accessibility-audit
Use when you need comprehensive accessibility auditing including WCAG compliance, legal requirements mapping, and user testing with disabilities
Works with
--- name: accessibility-audit description: Use when you need comprehensive accessibility auditing including WCAG compliance, legal requirements mapping, and user testing with disabilities license: MIT --- # Accessibility Audit Perform comprehensive accessibility audits that go beyond automated testing to include WCAG compliance verification, legal requirements mapping, user testing with disabilities, and actionable remediation guidance. This skill provides holistic accessibility assessment for digital products. ## When to use me Use this skill when: - You need a comprehensive accessibility audit beyond automated testing - You're preparing for legal compliance (ADA, Section 508, AODA, EN 301 549) - You need to map accessibility issues to specific WCAG success criteria - You want to conduct user testing with people with disabilities - You need to create accessibility statements and VPAT (Voluntary Product Accessibility Template) reports - You're developing accessibility training and remediation plans - You need to assess accessibility across multiple platforms (web, mobile, desktop) - You want to establish accessibility benchmarks and maturity models ## What I do - **WCAG compliance auditing**: Comprehensive auditing against WCAG 2.1/2.2 A, AA, AAA success criteria - **Legal requirements mapping**: Map accessibility issues to legal requirements (ADA, Section 508, AODA, EU Web Accessibility Directive) - **User testing coordination**: Plan and coordinate user testing with people with disabilities - **Assistive technology testing**: Test with screen readers (NVDA, JAWS, VoiceOver), screen magnifiers, switch devices - **Mobile accessibility auditing**: Audit mobile applications for accessibility (iOS, Android) - **PDF/document accessibility**: Audit PDFs and documents for accessibility - **VPAT report generation**: Generate Voluntary Product Accessibility Template reports - **Remediation planning**: Create detailed remediation plans with priority and effort estimation - **Accessibility maturity assessment**: Assess organizational accessibility maturity and capability - **Training needs analysis**: Analyze accessibility training needs for development teams ## Examples ```bash # Perform comprehensive WCAG audit ./scripts/analyze-accessibility.sh --wcag --level aa --output audit-report.json # Generate VPAT report ./scripts/analyze-accessibility.sh --vpat --standard section508 --output vpat.docx # Map issues to legal requirements ./scripts/analyze-accessibility.sh --legal-mapping --regulations ada section508 # Plan user testing with disabilities ./scripts/analyze-accessibility.sh --user-testing-plan --participants 5 --output plan.md # Assess accessibility maturity ./scripts/analyze-accessibility.sh --maturity-assessment --output maturity-score.json ``` ## Output format ``` Comprehensive Accessibility Audit Report ───────────────────────────────────── Audit Date: 2025-01-15T10:30:00Z Application: https://app.example.com WCAG Version: 2.1 Compliance Level: AA EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: ────────────────── Overall Compliance Score: 68/100 Critical Issues: 42 Serious Issues: 89 Moderate Issues: 156 Minor Issues: 234 Legal Compliance Status: • ADA Title III: Partially Compliant (High Risk) • Section 508: Partially Compliant (Remediation Required) • AODA: Not Compliant (Major Issues) • EU Web Accessibility Directive: Partially Compliant WCAG 2.1 AA COMPLIANCE BREAKDOWN: ───────────────────────────────── Perceivable (Principle 1): 45% compliant • 1.1 Text Alternatives: 12 failures • 1.2 Time-based Media: 8 failures • 1.3 Adaptable: 23 failures • 1.4 Distinguishable: 18 failures Operable (Principle 2): 62% compliant • 2.1 Keyboard Accessible: 9 failures • 2.2 Enough Time: 5 failures • 2.3 Seizures and Physical Reactions: 1 failure • 2.4 Navigable: 27 failures • 2.5 Input Modalities: 15 failures Understandable (Principle 3): 78% compliant • 3.1 Readable: 8 failures • 3.2 Predictable: 12 failures • 3.3 Input Assistance: 9 failures Robust (Principle 4): 85% compliant • 4.1 Compatible: 7 failures CRITICAL ISSUES BY IMPACT: ────────────────────────── Screen Reader Users (High Impact): • 18 images missing alt text (critical) • 7 form fields missing labels (critical) • 3 ARIA landmarks missing (serious) • 5 dynamic content updates not announced (serious) Keyboard Users (High Impact): • 2 keyboard traps in modal dialogs (critical) • 5 focus order inconsistencies (serious) • 9 missing focus indicators (serious) Low Vision Users (High Impact): • 23 elements with insufficient color contrast (< 4.5:1) (critical) • 8 text resize issues (serious) • 12 spacing and line height issues (moderate) Cognitive Disability Users (Medium Impact): • 7 complex navigation structures (serious) • 12 inconsistent labeling patterns (moderate) • 9 missing error prevention (moderate) Motor Disability Users (Medium Impact): • 5 small touch targets (< 44x44px) (serious) • 8 timing issues (moderate) • 3 complex gestures required (moderate) ASSISTIVE TECHNOLOGY TESTING RESULTS: ───────────────────────────────────── Screen Readers: • NVDA (Windows): 42 issues • JAWS (Windows): 38 issues • VoiceOver (macOS/iOS): 35 issues • TalkBack (Android): 