CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

aria-allowed-attr

Use when reviewing rendered HTML, interactive components, or design-system patterns related to Use only allowed ARIA attributes for each role. Check native semantics first, then inspect keyboard behavior, focus flow, accessible names, and screen-reader output where relevant.

58

Quality

68%

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/aria-allowed-attr/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

57%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.

A well-structured overview that uses progressive disclosure effectively to push detail into references/rule.md. The body itself is somewhat padded with obvious ARIA basics and lacks concrete, executable review steps or validation checkpoints in the main file.

Suggestions

Trim the Quick Reference bullets and intro that restate well-known ARIA concepts (e.g. "Each ARIA role only supports a specific set of ARIA attributes") to improve token efficiency.

Add one concrete, executable review step to the Check or Code Review section (e.g. inspect the accessibility tree, or run axe/Lighthouse) instead of only high-level direction.

Insert an explicit validation/verification checkpoint in the workflow (e.g. confirm the fix in the rendered accessibility tree and with a screen reader) to raise workflow clarity.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is mostly lean, but the Quick Reference bullets and intro restate ARIA basics Claude already knows ("Each ARIA role only supports a specific set of ARIA attributes", "Using unsupported attributes can confuse assistive technologies"), and the rule title is awkwardly repeated.

3 / 5

Actionability

Guidance is high-level ("Verify that all ARIA attributes... are valid", "Remove or correct ARIA attributes that are not supported") with no concrete commands or examples in the body; specifics are deferred to the reference file, leaving the body itself incomplete.

3 / 5

Workflow Clarity

Check/Fix/Explain/Code Review sections give a rough review sequence, but there are no explicit validation checkpoints or feedback loops, and the steps read more as parallel categories than a clearly sequenced workflow.

3 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

The body is a concise overview with a clearly signaled, one-level-deep pointer ("see references/rule.md") that holds the code examples and verification detail; the referenced file exists and is well organized, making navigation easy.

5 / 5

Total

14

/

20

Passed

Description

78%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 strong description that covers what and when with concrete, natural accessibility-review triggers and a distinct niche. Its main weakness is the awkwardly embedded rule-title phrase ("related to Use only allowed ARIA attributes for each role"), which slightly hurts readability.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Lists several concrete review actions ("Check native semantics first, then inspect keyboard behavior, focus flow, accessible names, and screen-reader output"), with only minor coverage gaps.

4 / 5

Completeness

Explicitly answers both what (review/check/inspect behaviors) and when ("Use when reviewing rendered HTML, interactive components, or design-system patterns"), though the embedded rule title makes the when-clause slightly clunky.

4 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Includes natural accessibility-review terms users would say ("rendered HTML, interactive components, design-system patterns", "ARIA attributes", "keyboard behavior", "screen-reader"), with a few synonyms missing.

4 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Targets a clear, narrow niche (allowed ARIA attributes per role within accessibility review) with distinct triggers and minimal overlap with other skills.

5 / 5

Total

17

/

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.