard/focus, dialogs, errors/recovery, targets, contrast, reduced motion, and assistive technology. Missing evidence is not a pass or a confirmed implementation defect.

Sources: CHECK-00001, RULE-00009 through RULE-00013, research/accessibility/textual-error-recovery.md, and research/accessibility/keyboard-focus-and-interaction-motion.md. Playwright role and label locators provide useful semantic feedback but do not replace accessibility audits.

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.