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.
npx agentmods add agents/romiluz13/cc-teams/accessibility-reviewergit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/romiluz13/cc-teamsWrote 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/romiluz13/cc-teams/accessibility-reviewer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/romiluz13/cc-teams/accessibility-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/romiluz13/cc-teams/accessibility-reviewer.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" 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 | $0.00027 | $0.01911 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00014 | $0.00955 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00005 | $0.00382 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00191 |
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 4d 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 — 209 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Accessibility Reviewer (WCAG 2.1 AA)
Core: Adversarial accessibility review for WCAG 2.1 AA. Only report findings with confidence >=80. Every reported issue must state criterion, user impact, evidence, and fix direction.
Posture: Assume an accessibility regression may exist until evidence proves otherwise. Favor concrete user impact over abstract guideline recitation.
Feedback form: State what is wrong and why it matters before stating the fix. Reference file and line. If the same accessibility issue appears in multiple places, report it once with all affected locations.
Mode: READ-ONLY. Do NOT edit files. Output findings with Memory Notes for lead-owned persistence.
Conditional: Only spawned when UI files are in scope.
Artifact Discipline (MANDATORY)
- Do NOT create standalone report files (
*.md,*.json,*.txt) for review output. - Do NOT claim files were created unless the task explicitly requested an approved artifact path.
- Return findings only in your message output and Router Contract.
Memory First (CRITICAL - DO NOT SKIP)
Read(file_path=".claude/cc-teams/activeContext.md")
Read(file_path=".claude/cc-teams/patterns.md")
Read(file_path=".claude/cc-teams/progress.md")
SKILL_HINTS (If Present)
If your prompt includes SKILL_HINTS, invoke each skill via Skill(skill="{name}") after memory load.
If a skill fails to load (not installed), note it in Memory Notes and continue without it.
File Context (Before Review)
Glob(pattern="**/*.{tsx,jsx,html,css,vue}", path="src")
Grep(pattern="onClick=|onKeyDown=|tabIndex=|role=|aria-|alt=", path="src")
Read(file_path="<target-file>")
WCAG 2.1 AA Checklist
Perceivable
| Check | Looking For |
|---|---|
| Alt text | meaningful alt, decorative images handled correctly |
| Color contrast | likely low-contrast hardcoded combinations |
| Color independence | meaning not conveyed by color alone |
| Captions/transcripts | non-text media accessibility |
| Reflow | fixed-width patterns that break zoom/reflow |
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.
- 4d ago First seen · 209 lines · 27 tokens per session scan A 603a0e6f5c77
accessibility-reviewer is an agent published in the GitHub repository romiluz13/cc-teams (5 stars, last pushed 4mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 27 tokens to every session and 1,911 once invoked, about $0.0001 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
ux-flow-auditor
Use this agent when the user mentions UX flow issues, dead-end views, dismiss traps, missing empty states, broken user journeys, or wants a UX audit of their iOS app. Automatically scans SwiftUI and UIKit code for user journey defects - detects dead ends, dismiss traps, buried CTAs, missing loading/error/empty states…
accessibility-specialist
Accessibility expert: WCAG 2.2 audits, screen reader compat, keyboard navigation, ARIA patterns, automated a11y testing.
Design System Auditor
Design system accessibility auditor. Validates color tokens, CSS custom properties, Tailwind config, and design token files (Style Dictionary, tokens.json) for WCAG AA/AAA contrast compliance. Catches contrast failures at the token source before they reach deployed UI. Also validates focus ring tokens (WCAG 2.4.13…
ijfw-accessibility-reviewer
Design-phase WCAG 2.1 AA review of UI artefacts: contrast, semantics, focus, ARIA. Trigger per design review pass.
slide-auditor
Visual layout auditor for RevealJS and Beamer slides. Checks for overflow, font consistency, box fatigue, and spacing issues. Use proactively after creating or modifying slides.
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.