tabindex

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

Quality

71%

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/tabindex/SKILL.md

Quality

Content

71%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, lean review skill that delegates detail appropriately to references/rule.md with clear navigation. Its main weakness is actionability: the body states what to check but leaves the concrete verification steps (how to inspect the rendered accessibility tree) in the reference file.

Suggestions

Add one concrete verification step in the body (e.g., 'Inspect the browser accessibility tree or run axe/Lighthouse to confirm no positive tabindex values remain') so the core action is executable without opening the reference.

Collapse the repeated positive-tabindex guidance across Quick Reference, Check, and Fix into a single statement to remove minor redundancy.

Include a short inline code snippet showing the good vs. bad tabindex markup so reviewers can act without consulting references/rule.md.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body is lean with no over-explanation of what tabindex is, though the positive-tabindex point is restated across Quick Reference, Check, and Fix, which is minor repetition that could be trimmed.	4 / 5
Actionability	Gives concrete directives ('Check for any positive tabindex values', 'use tabindex=0 or -1') and specific values in Quick Reference, but the actual verification methodology is deferred to references and 'ensure custom interactive elements are focusable' lacks the how, matching the incomplete-guidance anchor.	3 / 5
Workflow Clarity	The Check -> Fix -> Explain -> Code Review sequence is clear and unambiguous for a simple single-purpose review skill, though explicit validation checkpoints are absent (acceptable for a non-destructive review task).	4 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	The body is a concise overview with well-organized sections and a clearly signaled one-level-deep pointer to references/rule.md for 'full implementation details, code examples, and framework-specific guidance', matching the clean overview anchor.	5 / 5
	Total	16 / 20 Passed

Description

71%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 answers both 'what' and 'when' with concrete actions and an explicit trigger clause, but suffers from a templating artifact where the rule title is injected mid-sentence ('related to Use appropriate tabindex values'), producing an ungrammatical phrase and broad overlap-prone trigger wording.

Suggestions

Remove the injected title fragment so the 'Use when...' clause reads grammatically (e.g., 'Use when reviewing rendered HTML or interactive components for tabindex correctness.').

Tighten the trigger wording to tabindex-specific phrases ('tabindex', 'keyboard navigation', 'focus order') to reduce overlap with sibling accessibility skills.

Lead with the core capability verb rather than the generic 'reviewing rendered HTML' opening to sharpen distinctiveness.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	Lists several concrete actions ('Check native semantics first, then inspect keyboard behavior, focus flow, accessible names, and screen-reader output'), comparable to the anchor listing several specific actions with minor coverage gaps.	4 / 5
Completeness	Has an explicit 'Use when...' trigger clause and concrete checking actions, but the injected title fragment 'related to Use appropriate tabindex values' makes the when-clause read awkwardly, keeping it just below the clean anchor-5 example.	4 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	Includes natural review-oriented terms ('rendered HTML', 'interactive components', 'design-system patterns', 'tabindex values', 'keyboard behavior', 'screen-reader output') a user would say, with only minor synonyms like 'keyboard navigation' or 'focus order' missing.	4 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	The tabindex focus is specific, but the opening trigger phrasing ('reviewing rendered HTML, interactive components, or design-system patterns') is shared boilerplate that would overlap with sibling accessibility skills in the same family.	3 / 5
	Total	15 / 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/tabindex/SKILL.md
Commit: 30756a7

Reviewed: 17 days 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.