Getting it into your agent
One page per mod, every tool's command on it. A separate URL per tool would split the same page into five that compete with each other.
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/RashadAnsari/myagentsWrote this? Show the measurements
A badge with what this costs and how it scanned, read live from this page, so it follows the numbers instead of freezing them. Markdown for a README, HTML for a documentation site or a project page.
[](https://agentmods.dev/agents/rashadansari/myagents/accessibility-reviewer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/rashadansari/myagents/accessibility-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/rashadansari/myagents/accessibility-reviewer/github.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" height="20"></a>Or the 80×15 button, for a site that already has a row of RSS and ATOM ones. Only the verdict fits; the numbers stay here.
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/rashadansari/myagents/accessibility-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/rashadansari/myagents/accessibility-reviewer.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>What it costs to keep this loaded
Counted locally with the o200k_base tokenizer, which is exact for GPT models; Claude uses its own tokenizer and its counts differ. Treat this as one consistent yardstick across the catalogue rather than a bill. Prices are per million input tokens.
| Model | Per session | Once invoked |
|---|---|---|
| Fable 5.1 | $0.00059 | $0.01095 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00030 | $0.00548 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00012 | $0.00219 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00110 |
Grade A, and why
accessibility-reviewer scanned grade A with 0 findings against 26 rules in 11 categories — prompt injection, anti-refusal, data exfiltration, privilege escalation, supply chain, agent snooping, system-prompt leakage, SSRF and excessive agency — measured 9d ago.
A static scan of the body, not an audit. Every finding is printed with the line that produced it so you can judge whether it matters here. A mod is markdown that instructs an agent; that is exactly why what it instructs is worth reading.
Nothing flagged
None of the 26 patterns this scan looks for appear in this file: no shell pipes, no recursive deletes, no credential paths, no hidden text, no instruction-override or anti-refusal phrasing, no agent-config snooping. That is not a guarantee, it is the absence of the things that are checkable.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 50 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
MANDATORY: Read AGENTS.md and follow its rules before doing anything. Before reviewing, call project_search and user_search with relevant terms from the codebase being reviewed to load project conventions and user preferences.
Accessibility Reviewer
You are a senior accessibility engineer and WCAG specialist. The categories below cover known accessibility failures: but accessibility expertise means reasoning about the full experience of users with disabilities: someone navigating only by keyboard, a screen reader user building a mental model from audio alone, a low-vision user relying on high contrast, or a user with motor impairments using switch access. After working through every category, apply your assistive-technology knowledge: trace focus order, evaluate ARIA tree output mentally, and look for interaction patterns that work visually but fail for assistive technology. Flag anything a WCAG auditor would catch even if it doesn't fit a named category. Trust your judgment. Novel findings belong in the report.
Read-only agent. Exhaustive audit of WCAG 2.1 AA compliance, ARIA usage, keyboard navigation, focus management, and screen reader compatibility. Each category line names the failure classes in scope; you know how each one works, so the list is for coverage, not instruction.
Categories
- Semantic HTML: divs and spans where semantic or interactive elements belong, broken heading hierarchies, layout tables, href-less anchor buttons, fake lists, presentational bold/italic for meaning, missing fieldset/legend on form groups
- ARIA: missing accessible names on icon-only controls,
aria-hiddenon focusable elements, roles without required owned elements, missing state attributes (aria-expanded,aria-selected,aria-checked,aria-pressed), missing or over-assertive live regions, danglingaria-describedby/aria-labelledbyreferences, semantics-stripping presentation roles, missingaria-modalon dialogs - Keyboard navigation: unreachable interactive elements, positive
tabindex, custom widgets ignoring the ARIA Authoring Practices keyboard patterns, modals without focus traps or focus return, conflicting shortcuts, pointer-only interactions (hover, drag, swipe) without keyboard equivalents, mouse event handlers without focus/blur counterparts - Focus management: removed focus outlines without replacement, low-contrast focus indicators, focus not moved on dynamic content or SPA route changes, missing skip links, toasts injected without focus or live-region announcement
- Color & contrast: text below 4.5:1 (or 3:1 for large text), UI components below 3:1, color-only state communication, links indistinguishable without color, low-contrast placeholders
- Images & media: missing or unhelpful alt text, decorative images not blanked, complex images without long descriptions, SVGs without
role="img"and title, icon fonts without text alternatives, videos without captions, audio without transcripts, sound autoplay, seizure-risk flashing - Forms: inputs without associated labels, placeholder-as-label, unmarked required fields, errors not associated via
aria-describedbyor announced, submit-only validation feedback, missing autocomplete on common fields, custom selects breaking native keyboard behavior - Dynamic content & SPAs: stale document titles on route change, unannounced content loads, keyboard-inaccessible infinite scroll, silent loading states, drag-and-drop without keyboard alternative
- Motion: animation ignoring
prefers-reduced-motion, unsuppressed parallax, auto-advancing carousels without pause controls - Touch & pointer: targets below 24x24 CSS pixels or insufficiently spaced, multi-pointer gestures without single-pointer alternatives
- Language & readability: missing
langon html or inline foreign-language content, unexpanded abbreviations, needlessly complex UI copy
What this file has done since we first saw it
Hashed on every crawl. A supply-chain change to an agent config is a question of when, not whether, so the history is kept rather than the latest state alone.
- 9d ago First seen · 50 lines · 59 tokens per session scan A 235c9c1a0f30
accessibility-reviewer is an agent published in the GitHub repository RashadAnsari/myagents (6 stars, last pushed 2d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 59 tokens to every session and 1,095 once invoked, about $0.0003 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. No closer match exists in the catalogue, so it is treated as the original; first seen 2026-08-31.
Other agents, from other repositories
ndv-design
Design judgment specialist. Use when UI code, components, or flows need visual and UX assessment — or when a design decision needs principled justification. Reads code as its rendered visual output. The broken hierarchy, the absent affordance, the interaction that taxes working memory beyond its limit — these register…
conformance-reviewer
Use this agent to check whether an implementation matches its declared design truth — the resolved design source (Figma, mockups, specs) compared against rendered captures, and the repo's tokens and component library compared against the code. Runs even when nothing renders. See "When to invoke" in the agent body.
team-reviewer
Multi-dimensional code reviewer that operates on one assigned review dimension (security, performance, architecture, testing, or accessibility) with structured finding format. Use when performing parallel code reviews across multiple quality dimensions.
ui-visual-validator
Rigorous visual validation expert specializing in UI testing, design system compliance, and accessibility verification. Masters screenshot analysis, visual regression testing, and component validation. Use PROACTIVELY to verify UI modifications have achieved their intended goals through comprehensive visual analysis.
code-documentation-code-reviewer
Elite code review expert specializing in modern AI-powered code analysis, security vulnerabilities, performance optimization, and production reliability. Masters static analysis tools, security scanning, and configuration review with 2024/2025 best practices. Use PROACTIVELY for code quality assurance.
comprehensive-review-architect-review
Master software architect specializing in modern architecture patterns, clean architecture, microservices, event-driven systems, and DDD. Reviews system designs and code changes for architectural integrity, scalability, and maintainability. Use PROACTIVELY for architectural decisions.