fixing-accessibility
tessl i github:ibelick/ui-skills --skill fixing-accessibilityFix accessibility issues.
Validation
63%| Criteria | Description | Result |
|---|---|---|
description_trigger_hint | Description may be missing an explicit 'when to use' trigger hint (e.g., 'Use when...') | Warning |
metadata_version | 'metadata' field is not a dictionary | Warning |
license_field | 'license' field is missing | Warning |
body_examples | No examples detected (no code fences and no 'Example' wording) | Warning |
body_output_format | No obvious output/return/format terms detected; consider specifying expected outputs | Warning |
body_steps | No step-by-step structure detected (no ordered list); consider adding a simple workflow | Warning |
Total | 10 / 16 Passed | |
Implementation
85%This is a well-structured accessibility skill with excellent organization and concise rule definitions. The priority-based categorization and clear review workflow are strengths. The main weakness is the lack of concrete code examples showing violations and fixes, which would make the guidance more immediately actionable.
Suggestions
Add 2-3 concrete before/after code examples for the most common violations (e.g., icon-only button without aria-label, div used as button)
Include a small code snippet showing proper aria-describedby usage for form error linking
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The content is lean and efficient, using tables and bullet points to convey rules without unnecessary explanation. It assumes Claude understands accessibility concepts and doesn't explain what ARIA is or why accessibility matters. | 3 / 3 |
Actionability | Provides clear rules and categories but lacks concrete code examples. The guidance is specific ('icon-only buttons must have aria-label') but would benefit from before/after code snippets showing violations and fixes. | 2 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | Clear workflow for both usage modes: the review process explicitly states to quote violations, explain why, and propose fixes. Priority table provides clear sequencing for which issues to address first. | 3 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | Well-organized with clear sections progressing from usage to rules to review guidance. Content is appropriately contained in a single file given its scope, with logical grouping by priority categories. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 11 / 12 Passed |
Activation
0%This description is critically underdeveloped with only four words that provide almost no useful information for skill selection. It lacks specific actions, natural trigger terms, explicit usage guidance, and any distinguishing characteristics that would help Claude choose this skill appropriately from a larger skill set.
Suggestions
Add specific concrete actions like 'Add alt text to images, fix color contrast ratios, implement ARIA labels, ensure keyboard navigation, validate against WCAG guidelines'
Include a 'Use when...' clause with natural trigger terms: 'Use when the user mentions accessibility, a11y, WCAG, screen readers, alt text, color contrast, or ADA compliance'
Specify the scope/context to improve distinctiveness: clarify if this is for web pages, documents, mobile apps, or specific file types like HTML/CSS
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | The description uses vague language with no concrete actions specified. 'Fix accessibility issues' doesn't describe what specific actions are taken (e.g., add alt text, fix color contrast, add ARIA labels). | 1 / 3 |
Completeness | Missing both clear 'what' (no specific capabilities listed) and 'when' (no explicit trigger guidance or 'Use when...' clause). The description is too minimal to answer either question adequately. | 1 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | Only contains 'accessibility issues' which is somewhat relevant but misses common variations users would say like 'a11y', 'WCAG', 'screen reader', 'alt text', 'ARIA', or 'ADA compliance'. | 1 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | Very generic description that could conflict with many skills - doesn't specify what type of accessibility (web, mobile, documents), what file types, or what standards are addressed. | 1 / 3 |
Total | 4 / 12 Passed |
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.