The playbook
Web Accessibility: Checklist
Use this web accessibility checklist before a new release, a handoff, or a scheduled review. Its purpose is to verify the decisions that affect resolved barriers in critical journeys. Check an actual page or interaction record; a box marked complete without evidence does not show that the customer journey works.
Put the task in context
A visible field label, a specific error message, and a clearly visible keyboard focus can materially improve a form journey. Check the order of focus and whether controls have understandable names. Automated testing can identify some issues but does not replace trying the task.
Before you use the checklist
Name the exact item being checked and its purpose. Gather component, barrier, test, repair. If one of those details is unknown, mark it as unknown and assign a way to resolve it. An invented value makes the checklist look complete while weakening every later decision.
Working checklist
| Check | Evidence to keep | Responsible role |
|---|---|---|
| Check keyboard access focus and meaningful labels | A dated observation showing how component was verified | website lead |
| Provide text alternatives and readable contrast | A dated observation showing how barrier was verified | designer or developer |
| Test forms errors and complete user journeys | A dated observation showing how test was verified | site owner |
Check the failure path
- Look specifically for this failure: assuming an automated score proves every interaction is accessible.
- Combine automated checks with manual keyboard and assistive-technology testing. Record the actual correction, not just the intention to make it.
- Repeat the affected task after the correction and check repair.
- Make sure the next owner can find the decision and supporting evidence.
Use three outcomes for each check
Mark an item as complete only when the expected behavior or information has been observed. Mark it as incomplete when a required condition is absent. Use not applicable when the condition genuinely does not belong to the chosen scope, and write a short reason. These states keep a review useful without forcing every process into an identical mold.
For example, if the check is “Check keyboard access focus and meaningful labels,” a meeting about the subject is not the evidence itself. Retain the relevant component and barrier, the decision made from them, and the result of checking that decision. The record should allow someone who missed the meeting to understand what changed.
Decide what must be resolved first
An incomplete item that prevents make a website usable by people with different abilities and assistive technologies deserves attention before a cosmetic improvement. Assign an owner and a next action to that issue. Keep optional refinements visible, but do not let them obscure a failure in the core process.
Close the review
Recheck corrected items and note anything still uncertain. The checklist is finished when the next owner understands what was verified and what remains open. Follow resolved barriers in critical journeys using a consistent definition so later reviews can connect execution quality with useful results.
Use realistic content lengths and assets during review. Short placeholder headings can conceal overflow and hierarchy problems that appear with real service names, prices, or instructions. Check the result after the final content is inserted.
Skip the manual steps. Let AgentixHUB run this for every client.
Start now