CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

axiom-audit-accessibility

Use when the user mentions accessibility checking, App Store submission, code review, or WCAG compliance.

52

Quality

57%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

SecuritybySnyk

Passed

No findings from the security scan

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./axiom-codex/skills/axiom-audit-accessibility/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

77%

Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.

The content is highly actionable and well-sequenced with strong verification steps, but it is verbose and self-contained rather than split across progressively-disclosed reference files.

Suggestions

Move the Phase 4 compound-severity table and Phase 3 reasoning table into a separate reference file (e.g. references/compound-findings.md) referenced one level deep to cut main-body tokens.

Trim repeated 'Pattern/Search/Issue/Fix/Note' prose by using a compact shared format or table for the eight detection categories.

If cross-skill references like skills/xcui-ref.md are intended to resolve within this skill, add them as actual bundle files; otherwise mark them clearly as external skill pointers.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is dense and long (~250 lines) with two large tables and repeated Pattern/Issue/Fix blocks; it avoids explaining basic concepts but includes prose and structural repetition that could be tightened.

2 / 3

Actionability

Concrete grep patterns, executable fix snippets (e.g. '.accessibilityLabel', 'UIFontMetrics(...).scaledFont(for:)', '.frame(minWidth: 44, minHeight: 44)'), explicit file excludes, and a copy-ready output template make the guidance fully actionable.

3 / 3

Workflow Clarity

A clear five-phase sequence with mandatory tool use, contextual verification ('use Read to verify the surrounding context before reporting'), output limits, and a false-positive list provides explicit checkpoints and error-recovery guidance.

3 / 3

Progressive Disclosure

No bundle files exist (references/scripts/assets are absent) and the content is monolithic and inline; the only file references point to other skills rather than one-level-deep detail files within this skill.

2 / 3

Total

10

/

12

Passed

Description

37%

Based on the skill's description, can an agent find and select it at the right time? Clear, specific descriptions lead to better discovery.

The description has strong trigger terms but fails to state what the skill actually does, leaving the 'what' half of completeness empty and capping specificity. The 'code review' trigger also risks overlap with unrelated review skills.

Suggestions

Lead with what the skill does, e.g. 'Detects accessibility violations and missing assistive-technology support in Swift/iOS code, with WCAG and App Store-rejection findings.'

Remove or narrow 'code review' to a more specific trigger like 'accessibility code review' to avoid overlap with general code-review skills.

Keep the existing 'Use when...' clause but pair it with a one-line capabilities summary so both what and when are explicit.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

The description only states trigger conditions ('accessibility checking, App Store submission, code review, or WCAG compliance') and never names concrete actions the skill performs, matching the vague/no-actions anchor more than the 'names domain and some actions' anchor.

1 / 3

Completeness

It answers only 'when' (the Use when clause); the 'what does this do' half is entirely missing, which caps completeness at the lowest anchor.

1 / 3

Trigger Term Quality

Natural user-facing keywords ('accessibility checking', 'App Store submission', 'code review', 'WCAG compliance') give good coverage of terms a user would actually say.

3 / 3

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The accessibility/WCAG niche is fairly distinct, but 'code review' is broad and would overlap with many general code-review skills, so it could still trigger for the wrong skill.

2 / 3

Total

7

/

12

Passed

Validation

100%

Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.

Validation16 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Repository
CharlesWiltgen/Axiom
Reviewed

Table of Contents

Is this your skill?

If you maintain this skill, you can claim it as your own. Once claimed, you can manage eval scenarios, bundle related skills, attach documentation or rules, and ensure cross-agent compatibility.