
Accessibility Review
- 2.8k installs
- 23.2k repo stars
- Updated July 31, 2026
- anthropics/knowledge-work-plugins
accessibility-review is a skill for WCAG 2.1 AA audits on designs or pages with structured findings and contrast checks.
About
accessibility-review runs WCAG 2.1 AA audits on designs or pages triggered by audit accessibility, check a11y, or pre-handoff review requests. Quick reference covers Perceivable rules including alt text, semantic structure, contrast ratios four point five to one for normal text and three to one for large text and UI components. Operable criteria include keyboard access, logical focus order, visible focus indicators, and forty-four pixel touch targets. Understandable checks cover predictable focus behavior, error identification, and input labels. Robust requirements demand name, role, and value for UI components. Testing approach combines automated scans, keyboard-only navigation, screen reader testing, contrast verification, and two hundred percent zoom layout checks. Output templates summarize critical, major, and minor findings by WCAG category with color contrast tables, keyboard navigation matrices, and prioritized fixes. Optional Figma connector integration inspects color values and touch targets directly from design files.
- WCAG 2.1 AA criteria quick reference by principle.
- Structured findings tables with severity and recommendations.
- Color contrast and keyboard navigation output sections.
- Combined automated, manual, and screen reader testing approach.
- Optional Figma connector for direct design inspection.
Accessibility Review by the numbers
- 2,770 all-time installs (skills.sh)
- +101 installs in the week ending Jul 29, 2026 (Skillselion tracking)
- Ranked #117 of 1,888 Design & UI/UX skills by installs in the Skillselion catalog
- Security screen: LOW risk (skills.sh audit)
- Data as of Jul 31, 2026 (Skillselion catalog sync)
accessibility-review capabilities & compatibility
- Capabilities
- wcag 2.1 aa criteria checklist · automated and manual testing workflow · color contrast verification tables · keyboard navigation behavior matrix · screen reader announcement review · prioritized critical major minor findings
- Works with
- figma
- Use cases
- ui design · testing
- Pricing
- Free
What accessibility-review says it does
Audit a design or page for WCAG 2.1 AA accessibility compliance.
Contrast ratio >= 4.5:1 (normal text)
Start with contrast and keyboard
npx skills add https://github.com/anthropics/knowledge-work-plugins --skill accessibility-reviewAdd your badge
Show developers this skill is listed on Skillselion. Paste this into your README.
| Installs | 2.8k |
|---|---|
| repo stars | ★ 23.2k |
| Security audit | 3 / 3 scanners passed |
| Last updated | July 31, 2026 |
| Repository | anthropics/knowledge-work-plugins ↗ |
How do I audit a design or page for WCAG 2.1 AA accessibility issues before handoff?
Run a WCAG 2.1 AA accessibility audit on a Figma design or live page before handoff or release.
Who is it for?
Design and engineering teams reviewing Figma files or pages before ship or compliance review.
Skip if: Skip for legal compliance sign-off alone, backend APIs without UI, or WCAG AAA-only engagements.
When should I use this skill?
User asks to audit accessibility, check a11y, contrast, keyboard nav, or screen reader behavior.
What you get
Structured audit report with severity-ranked findings, contrast table, and priority fixes.
- WCAG 2.1 AA audit findings
- Pre-handoff accessibility review notes
By the numbers
- Checks compliance against WCAG 2.1 AA
- Evaluates four focus areas: color contrast, keyboard navigation, touch targets, and screen readers
Files
/accessibility-review
If you see unfamiliar placeholders or need to check which tools are connected, see CONNECTORS.md.
Audit a design or page for WCAG 2.1 AA accessibility compliance.
