Menu
Format accessibility audit reports with severity scoring (0-100, A-F grades), scorecard computation, and compliance exports including VPAT/ACR and remediation priorities.
Install with Codex or Claude Copy this prompt, paste it into Codex, Claude, or another assistant, and let it review the skill page and install it for you.
Based on SOC occupation classification
Use for web accessibility work in HTML, JSX, CSS, ARIA, keyboard, forms, contrast, modals, live regions, headings, links, tables, or WCAG review; starts accessibility-lead first and uses tool_search if subagent tools are lazy-loaded.
Developer tools accessibility router for Python, wxPython, desktop accessibility APIs, NVDA add-ons, scanner tooling, CI tooling, and accessibility developer experience.
Document accessibility router for Word, Excel, PowerPoint, PDF, EPUB, Office remediation, PDF remediation, and accessible generated documents.
GitHub workflow accessibility router for PR review, issues, Actions, releases, projects, security alerts, notifications, repository management, and accessible contributor workflows.
Markdown accessibility router for docs, README files, headings, links, tables, alt text, diagrams, generated docs, and publication-ready accessible markdown.
Compute web accessibility scores (0-100, A-F grades) with severity scoring, confidence levels, and remediation tracking across audits.
| name | report-generation |
| description | Format accessibility audit reports with severity scoring (0-100, A-F grades), scorecard computation, and compliance exports including VPAT/ACR and remediation priorities. |
Default output: DOCUMENT-ACCESSIBILITY-AUDIT.md in the project root.
Every audit report MUST include these sections:
Document Score = 100 - (sum of weighted findings)
Weights:
Error (high confidence): -10 points
Error (medium confidence): -7 points
Error (low confidence): -3 points
Warning (high confidence): -3 points
Warning (medium confidence):-2 points
Warning (low confidence): -1 point
Tips: 0 points
Floor: 0 (minimum score)
| Score | Grade | Meaning |
|---|---|---|
| 90-100 | A | Excellent - minor or no issues |
| 75-89 | B | Good - some warnings, few errors |
| 50-74 | C | Needs Work - multiple errors |
| 25-49 | D | Poor - significant accessibility barriers |
| 0-24 | F | Failing - critical barriers, likely unusable with AT |
| Mode | Description | Best For |
|---|---|---|
| By file | Group all issues under each document | Small batches (< 10 files) |
| By issue type | Group all instances of each rule across documents | Seeing patterns |
| By severity | Critical first, then serious, moderate, minor | Prioritizing fixes |
| Level | Criteria |
|---|---|
| Supports | No findings for this WCAG criterion across any document |
| Partially Supports | Some documents pass, some fail |
| Does Not Support | All or most documents fail |
| Not Applicable | Criterion does not apply to scanned document types |
When comparing against a baseline audit report:
| Status | Meaning |
|---|---|
| Fixed | Issue was in previous report but is now resolved |
| New | Issue was not in previous report but appears now |
| Persistent | Issue remains from previous report |
| Regressed | Issue was previously fixed but has returned |
(fixed / previous_total) * 100current_score - previous_score