reduced-motion

Use when reviewing rendered HTML, interactive components, or design-system patterns related to Respect reduced motion preferences. Check native semantics first, then inspect keyboard behavior, focus flow, accessible names, and screen-reader output where relevant.

Quality

63%

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

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./skills/reduced-motion/SKILL.md

Quality

Content

63%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 well-structured as an overview with an exemplary one-level-deep reference to real implementation content. Its weaknesses are moderate redundancy across the Check/Fix/Quick Reference sections and the absence of any concrete code or fix-verification detail in the body itself.

Suggestions

State the 3-flashes-per-second rule once (Quick Reference or Check) instead of three times, and drop the intro sentence duplicated from references/rule.md's 'Why It Matters'.

Add a minimal executable snippet to the Fix section, e.g., '@media (prefers-reduced-motion: reduce) { *, *::before, *::after { animation-duration: 0.01ms !important; transition-duration: 0.01ms !important; } }'.

Add a verification step after Fix, e.g., 'Verify the fix by emulating prefers-reduced-motion: reduce in browser devtools and confirming animations are disabled.'

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body is lean (~30 lines), but the 3-flashes-per-second rule is stated three times (Quick Reference, Check, and Fix), and the opening sentence about vestibular disorders duplicates the 'Why It Matters' section in references/rule.md. Mostly efficient but could be tightened, matching anchor 3 rather than 4.	3 / 5
Actionability	Concrete elements are present — the exact media query '@media (prefers-reduced-motion: reduce)' and the 3-flashes/second threshold — but the body includes no code snippet and omits key implementation details (how to disable animations, what a motion warning looks like), deferring everything to the reference file. Concrete guidance but incomplete matches anchor 3; not 4 because the body itself contains no executable code or command.	3 / 5
Workflow Clarity	The Check → Fix → Explain → Code Review structure gives a coherent review workflow with explicit criteria (prefers-reduced-motion, flash rate, parallax alternatives, warnings), and this simple review skill triggers no destructive/batch validation cap. Not 5 because the 'Code Review' section is vague boilerplate and no step verifies a fix (e.g., emulating reduced motion in devtools).	4 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	The body is a clean overview with a clearly signaled, one-level-deep reference — 'For full implementation details, code examples, and framework-specific guidance, see references/rule.md' — and the referenced file exists (138 lines) and delivers exactly that content, including the CSS example. This matches the anchor-5 structure.	5 / 5
	Total	15 / 20 Passed

Description

62%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 has an explicit trigger clause and concrete-sounding actions, but the actions are generic accessibility-review boilerplate that does not reflect the skill's actual subject (animations, prefers-reduced-motion, flashing limits). Trigger terms miss the most natural user phrasings around animation and motion.

Suggestions

Replace the generic review actions with motion-specific ones, e.g., 'Check that animations respect prefers-reduced-motion, no content flashes more than 3 times per second, and parallax/scrolljacking effects have reduced-motion alternatives.'

Add natural trigger terms users would say: 'animations', 'prefers-reduced-motion', 'motion', 'parallax', 'vestibular'.

Remove the mismatched keyboard/focus/screen-reader auditing language (or move it to a general accessibility-review skill) so the description matches the skill's actual behavior.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	The description lists several concrete actions ('Check native semantics first, then inspect keyboard behavior, focus flow, accessible names, and screen-reader output'), but these are generic accessibility-review actions that never mention animations or motion — the skill's actual domain. The mismatch is more than a minor coverage gap, so it sits at the 'names domain and concrete actions, but not comprehensive' anchor rather than 4.	3 / 5
Completeness	Both parts are explicitly present: the 'what' ('Check native semantics first, then inspect keyboard behavior, focus flow, accessible names, and screen-reader output') and an explicit 'Use when...' trigger clause. Not 5 because the 'what' describes generic accessibility auditing rather than motion-specific actions, weakening the what/when pairing.	4 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	'reduced motion', 'rendered HTML', 'interactive components', and 'design-system patterns' are relevant, but the natural phrases users would actually say — 'animations', 'prefers-reduced-motion', 'parallax', 'motion sickness' — are absent. Some relevant keywords with missing common variations matches anchor 3.	3 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	The qualifier 'related to Respect reduced motion preferences' carves a clear niche, but the broad opener 'reviewing rendered HTML, interactive components, or design-system patterns' overlaps with general accessibility-review skills. Mostly distinct with minor overlap risk matches anchor 4.	4 / 5
	Total	14 / 20 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/reduced-motion/SKILL.md
Commit: 7bfd868

Reviewed: 1 day 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.