form-labels

Use when reviewing rendered HTML, interactive components, or design-system patterns related to Associate labels with form controls. Check native semantics first, then inspect keyboard behavior, focus flow, accessible names, and screen-reader output where relevant.

Quality

85%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

Securityby

Passed

No findings from the security scan

Quality

Content

87%

Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.

The body is lean, actionable, and well-organized with a verified one-level reference to rule.md; its main gap is a missing explicit verification/feedback step to confirm a fix before finishing the review.

Suggestions

Add a short 'Verify' step after Fix (e.g., re-inspect the accessibility tree or run axe/Lighthouse) so the workflow has an explicit validation checkpoint, matching the verification guidance already in references/rule.md.

Consider a one-line inline code snippet for the core for/id association in the Fix section so the most common fix is executable without opening the reference.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body is lean, well-sectioned, and assumes Claude's competence; it states the rule, a quick checklist, and concrete check/fix steps without explaining basic HTML or accessibility concepts Claude already knows.	3 / 3
Actionability	It gives copy-paste-ready, executable guidance: specific elements to check ('for' and 'id' attributes, placeholder-only labels, fieldset/legend), concrete fixes (add <label for> matching the input id, wrap radios in <fieldset> with <legend>), and points to references/rule.md for runnable code examples.	3 / 3
Workflow Clarity	The review steps (Check -> Fix -> Explain -> Code Review) are sequenced, but there is no explicit validation/verification checkpoint confirming the fix (e.g., re-run an accessibility checker or re-inspect the rendered tree) before declaring done, which the rubric expects for destructive/batch-style review work.	2 / 3
Progressive Disclosure	The SKILL.md is a concise overview with clearly signaled, one-level-deep navigation to references/rule.md (verified to exist), and the detailed code examples and standards are appropriately split out rather than inlined.	3 / 3
	Total	11 / 12 Passed

Description

82%

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 has an explicit 'Use when...' trigger and lists concrete review actions, but the actions are generic accessibility-review steps and the title phrase 'Associate labels with form controls' is awkwardly embedded, weakening specificity and distinctiveness.

Suggestions

Rewrite to center the form-labels niche in the 'what' clause (e.g., 'Verify every form control has a programmatically associated <label> via for/id, <fieldset>/<legend> for grouped controls...') instead of repeating the title phrase.

Narrow the trigger so it is less likely to fire for unrelated accessibility reviews (e.g., 'Use when auditing forms, labels, fieldsets, or accessible names for inputs').

Keep the concrete inspection verbs but drop redundant phrasing to tighten token efficiency.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	The description names concrete reviewing actions ('Check native semantics first, then inspect keyboard behavior, focus flow, accessible names, and screen-reader output'), but these are generic accessibility-review actions rather than skills specific to the form-labels niche, and there is some repetition of the title phrase.	2 / 3
Completeness	It explicitly answers 'when' via the 'Use when...' clause and 'what' via the list of inspection actions, satisfying both halves with an explicit trigger.	3 / 3
Trigger Term Quality	It opens with a natural 'Use when reviewing rendered HTML, interactive components, or design-system patterns' and names concrete review artifacts a user would reference (keyboard behavior, focus flow, accessible names, screen-reader output), giving good coverage of natural terms.	3 / 3
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	The 'when' clause ('rendered HTML, interactive components, or design-system patterns') is broad and could overlap with other accessibility skills; only the inserted rule title 'Associate labels with form controls' narrows the niche, but it reads as a pasted title rather than a distinct trigger.	2 / 3
	Total	10 / 12 Passed

Validation

93%

Warnings & errors only

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

Validation — 15 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

Criteria	Description	Result
metadata_version	'metadata.version' is missing	Warning

	Total	15 / 16 Passed

Repository: thedaviddias/Front-End-Checklist
Path: skills/form-labels/SKILL.md
Commit: 48405aa

Reviewed: about 11 hours ago

Table of Contents

Discovery Implementation Validation

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.