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 skills add aks-builds/quality-skills --skill accessibility-testinggit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/aks-builds/quality-skillsWrote 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/skills/aks-builds/quality-skills/accessibility-testing)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/aks-builds/quality-skills/accessibility-testing"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/aks-builds/quality-skills/accessibility-testing.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 5.1 | $0.00145 | $0.02792 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00072 | $0.01396 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00029 | $0.00558 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00015 | $0.00279 |
Grade A, and why
accessibility-testing 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 7d 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 — 244 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Accessibility Testing
You are an expert in accessibility testing for web, mobile, and (when applicable) desktop / kiosk software. Your goal is to help engineers integrate automated a11y scans into CI, design tests that catch real accessibility issues, and recognize the limits of automation — most accessibility failures still require human judgment. Don't fabricate WCAG success criteria, tool features, or assistive technology capabilities. When uncertain, point the reader to W3C / WAI documentation, the specific tool's docs, or recognized accessibility consultants.
Initial Assessment
Check .agents/qa-context.md (fallback: .claude/qa-context.md) before answering. Pay attention to:
- Conformance target — WCAG 2.1 AA is the standard most regulations point at. WCAG 2.2 (2023) adds criteria. Section 508 (US federal) and the EAA / European Accessibility Act (in force June 2025) reference WCAG.
- Audience — public site, internal tool, regulated industry (healthcare, finance, government). Drives investment level.
- Stack — automated tools vary by platform (web vs iOS vs Android). Manual testing applies everywhere.
- Maturity — first-time a11y program, ongoing maintenance, or remediation after audit.
- Specific failures known — past complaints, lawsuits, audit findings.
If the file does not exist, ask: conformance target, audience / regulatory context, platform(s), current a11y maturity.
What automated a11y testing can and cannot do
| Automation catches | Automation misses |
|---|---|
| Missing alt attributes | Alt text that's present but useless ("image.jpg") |
| Form inputs without labels | Labels that say wrong things |
| Color contrast violations on rendered HTML | Contrast in dynamically generated SVGs / canvases |
| Heading structure issues | Reading order that makes no sense |
| Missing landmarks | Landmarks named non-meaningfully |
ARIA validity (e.g., aria-hidden errors) |
ARIA used to lie ("button" role on something that isn't a button) |
| Some keyboard-trap conditions | Most keyboard usability issues |
| Missing language declaration | Wrong language declaration |
What ships with it
1 file beside SKILL.md in the same directory: the scripts, references and assets a skill reads on demand. Not counted in the per-session cost; read them before you install if any of them is executable.
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.
- 7d ago First seen · 244 lines · 145 tokens per session scan A 40f033b38b4e
accessibility-testing is a skill published in the GitHub repository aks-builds/quality-skills (2 stars, last pushed 4d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 145 tokens to every session and 2,792 once invoked, about $0.0007 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 skills, from other repositories
test-case-writer
Use when someone asks to generate test cases, write test cases from a user story, create test cases from a BRD, design test cases from a mockup or wireframe, or produce a test case table from requirements.
api-testing
API testing checks a software service directly through its endpoints, using OpenAPI or Swagger documentation or automated test cases. It can produce and run scripts that test requests and responses.
automated-e2e-testing
A workflow for turning manual web-app test cases into Playwright end-to-end tests and running them. End-to-end tests check a complete user flow through the website.
test-strategy
A method for deciding how a feature should be tested by turning risks into testing scope, depth, and priorities. TDD, or test-driven development, is not the focus here; this works at the system level through UI, API, manual, and specialist testing.
regression-testing
A workflow for deciding which existing tests should run after a code change. Regression testing checks that a change has not broken features that already worked.
exploratory-testing
A method for exploratory testing, where a tester learns an unfamiliar system while looking for risks instead of following only predefined test cases. It produces structured notes about the system, risks, test ideas, bugs, and unanswered questions.