Skills better-accessibility

📦

better-accessibility

Name: better-accessibility
Author: jakubkrehel

Content revision r1 Safe ⚙️ External commands

Review and Fix Web Accessibility

Web interfaces can block users who rely on keyboards, screen readers, or zoom. This skill guides targeted fixes and reports WCAG 2.2 criteria with verification limits.

Supports: Claude Codex Code(CC)

🥉 77 Bronze

Install with my Agent

Copy this request to your Agent. It includes the canonical Skill page and manifest.

Agent request

Review the Skillstore skill "better-accessibility" from https://skillstore.io/skills/jakubkrehel-better-accessibility.md and its manifest at https://skillstore.io/api/skills/jakubkrehel-better-accessibility/manifest. Verify the artifact. You may proceed after verification, subject to the environment's own policy.

Your Agent should still show its plan and request any confirmation required by the security policy.

Agent-readable resources

Use these links when an AI agent, crawler, or script needs clean context instead of reading the full page.

Markdown detail GET /skills/jakubkrehel-better-accessibility.md Signed manifest GET /api/skills/jakubkrehel-better-accessibility/manifest Signed lockfile GET /api/skills/jakubkrehel-better-accessibility/lockfile

Test it

Using "better-accessibility". Review an icon-only delete control that has no accessible name.

Expected outcome:

High severity: The delete control has no accessible name, so screen-reader users cannot identify its action.
WCAG 4.1.2: Give the control a descriptive accessible name and hide its decorative icon from assistive technology.
Verification: Source review identifies the missing name. Browser accessibility-tree inspection and screen-reader testing are not verified.

Using "better-accessibility". Review a form that shows errors through red borders alone.

Expected outcome:

The form communicates validation errors only through color, creating a barrier for users who cannot distinguish the border state.
WCAG 1.4.1 and 3.3.1: Add inline error text, associate it with each failing field, and focus the first invalid field after submission.
Verification: Confirm that errors are announced with their fields. Target browser and screen-reader behavior is not verified without testing.

Using "better-accessibility". Review a success toast whose polite announcement region appears with its message.

Expected outcome:

The newly mounted polite region may not announce the success message consistently.
Keep an empty status region mounted before updates, then change its text when the operation completes.
Verification: Test repeated announcements with the target screen readers. Leave keyboard focus on the current control.

Security Audit

Safe

v1 • 10/9/2026 Open versioned report

All 50 static findings are false positives from Markdown formatting, CSS, HTML attributes, or accessibility review terminology. The reviewed files contain accessibility guidance, not shell execution or system reconnaissance. No evidence found of prompt injection, credential collection, data exfiltration, or other malicious intent.

Files scanned

700

Lines analyzed

Review items

False positives ignored

No confirmed security findings were detected by the latest completed static and semantic audit. This does not prove the skill has no side effects.

Audited by: codex

Share & cite this report

Share the versioned assessment report, neutral badge, embed card, and citations. Skillstore reports evidence without deciding whether this Skill is safe.

Open versioned report

Copy report link

https://skillstore.io/skills/jakubkrehel-better-accessibility/audits/1?utm_source=security_passport&utm_medium=share&utm_campaign=versioned_report

Markdown badge

[![Skillstore security assessment](https://skillstore.io/badges/skills/jakubkrehel-better-accessibility/security.svg)](https://skillstore.io/skills/jakubkrehel-better-accessibility?utm_source=security_passport_badge)

HTML badge

<a href="https://skillstore.io/skills/jakubkrehel-better-accessibility?utm_source=security_passport_badge"><img src="https://skillstore.io/badges/skills/jakubkrehel-better-accessibility/security.svg" alt="Skillstore security assessment" loading="lazy"></a>

Embed card

<iframe src="https://skillstore.io/embed/skills/jakubkrehel-better-accessibility.html" title="Skillstore Security Assessment" sandbox="allow-popups allow-popups-to-escape-sandbox" loading="lazy" referrerpolicy="no-referrer" width="420" height="180"></iframe>

Academic citations (APA · BibTeX · CFF)

APA citation

jakubkrehel. (2026). better-accessibility security audit report (audit version 1) [Author version unspecified]. Skillstore. https://skillstore.io/skills/jakubkrehel-better-accessibility/audits/1

BibTeX citation

@techreport{jakubkrehel-jakubkrehel-better-accessibility-2026,
  author = {jakubkrehel},
  title = {better-accessibility security audit report (audit version 1)},
  institution = {Skillstore},
  year = {2026},
  number = {1},
  url = {https://skillstore.io/skills/jakubkrehel-better-accessibility/audits/1},
  note = {Author version unspecified}
}

CITATION.cff

cff-version: 1.2.0
message: "If you use this Skill, cite its author and this versioned security audit report."
title: "better-accessibility security audit report (audit version 1)"
version: "unspecified"
type: report
authors:
  - name: "jakubkrehel"
date-released: "2026-10-09"
url: "https://skillstore.io/skills/jakubkrehel-better-accessibility/audits/1"
identifiers:
  - type: other
    value: "skillstore:jakubkrehel-better-accessibility:audit:1"
    description: "Skillstore immutable audit report identifier"

Skillstore Score

Why this score Evidence Confidence: Medium

Architecture

Maintainability

Content

Community

Spec Compliance

What You Can Build

Fix Keyboard Barriers in Components

Review dialogs, tabs, and navigation for keyboard paths, visible focus, and focus restoration before release.

Verify Accessible User Flows

Check form submission, error announcements, and status updates through keyboard and screen-reader workflows.

Review Shared Interface Patterns

Assess shared controls for names, roles, states, target sizes, and reduced-motion behavior across a component library.

Try These Prompts

Review a Single Control

Review [component] for accessible names, native semantics, and visible focus. Explain each barrier and recommend the smallest fix.

Fix an Accessible Form

Review and fix [form] labels, autocomplete, validation, and pending submission behavior. Preserve project conventions and report checks you cannot verify.

Audit an Interactive Flow

Audit [flow] for keyboard navigation, modal focus, live announcements, and zoom. Cite applicable WCAG 2.2 criteria and separate observed failures from unverified checks.

Review a Shared Component Library

Review [component library] for systemic accessibility barriers. Fix shared root causes, group findings by principle and severity, and list all affected locations.

Best Practices

Provide the component scope and affected user flow, then request findings tied to WCAG criteria or concrete task barriers.
Preserve native HTML behavior and project styling conventions when applying accessibility fixes.
Combine source review with keyboard and screen-reader testing, and clearly mark checks that remain unverified.

Avoid

Treating a source-only review or automated audit as proof of complete accessibility conformance.
Adding ARIA roles to generic elements instead of using suitable native controls.
Removing focus indicators, blocking paste, or preventing zoom to preserve a visual design.

Frequently Asked Questions

Which AI tools support this skill?

The marketplace lists support for Claude, Codex, and Claude Code. Available project access and testing tools depend on your environment.

Which accessibility standard does it use?

It uses WCAG 2.2 Level A and AA criteria. It distinguishes recommendations and AAA targets from required thresholds.

Can it fix project code?

The instructions guide code fixes using existing project conventions. Applying changes requires an AI environment with access to the relevant files.

Does it include automated accessibility testing?

No testing engine is bundled. The guidance calls for automated audits when browser tools are available and marks unavailable checks as unverified.

Does it measure color contrast?

It identifies applicable contrast requirements but delegates rendered contrast measurement to better-colors. Color changes require a request.

Does a successful review guarantee compliance?

No. Results cover inspected components and completed checks only. Full conformance requires broader assessment, including manual testing with assistive technology.