accessibility-testing

Use when reviewing component libraries, page flows, or CI pipelines that need repeatable accessibility checks. Automated testing is strongest at catching structural and attribute-level issues; it does not replace keyboard, screen reader, and manual UX testing.

Quality

70%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

Securityby

Passed

No findings from the security scan

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./skills/accessibility-testing/SKILL.md

Quality

Content

71%Weight 40%Scale 1-5

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

The body is a lean overview that correctly pushes implementation detail into an existing one-level reference. Its weakness is actionability: tool names appear but no executable code or commands are inlined, and the Check/Fix/Explain sections are generic directives rather than specific steps.

Suggestions

Inline one minimal copy-paste jest-axe snippet (or a one-line axe CLI command) so the overview is immediately executable without opening the reference.

Replace the vague Check/Fix/Explain one-liners with specific guidance, e.g., 'Check: grep CI workflows for axe/jest-axe steps; Fix: add @axe-core/playwright to the E2E suite and enable color-contrast'.

Order the Quick Reference bullets as an explicit sequence (component tests -> E2E tests -> CI gate -> individual rules) so the workflow reads as steps rather than an unordered list.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body is lean (~30 lines) with no explanation of concepts Claude already knows; the opening 'catches 30-50% of WCAG violations' stat and the boundary note partially duplicate the frontmatter description and reference file, leaving minor instances that could be trimmed — anchor 4 rather than 5.	4 / 5
Actionability	The Quick Reference names concrete tools (jest-axe, @axe-core/playwright, cypress-axe) and a specific rule (color-contrast), but the body contains no executable code or commands, and the Check/Fix/Explain directives are generic one-liners ('Review this test suite for accessibility testing coverage using axe-core, jest-axe, or similar tools') — concrete guidance that is incomplete, matching anchor 3.	3 / 5
Workflow Clarity	The Quick Reference bullets imply a sensible order (component tests, E2E tests, CI, individual rules) and the four mode sections give situation-specific direction, but the sequence is implicit with no explicit ordering or verification of coverage — anchor 4 for a simple skill with minor gaps rather than the fully unambiguous anchor 5.	4 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	A short, well-sectioned overview with a single, clearly signaled, one-level-deep reference ('see references/rule.md') that exists in the bundle and holds the code examples and framework detail — matching the anchor 5 'clear overview with well-signaled one-level-deep references'.	5 / 5
	Total	16 / 20 Passed

Description

70%Weight 40%Scale 1-5

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

A well-formed description with an explicit 'Use when' trigger clause, good natural keywords, and a useful capability boundary. Its main weakness is that the 'what' is implied rather than stated as concrete actions, and it lacks common synonyms like 'a11y', 'WCAG', and 'axe'.

Suggestions

Open with an explicit action statement (e.g., 'Add automated accessibility tests using axe-core, jest-axe, cypress-axe, and @axe-core/playwright...') before the 'Use when' clause.

Include common trigger synonyms users actually say — 'a11y', 'WCAG', 'axe-core' — alongside the existing keywords.

Tie the boundary sentence to the what-statement (e.g., '...for structural and attribute-level WCAG checks; defer keyboard/screen-reader validation to manual testing') so both what and when are fully explicit.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	The description names the domain ('repeatable accessibility checks') and a concrete reviewing action over 'component libraries, page flows, or CI pipelines', plus a capability boundary ('strongest at catching structural and attribute-level issues'), but never states the concrete actions (e.g., add jest-axe tests, run axe in CI) that would make it comprehensive — matching anchor 3 rather than 4.	3 / 5
Completeness	The 'when' is explicit and concrete ('Use when reviewing component libraries, page flows, or CI pipelines...'), and a 'what' is implied (automated accessibility testing with known strengths/limits), but the what-side is never stated as an explicit action, so it falls between anchor 4 and the fully explicit anchor 5.	4 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	Good natural keyword coverage: 'accessibility checks', 'component libraries', 'page flows', 'CI pipelines', 'keyboard', 'screen reader' — a few common synonyms are missing ('a11y', 'WCAG', 'axe'), which fits anchor 4 ('good keyword coverage; a few natural terms missing').	4 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	The niche (automated accessibility testing in review/CI contexts) is mostly distinct, and the boundary clause ('it does not replace keyboard, screen reader, and manual UX testing') reduces overlap with manual-testing skills; minor overlap remains with general frontend code-review skills, matching anchor 4.	4 / 5
	Total	15 / 20 Passed

Validation

93%

Warnings & errors only

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

Validation — 15 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

Criteria	Description	Result
metadata_version	'metadata.version' is missing	Warning

	Total	15 / 16 Passed

Repository: thedaviddias/Front-End-Checklist
Path: skills/accessibility-testing/SKILL.md
Commit: 7bfd868

Reviewed: 1 day ago

Table of Contents

Discovery Implementation Validation

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.