Content
70%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
The content is well-structured with a clear check→fix→verify workflow and clean one-level-deep progressive disclosure, but it loses points to Quick Reference/Explain redundancy and to deferring the executable HTML example entirely into the reference file.
Suggestions
Merge the overlapping accname-computation content between Quick Reference and Explain into a single authoritative block to remove redundancy.
Inline a minimal treeitem markup example (one correct + one incorrect) in the body so the core pattern is visible without opening the reference.
Make the Code Review verification step explicitly cite the reference's Verification subsection (axe/Lighthouse + screen-reader re-test) so the feedback loop is discoverable from the body.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is well-sectioned and free of basic-concept padding, but the Quick Reference and Explain sections overlap (both cover the accname computation order and screen-reader behavior), so it could be tightened by deduplicating. | 2 / 3 |
Actionability | Check and Fix give concrete, specific numbered guidance (accname order: aria-labelledby → aria-label → text; four fix options with examples), but the executable HTML example is deferred to references/rule.md rather than appearing inline in the body, leaving a key detail one click away. | 2 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | A clear Check → Fix → Explain → Code Review sequence is present with a verification phase (Code Review plus browser accessibility tooling), and the single-rule audit task is unambiguous with validation checkpoints in the referenced Verification section. | 3 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | The body is a concise overview with a clearly signaled one-level-deep reference ("see references/rule.md") that exists as a real file, and sections are well organized for discovery. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 10 / 12 Passed |