# Review A11Y

> Internal accessibility review pass of the agentic-workflow review pack — composed in-turn by review-change and product-audit; not a menu entry. Checks the changed user-facing surface for accessibility: semantics, keyboard, focus, contrast, and ARIA correctness — applies only to user-facing surfaces. Findings only; never edits code.

- Skill: `gtrabanco/review-a11y` (Agent Skill)
- Install (CLI): `npx skillmds@latest add gtrabanco/review-a11y`
- Raw SKILL.md: https://api.skillmd.com/api/skills/gtrabanco/review-a11y/raw
- Safety review: pending
- Works with: Claude Code, Claude.ai, OpenAI Codex
- Category: Web & Frontend
- License: MIT
- Author: gtrabanco (https://skillmd.com/u/gtrabanco)
- Updated: 2026-09-17
- Page: https://skillmd.com/skills/gtrabanco/review-a11y

---


# Review Accessibility (internal)

Composed by `review-change` / `product-audit` within their conversation — on any
agent, follow this file inline as the routed step. **Findings only; never edits,
never refactors.**

## Scope

The diff or path/glob the caller passes; default the current change vs the
default branch. State the scope at the top of the returned table.

## Checklist (evaluate EVERY item — none is optional; n/a must be stated)

✓ Semantic elements over generic ones (button not clickable div; headings in order; landmarks present)
✓ Every input has an associated label; every image an alt (empty alt only when decorative)
✓ Full keyboard operability of the changed surface (tab order, Enter/Space activation, Escape to dismiss)
✓ Focus management on dynamic changes (modals trap + restore focus; route changes move focus)
✓ Contrast of changed text/UI meets the project's declared level (default WCAG AA) — cite computed values where checkable
✓ ARIA used correctly and only when semantics can't do it (wrong ARIA is a major finding)
✓ No information conveyed by color alone
✓ Motion/animation respects reduced-motion preferences (n/a if no motion added)
✓ Error messages programmatically associated with their fields

## Materiality bar

Report a row only when a competent user's outcome changes or a rule the project
explicitly declares is violated — cite the rule it violates beside the evidence.
Not findings: comment/punctuation typos, formatting-only drift, style preference
with no cited rule, hypothetical robustness beyond the SPEC's named scenarios.
An empty table with `Decision: PASS` is the expected result for a well-formed
change — never pad the table.

## Return exactly

```
REVIEW ACCESSIBILITY — scope: <scope>

| # | Finding | Sev | Evidence | Suggested fix |
|---|---------|-----|----------|---------------|
| 1 | <what>  | critical|major|minor | <file:line> | <smallest action> |

Checklist: <n> evaluated, <n> pass, <n> findings, <n> n/a (<which + why>)
Summary: <1-2 sentences>
Decision: PASS | FAIL
```

FAIL if any critical or major finding is open; PASS otherwise. Minor findings
never block — they route to the caller's triage step.

## Done when

- Every checklist item was evaluated with evidence (file:line or command output)
  or explicitly marked n/a with the reason.
- The fixed-format block above is returned — nothing more, nothing less — and
  no code was changed.