CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

accordion-accessibility

Use when reviewing templates, rendered HTML, or shared components related to Make accordions keyboard navigable. Validate the final browser-facing markup, not just the source framework abstraction.

61

Quality

72%

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 ./skills/accordion-accessibility/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

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 well-structured, concise overview that progressively discloses detail to references/rule.md, with clear attribute-level guidance; its main gap is the absence of any inline executable code or markup example.

Suggestions

Include one small inline before/after markup snippet (e.g., a correct button+aria-controls trigger) so the body is self-contained for the common case without requiring the reference file.

Add a short verify step after 'Fix' (e.g., re-check the rendered HTML for aria-expanded toggling and keyboard focus) to make the review loop explicit.

De-duplicate the aria-expanded/aria-controls details shared between Quick Reference, Check, and Fix to tighten the body further.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is lean with short, focused sections and no padding or over-explanation of basic ARIA concepts, though 'Check' and 'Fix' partially restate the Quick Reference bullets.

4 / 5

Actionability

Concrete attribute names (aria-expanded, aria-controls) and keys (Enter, Space, arrows) are named, but the body provides no inline executable code or markup examples, deferring all examples to references/rule.md.

3 / 5

Workflow Clarity

The Check -> Fix -> Explain -> Code Review sections give a coherent review sequence for a single-purpose, non-destructive task, though no explicit verify-after-fix checkpoint is stated.

4 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

A concise overview body (~35 lines) cleanly signals one-level-deep detail via 'see references/rule.md' (verified present, 308 lines), with well-organized sections and easy navigation.

5 / 5

Total

16

/

20

Passed

Description

73%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.

The description is specific and clearly triggered with an explicit 'Use when' clause and a distinct niche, though the 'what' relies partly on the rule title and concrete actions are limited to reviewing and validating.

Suggestions

Add 1-2 more concrete actions beyond 'reviewing' and 'validating' (e.g., 'flag missing aria-expanded, aria-controls, or keyboard handlers') to raise specificity.

Surface natural trigger synonyms explicitly (e.g., 'accordion', 'accessibility', 'a11y', 'keyboard navigation') so users phrase-matching those terms hit this skill.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

The description names a focused domain ('reviewing templates, rendered HTML, or shared components', 'Validate the final browser-facing markup') with 1-2 concrete actions but lacks comprehensive coverage of what the skill does.

3 / 5

Completeness

Both 'what' (review/validate accordion keyboard navigability) and an explicit 'when' ('Use when reviewing templates, rendered HTML, or shared components') are present; the 'what' leans on the rule title and could be slightly more explicit.

4 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Includes natural frontend terms ('reviewing templates', 'rendered HTML', 'shared components') a user would plausibly say, though a few natural synonyms like 'accordion', 'accessibility', or 'a11y' appear only implicitly via the rule framing.

4 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Highly specific niche (accordion keyboard-navigability review of rendered HTML) with distinct triggers and minimal overlap risk against other skills.

5 / 5

Total

16

/

20

Passed

Validation

93%

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

Validation15 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

CriteriaDescriptionResult

metadata_version

'metadata.version' is missing

Warning

Total

15

/

16

Passed

Repository
thedaviddias/Front-End-Checklist
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.