a11y-review
Skill3 starsChanged 31 days agoMITView on GitHub
Audit accessibility with automated and manual evidence. Triggers on "accessibility", "无障碍".
2 other projects use a version of this.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- aiuxmasters/agentic-design-toolstheir own version, first seen Jul 16, 2026
- badass-courses/a11y-agenttheir own version, first seen Mar 18, 2026
Other versions2 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 2
- aiuxmasters/agentic-design-tools★ 0same name
- badass-courses/a11y-agent★ 0same name
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.
In this repository49 other files it gives its agents.
- AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- CLAUDE.mdCLAUDE.md
- brainstormSkill
- oss-strategySkill
- specSkill
- researchSkill
- api-designSkill
- architectureSkill
- codebase-designSkill
- design-researchSkill
- domain-modelingSkill
- frontend-designSkill
- imagegenSkill
- image-to-codeSkill
- prompt-engineeringSkill
- prototypeSkill
- schema-designSkill
- auth-implementationSkill
- breakdownSkill
- context-engineeringSkill
- error-handlingSkill
- i18nSkill
- implementSkill
- multi-agent-orchestrationSkill
- cost-optimizationSkill
- performanceSkill
- refactoringSkill
- simplifySkill
- api-testingSkill
- e2e-testingSkill
- load-testingSkill
- tddSkill
- test-generationSkill
- code-reviewSkill
- debuggingSkill
- lintingSkill
- security-reviewSkill
- ci-cdSkill
- deprecation-migrationSkill
- git-workflowSkill
- oss-polishSkill
- shippingSkill
- documentation-auditSkill
- handoffSkill
- incident-responseSkill
- observabilitySkill
- purity-auditSkill
- skill-authoringSkill
- using-skillsSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
2 rules. About 0 are common, 2 are distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.
≈0
Common · estimate
Many files like this have a rule of this kind.
≈2
Distinctive · estimate
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
- Distinctive: line 18
Run applicable tools and manual keyboard, focus, semantic, contrast and error checks.
- Distinctive: line 22
Document reproduction, impact and remedies at the approved path, retest fixes and leave acceptance to the human.
≈ “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.
Files
Accessibility Review
When to use
- Audit accessibility with automated and manual evidence.
Not for: frontend-design for redesign; e2e-testing for general journeys.
Steps
- Agree target and flows; consult current authoritative criteria rather than a frozen subset.
- Run applicable tools and manual keyboard, focus, semantic, contrast and error checks.
- Exercise assistive technology when available and disclose unavailable coverage; automation does not establish full conformance.
- Document reproduction, impact and remedies at the approved path, retest fixes and leave acceptance to the human.
Output: Suggested paths, subject to human audit: docs/a11y-report.md when durable findings are requested.
Verify
- Findings identify real controls and criteria; automated, manual and unavailable checks are distinguished.
References
- engineering-principles.md — shared decision boundaries, scope and verification.
- human-audit.md — document consent, readability and human review.
- references/wcag-checklist.md — WCAG 2.2 AA criterion-by-criterion checklist mapped to axe-core rules, with the manual checks automated tools miss
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
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.