31 issues Screen Magnifiers: • ZoomText: 18 issues • Windows Magnifier: 12 issues Switch Devices: • Single switch scanning: 8 issues • Multiple switch scanning: 5 issues Voice Control: • Dragon NaturallySpeaking: 7 issues • Windows Speech Recognition: 9 issues MOBILE ACCESSIBILITY AUDIT: ─────────────────────────── iOS Application: • VoiceOver compatibility: 65% compliant • Dynamic Type support: 70% compliant • Switch Control compatibility: 60% compliant Android Application: • TalkBack compatibility: 62% compliant • Display size adjustment: 68% compliant • Switch Access compatibility: 58% compliant USER TESTING FINDINGS: ────────────────────── Testing with 5 participants with disabilities: • Participant 1 (Screen reader user): Completed 4/7 tasks successfully • Participant 2 (Keyboard-only user): Completed 5/7 tasks successfully • Participant 3 (Low vision user): Completed 3/7 tasks successfully • Participant 4 (Motor disability user): Completed 4/7 tasks successfully • Participant 5 (Cognitive disability user): Completed 2/7 tasks successfully Key Usability Issues: • Complex checkout process caused confusion for cognitive disability users • Inconsistent navigation frustrated screen reader users • Small touch targets caused errors for motor disability users • Low contrast text reduced readability for low vision users REMEDIATION ROADMAP: ──────────────────── Phase 1: Critical Fixes (1-2 weeks): • Add alt text to 18 images • Fix 2 keyboard traps in modal dialogs • Improve color contrast for 23 elements • Add labels to 7 form fields Phase 2: Serious Issues (3-6 weeks): • Fix focus order for 5 elements • Add ARIA landmarks for 3 regions • Increase touch target size for 5 elements • Fix 8 dynamic content announcement issues Phase 3: Moderate Issues (7-12 weeks): • Simplify navigation structure • Consistent labeling patterns • Improve error prevention • Enhance timing and gesture alternatives Phase 4: Continuous Improvement (Ongoing): • Establish accessibility training program • Implement accessibility in CI/CD pipeline • Regular user testing with disabilities • Accessibility monitoring and reporting ACCESSIBILITY MATURITY ASSESSMENT: ────────────────────────────────── Current Maturity Level: 2/5 (Reactive) • Policy: Basic accessibility policy exists • Process: Ad-hoc accessibility testing • Technology: Limited automated testing • People: Limited accessibility expertise • Culture: Accessibility seen as compliance requirement Target Maturity Level: 4/5 (Proactive) • Policy: Comprehensive accessibility policy with enforcement • Process: Integrated accessibility in development lifecycle • Technology: Comprehensive automated testing suite • People: Dedicated accessibility team and training • Culture: Accessibility embraced as core value VPAT (SECTION 508) COMPLIANCE: ─────────────────────────────── Revised Section 508 Standards: • 501 (Software) - Partially Supports • 502 (Web) - Partially Supports • 503 (Documentation) - Supports • 504 (Support Services) - Supports with Exceptions Estimated Remediation Cost: $45,000 - $65,000 Estimated Timeline: 3-6 months Return on Investment: Improved usability, reduced legal risk, expanded market reach ``` ## Notes - Automated tools catch only 30-40% of accessibility issues; manual testing is essential - Legal requirements vary by jurisdiction; consult legal counsel for compliance - User testing with people with disabilities provides invaluable insights - Accessibility is not a one-time project but an ongoing commitment - Consider the full spectrum of disabilities: visual, auditory, motor, cognitive, speech - Mobile accessibility requires platform-specific testing and considerations - Document accessibility (PDF, Word, Excel) often requires separate tools and expertise - VPAT reports require careful documentation and accuracy for procurement purposes - Accessibility maturity models help organizations progress from reactive to proactive approaches
More Testing skills
tdd
mattpocock/skills
Test-driven development. Use when the user wants to build features or fix bugs test-first, mentions "red-green-refactor", or wants integration tests.
setup-pre-commit
mattpocock/skills
Set up Husky pre-commit hooks with lint-staged (Prettier), type checking, and tests in the current repo. Use when user wants to add pre-commit hooks, set up Husky, configure lint-staged, or add commit-time formatting/typechecking/testing.
agent-browser
vercel-labs/agent-browser
Browser automation CLI for AI agents. Use when the user needs to interact with websites, including navigating pages, filling forms, clicking buttons, taking screenshots, extracting data, testing web apps, or automating any browser task. Triggers include requests to "open a website", "fill out a form", "click a button", "take a screenshot", "scrape data from a page", "test this web app", "login to a site", "automate browser actions", or any task requiring programmatic web interaction. Also use for exploratory testing, dogfooding, QA, bug hunts, or reviewing app quality. Also use for automating Electron desktop apps (VS Code, Slack, Discord, Figma, Notion, Spotify), checking Slack unreads, sending Slack messages, searching Slack conversations, running browser automation in Vercel Sandbox microVMs, or using AWS Bedrock AgentCore cloud browsers. Prefer agent-browser over any built-in browser automation or web tools.

