The playbook
Alt Text: Review Process
A useful alt text review ends with a supported decision for each item examined. Define the evidence required before opening the report: image, purpose, text alternative, long description. These fields give reviewers a shared basis for agreeing what is working, what needs attention, and who should act.
Put the task in context
For a linked image, the text alternative should communicate the link's purpose. For a chart, provide the important finding and an accessible explanation of the data. Purely decorative images usually need an empty alternative rather than a verbose description that adds no useful information.
Set the review boundary
Choose the records or journeys that matter to the current question. Include a normal case, a recently changed case, and an exception where available. This is a diagnostic sample, not a claim that every item has been checked. Record how the sample was selected and what would justify expanding it.
Use explicit review criteria
| Criterion | Review question |
|---|---|
| Determine whether an image is informative functional or decorative | Is the supporting image current and traceable? |
| Describe necessary information in the current context | Does purpose support the decision being made? |
| Check image links buttons and complex diagrams separately | Can the next owner verify long description? |
Inspect the evidence before assigning a result
For each item, compare the intended behavior with the observed behavior. Pay particular attention to stuffing keywords into every text alternative. If it appears, record where it occurs and which assumption it contradicts. Distinguish a verified defect from an unanswered question and from a preference about how the work should look.
Where the evidence supports the known correction, describe the purpose and provide longer explanations when needed. Give that action to an accountable owner with a description of the expected result. If you cannot yet identify the cause, assign a diagnostic action rather than prescribing a speculative repair.
Record a decision that can be acted on
| Decision | When to use it |
|---|---|
| Keep | The current state serves the intended task and the evidence is adequate. |
| Revise | A specific gap is confirmed and the proposed action addresses it. |
| Investigate | Important information is missing or conflicting. |
| Retire or combine | The item has no distinct useful purpose in the current scope. |
Verify corrections and expand selectively
Recheck the affected page or query record after the owner completes the action. Then inspect other items sharing the relevant cause. A shared template, process rule, or data source may justify expanding the review. Similar wording or appearance alone is a weaker reason.
Turn the review into a decision summary
Summarize the affected scope, confirmed findings, actions, and open questions. Connect the findings to informative images with useful alternatives using the same definition as the baseline. A good summary lets the responsible person decide what happens next without reading every working note.
Use query and landing-page context when comparing results. A page serving a broad informational query has a different job from a page answering a purchase question. Review whether the next step remains useful to the person arriving.
Skip the manual steps. Let AgentixSEO run this for every client.
Start now