# WCAG 2.1 Level AA Compliance Assessment Checklist (Enhanced Version 3.1) **LEGAL RISK PRIORITIZED + COMPREHENSIVE TESTING - CHROMIUM BROWSER OPTIMIZED** Based on Official W3C Specification + Litigation Patterns This comprehensive checklist covers ALL WCAG 2.1 Level AA success criteria with LEGAL RISK PRIORITIZATION based on lawsuit frequency patterns while ensuring complete testing coverage using Chromium browser tools and capabilities. Source: https://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG21/ --- ## TESTING METHODOLOGY - CHROMIUM BROWSER OPTIMIZED ### **Primary Testing Tools (Built-in Chromium):** - **Chrome DevTools Accessibility Panel** (F12 → Accessibility tab) - **Chrome DevTools Lighthouse Accessibility Audit** (F12 → Lighthouse → Accessibility) - **Chrome DevTools Elements Panel** (inspect ARIA, semantic markup) - **Chrome DevTools Console** (test focus management, ARIA states) - **Chromium Accessibility Tree** (chrome://accessibility/) - **Keyboard navigation** (Tab, Shift+Tab, Arrow keys, Enter, Space) - **Browser zoom** (Ctrl/Cmd + +/-) - **Responsive design mode** (F12 → Device toggle) ### **Optional Enhancement Extensions (Not Required):** - **axe DevTools** (if available) - Enhanced accessibility scanning - **WAVE** (if available) - Visual accessibility evaluation - **Colour Contrast Analyser** (if available) - Color contrast checking ### **Free Web-Based Validation Tools:** - **W3C Markup Validator:** https://validator.w3.org/ - **W3C CSS Validator:** https://jigsaw.w3.org/css-validator/ - **WebAIM Contrast Checker:** https://webaim.org/resources/contrastchecker/ ### **Chromium-Specific Testing Process for Each Item:** 1. **Open Chrome DevTools** (F12) and navigate to Accessibility panel 2. **Run Lighthouse Accessibility Audit** for automated detection 3. **Inspect Elements** using DevTools for semantic markup verification 4. **Test keyboard navigation** throughout the interface 5. **Check Accessibility Tree** for proper programmatic relationships 6. **Use Console** to test dynamic content and ARIA states 7. **Validate markup** using W3C online tools 8. **Document findings** with DevTools screenshots and specific remediation steps ### **Documentation Requirements:** - Record all failures with specific WCAG 2.1 success criteria references - Include screenshots and visual documentation - Provide specific remediation recommendations with code examples - Note testing method used for each criterion - Document testing environment ### **⚠️ CRITICAL: Professional Reporting Standards** **ALL reports must be client-facing professional documents:** #### Assessor Identity - **ALWAYS use:** "Shortcut Solutions" as the assessor - **NEVER mention:** Augment AI, AI agents, automation, cremote, MCP tools, specific tool names #### Report Language **Use professional terminology:** - ✅ "Comprehensive accessibility testing" - ✅ "Automated scanning combined with manual verification" - ✅ "WCAG 2.1 Level AA compliance assessment" - ✅ "Assistive technology evaluation" **NEVER use:** - ❌ "Using cremote tools" - ❌ "Augment AI Agent" - ❌ "Automated by [tool name]" - ❌ "axe-core v4.8.0" - ❌ "web_page_accessibility_report_cremotemcp" #### Report Header Format ```markdown # ADA Level AA Accessibility Assessment Report ## [Client Company Name] Website **Assessment Date:** [Date] **Assessor:** Shortcut Solutions **Standard:** WCAG 2.1 Level AA **Methodology:** Comprehensive accessibility testing including automated scanning, manual verification, and assistive technology evaluation ``` #### What to NEVER Include - ❌ Tool names (cremote, axe-core versions, etc.) - ❌ AI/automation mentions - ❌ Technical implementation details - ❌ Container paths (/tmp/, etc.) - ❌ MCP tool syntax - ❌ "Powered by" or "Using" statements #### Focus Reports On - ✅ Findings and their impact - ✅ WCAG criteria violations - ✅ User impact descriptions - ✅ Remediation recommendations - ✅ Professional assessment methodology ### **Screenshot Testing Protocol (CRITICAL - Test First):** **Before beginning assessment, verify screenshot functionality:** 1. **Create Documentation Directory:** ```bash