Usage
/accessibility-review $ARGUMENTSAudit for accessibility: @$1
WCAG 2.1 AA Quick Reference
Perceivable
- 1.1.1 Non-text content has alt text
- 1.3.1 Info and structure conveyed semantically
- 1.4.3 Contrast ratio >= 4.5:1 (normal text), >= 3:1 (large text)
- 1.4.11 Non-text contrast >= 3:1 (UI components, graphics)
Operable
- 2.1.1 All functionality available via keyboard
- 2.4.3 Logical focus order
- 2.4.7 Visible focus indicator
- 2.5.5 Touch target >= 44x44 CSS pixels
Understandable
- 3.2.1 Predictable on focus (no unexpected changes)
- 3.3.1 Error identification (describe the error)
- 3.3.2 Labels or instructions for inputs
Robust
- 4.1.2 Name, role, value for all UI components
Common Issues
1. Insufficient color contrast 2. Missing form labels 3. No keyboard access to interactive elements 4. Missing alt text on meaningful images 5. Focus traps in modals 6. Missing ARIA landmarks 7. Auto-playing media without controls 8. Time limits without extension options
Testing Approach
1. Automated scan (catches ~30% of issues) 2. Keyboard-only navigation 3. Screen reader testing (VoiceOver, NVDA) 4. Color contrast verification 5. Zoom to 200% — does layout break?
Output
## Accessibility Audit: [Design/Page Name]
**Standard:** WCAG 2.1 AA | **Date:** [Date]
### Summary
**Issues found:** [X] | **Critical:** [X] | **Major:** [X] | **Minor:** [X]
### Findings
#### Perceivable
| # | Issue | WCAG Criterion | Severity | Recommendation |
|---|-------|---------------|----------|----------------|
| 1 | [Issue] | [1.4.3 Contrast] | 🔴 Critical | [Fix] |
#### Operable
| # | Issue | WCAG Criterion | Severity | Recommendation |
|---|-------|---------------|----------|----------------|
| 1 | [Issue] | [2.1.1 Keyboard] | 🟡 Major | [Fix] |
#### Understandable
| # | Issue | WCAG Criterion | Severity | Recommendation |
|---|-------|---------------|----------|----------------|
| 1 | [Issue] | [3.3.2 Labels] | 🟢 Minor | [Fix] |
#### Robust
| # | Issue | WCAG Criterion | Severity | Recommendation |
|---|-------|---------------|----------|----------------|
| 1 | [Issue] | [4.1.2 Name, Role, Value] | 🟡 Major | [Fix] |
### Color Contrast Check
| Element | Foreground | Background | Ratio | Required | Pass? |
|---------|-----------|------------|-------|----------|-------|
| [Body text] | [color] | [color] | [X]:1 | 4.5:1 | ✅/❌ |
### Keyboard Navigation
| Element | Tab Order | Enter/Space | Escape | Arrow Keys |
|---------|-----------|-------------|--------|------------|
| [Element] | [Order] | [Behavior] | [Behavior] | [Behavior] |
### Screen Reader
| Element | Announced As | Issue |
|---------|-------------|-------|
| [Element] | [What SR says] | [Problem if any] |
### Priority Fixes
1. **[Critical fix]** — Affects [who] and blocks [what]
2. **[Major fix]** — Improves [what] for [who]
3. **[Minor fix]** — Nice to haveIf Connectors Available
If ~~design tool is connected:
- Inspect color values, font sizes, and touch targets directly from Figma
- Check component ARIA roles and keyboard behavior in the design spec
If ~~project tracker is connected:
- Create tickets for each accessibility finding with severity and WCAG criterion
- Link findings to existing accessibility remediation epics
Tips
1. Start with contrast and keyboard — These catch the most common and impactful issues. 2. Test with real assistive technology — My audit is a great start, but manual testing with VoiceOver/NVDA catches things I can't. 3. Prioritize by impact — Fix issues that block users first, polish later.
Related skills
How it compares
Pick accessibility-review for pre-ship WCAG 2.1 AA design and page audits inside the agent; use automated CI axe tests for ongoing regression in pipelines.
FAQ
What contrast ratio for body text?
At least four point five to one against the background for normal text under 1.4.3.
What testing order is recommended?
Start with contrast and keyboard, then screen reader and two hundred percent zoom.
Can Figma values be inspected?
Yes when a design tool connector is available for colors, fonts, and touch targets.
Is Accessibility Review safe to install?
skills.sh reports 3 of 3 security scanners passed. Review the Security Audits panel on this page before installing in production.