video-accessibility

Use when reviewing templates, rendered HTML, or shared components related to Make videos accessible with captions. Validate the final browser-facing markup, not just the source framework abstraction.

Quality

70%

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/video-accessibility/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.

The content is a well-structured, concise overview that follows good progressive-disclosure practice by deferring full code examples to references/rule.md. Its weaknesses are the absence of any executable code in the body and some restatement of accessibility concepts Claude already knows.

Suggestions

Include one small inline code snippet (e.g. a minimal `<video>` with `<track kind="captions">` and `aria-describedby`) so the body is actionable without opening the reference.

Drop or trim the opening "why" sentence and the "Explain" rationale, since Claude already knows why captions and audio descriptions matter; keep only user-facing framing if needed.

Add an explicit re-verification step after "Fix" (re-run the Check items) to close the review loop for batch markup reviews.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body is lean and well-sectioned (~30 lines), but the opening "why" sentence and the "Explain" section restate accessibility rationale Claude already knows, which is minor over-explanation that keeps it at anchor 4 rather than 5.	4 / 5
Actionability	The body names concrete targets ("Add track elements", "disable autoplay", keyboard/focus management) but provides no executable code in the body itself — all code is deferred to references/rule.md, so guidance is high-level with key details missing (anchor 3).	3 / 5
Workflow Clarity	The Check → Fix → Explain → Code Review sequence is clear and the "Check" section acts as the verification checkpoint for this single-purpose review skill, with only minor validation gaps (no explicit fix-then-reverify loop).	4 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	The body is a concise overview with a clearly signaled, one-level-deep reference ("see `references/rule.md`"), the referenced file exists and does not chain further, and content is appropriately split — matching anchor 5.	5 / 5
	Total	16 / 20 Passed

Description

70%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 clearly states both the trigger context and the core action (validate browser-facing markup, not the framework abstraction), and is reasonably distinct from generic accessibility skills. Its main weakness is that the action verbs are generic and it omits natural synonyms (transcripts, audio descriptions, autoplay).

Suggestions

Expand the "what" with more specific actions, e.g. "check for <track> captions/descriptions, transcripts, keyboard pause controls, and autoplay".

Add natural synonyms users say ("transcripts", "audio descriptions", "autoplay", "keyboard controls") to broaden trigger coverage.

Rephrase "related to Make videos accessible with captions" into natural wording — the capitalized "Make" reads as a rule title rather than a user trigger phrase.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	The description names the domain and two concrete actions ("reviewing templates, rendered HTML, or shared components" and "Validate the final browser-facing markup"), but the verbs are generic and coverage is not comprehensive, matching anchor 3 rather than the multi-action anchor 4.	3 / 5
Completeness	It explicitly answers both "what" (review/validate video-accessibility markup) and "when" ("Use when reviewing templates, rendered HTML, or shared components"), but the "what" is somewhat generic and could be more specific, so it sits at anchor 4 rather than 5.	4 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	Natural trigger terms are present ("templates", "rendered HTML", "shared components", "videos accessible with captions", "browser-facing markup"), giving good keyword coverage, though common synonyms like transcripts, audio descriptions, and autoplay are missing.	4 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	The scope is a fairly clear niche (video accessibility captions in rendered HTML/templates/shared components) with only minor overlap risk against broader HTML-accessibility skills, matching anchor 4.	4 / 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/video-accessibility/SKILL.md
Commit: 30756a7

Reviewed: 4 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.