CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

testland/wcag-keyboard-navigation

Reference catalog for WCAG 2.2 keyboard-navigation conformance - covers SC 2.1.1 (Keyboard), 2.1.2 (No Keyboard Trap), 2.1.4 (Character Key Shortcuts), 2.4.3 (Focus Order), 2.4.7 (Focus Visible), 2.4.11/2.4.12 (Focus Not Obscured) - with conformance levels (A/AA), test scripts, and per-criterion failure patterns, plus the modal focus-trap / focus-management pattern (focus-on-open, Tab-cycle, inert, Escape-closes, restore-to-trigger, native `<dialog>`) in references/. Use when authoring or reviewing keyboard-only interaction support, or a modal / drawer / popover's focus management.

68

Quality

85%

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

Overview
Quality
Evals
Security
Files

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 reference body: per-criterion failure/fix tables, sequenced per-component test patterns with embedded verification, and clean one-level-deep disclosure into references/focus-trap.md. The main costs are a redundant Anti-patterns section that repeats earlier table rows, an Overview that re-explains POUR/levels Claude already knows, and one pseudocode placeholder in the Playwright example.

Suggestions

Cut or merge the Anti-patterns section (lines ~189-197) into the existing SC tables, or reduce it to a one-line cross-reference, since its rows duplicate SC 2.1.1/2.4.3/2.4.7/2.4.11 content verbatim.

Complete the Playwright snippet by replacing 'await expect(...).toBeVisible();' with a concrete assertion against a real test locator so the example is copy-paste runnable.

Trim the Overview's re-explanation of the four POUR principles and A/AA/AAA levels to a single sentence pointing straight at the Operable criteria, keeping only what Claude cannot infer.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

Mostly efficient (dense pattern/fix tables, numbered test steps), but there is genuine tightening material: the Overview restates the POUR principles and A/AA/AAA levels Claude already knows, and the Anti-patterns section duplicates nearly verbatim rows already present in the SC 2.1.1, 2.4.3, 2.4.7, and 2.4.11 tables. This is more than 'minor instances that could be trimmed' (a 4) but far from heavily padded prose (a 2).

3 / 5

Actionability

Concrete, executable guidance dominates: specific CSS fixes (':focus-visible { outline: 2px solid var(--focus-ring); }'), 'scroll-margin-top', tabindex rules, and a Playwright test script. Falls short of fully copy-paste ready because the Playwright snippet contains a literal placeholder ('await expect(...).toBeVisible();'), so it is not runnable as written.

4 / 5

Workflow Clarity

Per-component patterns are clearly sequenced with verification built into each step ('Tab through every field; verify focus order matches reading order', 'verify each interactive element has a visible focus ring'), and fixes are cross-referenced. Missing an explicit error-recovery loop and a top-level procedure tying sections into a single review pass, so it sits at 'clear sequence with most checkpoints present' rather than the full feedback-loop/checklist anchor.

4 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

The body is an overview and the deep material (6-step modal focus pattern, native <dialog>, Playwright test scripts) is appropriately split into references/focus-trap.md, which exists in the bundle and is clearly signaled three times with descriptive link text. References are one level deep and navigation is easy, matching the top anchor.

5 / 5

Total

16

/

20

Passed

Description

92%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 strong description: it states precisely what the catalog covers (six named SCs with conformance levels, test scripts, failure patterns, and the modal focus-management sub-pattern) and gives an explicit 'Use when...' clause with concrete, natural triggers. Third-person voice throughout and no fluff, though it is on the long side and omits a few common synonyms like 'accessibility' or 'a11y'.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Enumerates the full SC range (2.1.1, 2.1.2, 2.1.4, 2.4.3, 2.4.7, 2.4.11/2.4.12) plus the concrete artifacts provided (conformance levels A/AA, test scripts, per-criterion failure patterns) and the modal sub-pattern steps (focus-on-open, Tab-cycle, inert, Escape-closes, restore-to-trigger, native <dialog>). Comprehensive and concrete with nothing material missing, matching the top anchor rather than 'several specific actions with minor gaps'.

5 / 5

Completeness

Explicitly answers both: what ('Reference catalog for WCAG 2.2 keyboard-navigation conformance... with conformance levels (A/AA), test scripts, and per-criterion failure patterns') and when ('Use when authoring or reviewing keyboard-only interaction support, or a modal / drawer / popover's focus management') with concrete trigger phrases, matching the top anchor exactly.

5 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Good natural-term coverage: 'keyboard navigation', 'keyboard-only interaction support', 'focus management', 'keyboard trap', and component synonyms 'modal / drawer / popover'. A few natural terms users would say are absent ('accessibility', 'a11y', 'tab order', 'screen reader'), so it falls just short of the comprehensive synonym/extension coverage of the top anchor.

4 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

'WCAG 2.2 keyboard-navigation conformance' with named SC numbers is a clear niche, and the triggers (authoring/reviewing keyboard-only support, modal focus management) would not naturally fire sibling skills like a scanner (axe-a11y) or color-contrast skill. Minimal conflict risk, matching the top anchor.

5 / 5

Total

19

/

20

Passed

Validation

100%

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

Validation — 16 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Reviewed

Table of Contents