CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

aria-valid-attr-value

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

64

Quality

76%

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-valid-attr-value/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

78%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, token-efficient overview that pairs a concrete Quick Reference with a clean one-level-deep pointer to references/rule.md for code and verification. The main gap is that the Check/Fix sections stay high-level while the actionable detail lives entirely in the reference file.

Suggestions

Inline one tiny before/after markup snippet (e.g., aria-expanded="yes" -> "true") in the Quick Reference so the body is actionable without opening the reference.

Add a one-line 'Verify' pointer in the body (e.g., 'Confirm via the accessibility tree or axe/Lighthouse') to surface the validation checkpoint that currently lives only in rule.md.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is lean and assumes competence (no padding about what ARIA is), though the templated 'Check'/'Fix' lines ('Validate that all ARIA attribute values conform to the allowed types') could be tightened further.

4 / 5

Actionability

The Quick Reference gives concrete, copy-ready examples ('aria-expanded="true"', 'yes/no' vs 'true/false', ID references in 'aria-labelledby'/'aria-owns'), while the Check/Fix sections stay somewhat abstract; executable code is offloaded to references/rule.md.

4 / 5

Workflow Clarity

The Check -> Fix -> Explain -> Code Review headings form a coherent review sequence, and verification guidance lives in references/rule.md; the body itself lacks an explicit validation checkpoint, but this is a non-destructive review skill so the cap does not apply.

4 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

A concise overview with a single, clearly signaled one-level-deep reference ('see references/rule.md') that exists in the bundle; content is appropriately split and easy to navigate.

5 / 5

Total

17

/

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.

A trigger-forward description that clearly states when to use the skill and enumerates concrete review actions, with only minor overlap risk against adjacent accessibility skills. It would benefit from leading with a sharper one-line capability statement before the 'Use when' clause.

Suggestions

Open with a concise capability statement (e.g., 'Reviews rendered HTML for valid ARIA attribute values.') before the 'Use when' trigger clause so the 'what' is unambiguous.

Add natural accessibility-audit phrasings ('accessibility review', 'a11y', 'screen reader testing') to broaden trigger coverage.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Lists several concrete review actions ('Check native semantics first, then inspect keyboard behavior, focus flow, accessible names, and screen-reader output'), though these describe review methodology rather than the rule's own scope.

4 / 5

Completeness

Explicitly answers 'when' via 'Use when reviewing...' and implies 'what' through the enumerated checks; both are present but the 'what' is somewhat embedded in the trigger clause rather than stated as a standalone capability.

4 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Includes natural review triggers ('rendered HTML', 'interactive components', 'design-system patterns', 'screen-reader output') plus 'ARIA attributes', but omits common phrasings like 'accessibility audit' or 'a11y'.

4 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The trigger 'reviewing rendered HTML, interactive components, or design-system patterns' is broad and could overlap with sibling accessibility skills, but the explicit tie to 'Use valid values for ARIA attributes' narrows the niche.

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.