Review a11y
Skill chrisallenlane/claude-swe-workflows/skills/review-a11y
Accessibility audit. Dispatches an accessibility auditor to identify WCAG conformance gaps, prioritize by user impact, and recommend fixes. Advisory only — no changes made.From its SKILL.md
npx -y skills add chrisallenlane/claude-swe-workflows --skill review-a11yAssembled from the repository path, not quoted from the project. Check it against their README if it does not work.
One thing to look at
- 18 stars18 stars. Stars are a popularity signal and not a quality one, but at this level it is likely that nobody has read this closely except its author, and you would be relying on your own review.
SKILL.md
5.6 KB, ~1.1k tokens by cl100k_base, as published. Nobody here has run it
Accessibility Review - WCAG Conformance Audit
Advisory-only accessibility audit. Dispatches a QA - Web A11y Reviewer agent to evaluate web content against WCAG 2.2 Level AA, prioritize issues by real-world user impact, and recommend fixes. No changes are made.
Philosophy
Impact over compliance. A missing form label that blocks screen reader users is more important than a redundant ARIA role that harms nobody. The audit prioritizes barriers that prevent or degrade access for people with disabilities.
Diagnostic, not therapeutic. This skill identifies accessibility barriers and recommends fixes. It does not implement them. Ask for changes directly after reviewing the findings, or use /implement with the audit as context.
Workflow Overview
┌──────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ ACCESSIBILITY REVIEW │
├──────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤
│ 1. Detect web content │
│ 2. Determine scope │
│ 3. Dispatch accessibility auditor │
│ 4. Present audit report │
└──────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
Workflow Details
1. Detect Web Content
Scan the project for web content files:
| Extensions | Content type |
|---|---|
.html, .htm | HTML documents |
.jsx, .tsx | React/JSX components |
.vue | Vue components |
.svelte | Svelte components |
.css, .scss, .less | Stylesheets |
.ejs, .hbs, .pug, .njk | HTML templates |
Exclude: node_modules/, vendor/, dist/, build/, .git/, and other generated/vendored directories.
If no web content is found: Report "No web content detected in this project. Accessibility audits apply to projects with HTML, CSS, or UI component files." and abort.
2. Determine Scope
Present detected web content to the user with file counts:
Detected web content:
- HTML: 12 files
- React (TSX): 28 files
- CSS: 8 files
What should I audit?
- Entire project (default)
- Specific directory (e.g., src/components/)
- Specific files
Accept the user's selection. Default: entire project.
3. Dispatch A11y Auditor
Assess scope size with Glob.
Small scope (roughly ≤20 web content files): Spawn a single QA - Web A11y Reviewer agent with the full scope.
Large scope (roughly >20 web content files): Partition by directory or component boundary. Spawn multiple QA - Web A11y Reviewer agents in parallel, each with a focused partition.
Prompt for each agent:
Audit the following web content for accessibility issues.
Scope: [partition or full scope]
Read all files in scope and perform your full audit:
1. Detect and run any automated accessibility tooling (axe-core, pa11y, etc.)
2. Manual inspection for issues automated tools miss (keyboard navigation,
semantic correctness, dynamic content, ARIA usage, content quality, media)
3. Classify every issue by severity (CRITICAL / HIGH / LOW)
Produce your standard output format with summary, issues by severity,
and tooling recommendations.
4. Present Audit Report
Collect all agent responses. If multiple agents were dispatched, merge findings into a single report, deduplicating issues that span partitions.
Present a consolidated report:
## Accessibility Audit Report
Conformance target: WCAG 2.2 Level AA
Method: [automated + manual | manual only]
Scope: [what was audited]
Issues found: N (X critical, Y high, Z low)
### CRITICAL
[merged critical findings from all agents]
### HIGH
[merged high findings]
### LOW
[merged low findings]
### Tooling Recommendations
[if applicable — recommendations for adding automated accessibility testing]
### Suggested Next Steps
[Based on findings:
- If critical/high issues found: recommend fixing them, noting which
would be handled by HTML changes vs CSS changes vs JS changes
- If no significant issues: "No significant accessibility barriers found"
- If no automated tooling exists: recommend adding axe-core or pa11y]
The report is your synthesis. If multiple agents were dispatched, look for patterns across partitions (e.g., missing labels is a project-wide habit, not an isolated incident). Don't just concatenate agent outputs.
Agent Coordination
- All auditor agents run in parallel (they are read-only and independent)
- Wait for all agents to complete before presenting the consolidated report
- If an agent fails or times out, note the failure in the report and continue with other results
Abort Conditions
Abort:
- No web content files detected in scope
- Not a git repository
Do NOT abort:
- No automated accessibility tooling available (proceed with manual audit)
- A single agent fails in a multi-agent dispatch (report failure, continue)
- Few issues found (report "no significant issues" — that's a valid outcome)
What ships with it: 1 file
3.5 KB alongside SKILL.md
references/
- README.md3.5 KB
Gives 0 of the 12 instructions most review quality skills give in ~1.1k tokens
Counted across 1,273 of the 2,403 authors here whose files we hold, read 2026-09-06
- Ask one question at a timein 63 of 1273, across 62 files
- Provide a recommended answer for each questionin 47 of 1273, across 45 files
- Rank findings by severityin 44 of 1273
- Use parameterized queries for database accessin 38 of 1273, across 20 files
- Validate all user input with schemasin 33 of 1273, across 15 files
- Store secrets in environment variablesin 32 of 1273, across 14 files
- Explore the codebase to answer questionsin 31 of 1273, across 29 files
- Store tokens in httpOnly cookiesin 30 of 1273, across 12 files
- Implement rate limiting on API endpointsin 30 of 1273, across 12 files
- Sanitize user-provided HTMLin 29 of 1273, across 11 files
- Return generic error messages to usersin 28 of 1273, across 10 files
- Cite file and line for every findingin 28 of 1273, across 25 files
Said here and by no other author read
- Scan project for web content files
- Exclude generated and vendored directories
- Abort if no web content is found
- Present detected web content to user
- Partition large scopes into smaller segments
- Deduplicate issues across partitions
Grouped from the skills themselves: near-identical wordings counted once, and counted by distinct author, so one author publishing three of these counts once. Length counted with cl100k_base; the agent that loads this file may tokenize it differently.