accessibility-testing · git:20260803.f52f41e · 2026-08-03 · sha256 11e75b3cbcf8634b
accessibility-testing git:20260803.f52f41eA
Immutable. This exact content is served forever at /api/v1/blob/11e75b3cbcf8634b.
--- name: accessibility-testing description: Use this skill when you need to design accessibility testing against WCAG, keyboard navigation, and assistive technology scenarios; triggers include accessibility testing and a11y testing. --- # Accessibility Testing (English) **中文版:** See the corresponding Chinese skill. ## When to Use - Need help with accessibility testing in a real project context. - Need an output that can be used directly for execution, review, or follow-up. ## Workflow 1. Read and follow the main prompt listed under Progressive disclosure (coverage, structure, quality bar). 2. Add only project context that changes the result: scope, environment, constraints, risks, dependencies, expected deliverable. 3. If input is incomplete, return a usable first draft and explicitly mark assumptions and gaps. 4. Default to Markdown; switch formats only when the user asks. ## Core Constraints - Prioritize by risk / business impact — do not treat everything equally. - Separate confirmed facts from current assumptions. - Do not invent endpoints, fields, environments, or root causes the user did not provide. - Keep output executable: concrete scenarios, clear priority, clear next steps. ## Progressive Disclosure - Before producing output, read and follow `prompts/accessibility-testing.md` (minimum coverage, output structure, quality bar). - When Excel/CSV/JSON/Word is requested: read `output-formats.md` and honor the format. - When a ready-made template fits: use matching files under `output-templates/`. - For deep framework/troubleshoot/schema notes: read only the relevant file(s) under `references/`, do not load the whole directory. - For format conversion or helper checks: prefer existing `scripts/` over reinventing. - For evaluating/regressing this skill: use `evals/` with skill-up. ## Pre-delivery Checklist - [ ] Followed the main prompt's output structure - [ ] Minimum coverage focus: scope and target users, keyboard access, focus order and visible focus, screen reader semantics and labels, headings and landmarks, form errors and validation feedback, color contrast and non-color cues, images, icons, and alternative text, ... (details in main prompt) - [ ] Covered the minimum checklist, or explained omissions - [ ] High-risk items have explicit priority - [ ] Did not invent details the user did not provide - [ ] Assumptions and gaps are marked ## Common Pitfalls - Do not pretend completeness when scope/context is missing. - Do not treat every item as equally important. - Do not skip assumptions and information gaps. - Do not dump generic theory unrelated to the current toolchain.