CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

aria-text

Use when reviewing rendered HTML, interactive components, or design-system patterns related to Avoid focusable descendants in role='text' elements. 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-text/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

61%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 concise and well-structured with a clear pointer to a real reference file, but it lacks inline executable code examples and explicit verification feedback loops in the body itself. Strengthening actionability and workflow checkpoints would raise the score.

Suggestions

Add one or two short inline HTML snippets (a correct vs. incorrect role="text" container) so the body is copy-paste-ready without forcing a jump to references.

Make the verification step an explicit feedback loop in the body (e.g., 'After fixing, re-inspect the accessibility tree / re-run axe and confirm the interactive element is now focusable and announced').

Trim the restated rule in the opening line and the trailing rule-page link to reduce redundancy, since the title and frontmatter already convey the rule name.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is lean with short Quick Reference bullets and concise Check/Fix/Explain/Code Review sections that avoid over-explaining concepts Claude already knows; minor redundancy from restating the rule could be trimmed.

4 / 5

Actionability

Provides concrete guidance ('Identify elements with role="text" and verify they do not contain any focusable elements like buttons, links, or inputs'; 'Remove role="text" from containers... or move the interactive elements outside') but defers executable code examples entirely to references, leaving the body short of copy-paste-ready material.

3 / 5

Workflow Clarity

The Check → Fix → Explain → Code Review sections form a rough sequence, but verification checkpoints are only implicit in the body ('verify the fix with browser accessibility tooling') rather than explicit feedback loops.

3 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

The body is well-organized with clear sections and a clearly signaled, one-level-deep pointer to a real references/rule.md file, though the single reference could be more granularly split.

4 / 5

Total

14

/

20

Passed

Description

75%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 clearly names a specific accessibility niche and provides an explicit 'Use when...' trigger plus a list of concrete inspection actions. It is strong on completeness and distinctiveness but could incorporate more natural trigger synonyms and name remediation actions.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

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

4 / 5

Completeness

Explicitly provides both 'what' (inspect semantics, keyboard behavior, focus flow, accessible names, screen-reader output) and 'when' via an explicit 'Use when...' trigger clause, though the trigger could be more specific.

4 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Good keyword coverage with natural terms ('rendered HTML, interactive components, design-system patterns', 'role="text"', 'keyboard behavior', 'screen-reader output'), though common synonyms like 'ARIA' or 'WCAG' are absent.

4 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Targets a distinct niche ('Avoid focusable descendants in role="text" elements') with clear specific triggers, with only minor overlap risk against general accessibility review skills.

4 / 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.