mkdir -p docs/screenshots ``` 2. **Test Screenshot Capability:** - Take initial test screenshot to container: `/tmp/test-screenshot.png` - Download to local path: `/full/path/to/docs/screenshots/test-screenshot.png` - Verify file exists and is viewable - **If test fails: STOP and alert user - screenshot documentation is required** 3. **Screenshot Naming Convention:** - Homepage: `homepage-full.png` - Individual pages: `[page-name]-full.png` - Specific issues: `[issue-type]-[page]-evidence.png` - Always use full-page screenshots unless testing specific elements 4. **MCP Tool Screenshot Workflow:** ``` Step 1: web_screenshot_cremotemcp -> /tmp/[filename].png Step 2: file_download_cremotemcp -> /full/absolute/path/docs/screenshots/[filename].png Step 3: Verify download success before proceeding ``` 5. **Screenshot Documentation Requirements:** - **Always save to docs folder, never /tmp folder** (tmp files get cleaned up) - Use absolute paths for all file operations - Test screenshot functionality before running full assessment - Alert user immediately if screenshot capability fails - Include screenshot references in all findings documentation --- ## ⚠️ CRITICAL: COMPLIANCE SCORING METHODOLOGY ### DO NOT CONFUSE TEST EXECUTION SUCCESS WITH COMPLIANCE SCORES **IMPORTANT:** Testing tools may return a "success" status or "100" score that indicates **test execution completed successfully**, NOT that the page is accessible or compliant. ### Understanding Tool Output **Test Execution Status:** - `status: "success"` = Tests ran without errors - `overall_score: 100` = All tests completed successfully - **DOES NOT MEAN:** The page passes accessibility requirements **Compliance Score (What You Calculate):** - Based on actual violations, failures, and issues found - Considers severity, impact, and failure percentages - **THIS is what you report in your assessment** ### Compliance Scoring Formula ``` Base Score: 100 points Deductions: 1. Critical/Serious Violations: - Critical axe-core violations: -10 points each - Serious axe-core violations: -5 points each - Duplicate IDs: -5 points each - Missing landmarks: -10 points 2. Contrast Failures: - 0-10% failure rate: -5 points - 11-20% failure rate: -10 points - 21-30% failure rate: -15 points - 31-40% failure rate: -20 points - 41%+ failure rate: -25 points 3. Keyboard Accessibility: - 1-10 missing focus indicators: -5 points - 11-25 missing focus indicators: -10 points - 26-50 missing focus indicators: -15 points - 51+ missing focus indicators: -20 points - Keyboard traps: -15 points each 4. Form Accessibility: - Missing labels: -5 points per form - No ARIA compliance: -10 points per form - Not keyboard accessible: -10 points per form 5. Moderate/Minor Issues: - Moderate violations: -2 points each - Minor violations: -1 point each Final Compliance Score = Base Score - Total Deductions (minimum 0) ``` ### Compliance Status Thresholds | Score Range | Status | Legal Risk | Description | |-------------|--------|------------|-------------| | **95-100** | FULLY COMPLIANT | VERY LOW | Minor issues only, excellent accessibility | | **80-94** | SUBSTANTIALLY COMPLIANT | LOW | Some moderate issues, good overall accessibility | | **60-79** | PARTIALLY COMPLIANT | MODERATE | Multiple serious issues, significant barriers exist | | **40-59** | MINIMALLY COMPLIANT | HIGH | Major accessibility barriers, urgent remediation needed | | **0-39** | NON-COMPLIANT | CRITICAL | Critical failures, immediate remediation required | ### Example Calculation **Test Results:** - Contrast failures: 70 out of 217 elements (32.3% failure rate) - Axe-core violations: 2 serious violations - Missing focus indicators: 15 elements - Duplicate ARIA IDs: 2 instances **Compliance Score Calculation:** ``` Base Score: 100 Deductions: - 32.3% contrast failure rate: -20 points - 2 serious axe-core violations: -10 points (2 × 5) - 15 missing focus indicators: -10 points - 2 duplicate IDs: -10 points (2 × 5) Final Score: 100 - 20 - 10 - 10 - 10 = 50/100 Status: MINIMALLY COMPLIANT Legal Risk: HIGH ``` ### Correct Reporting Format **✅ CORRECT:** ```markdown **Compliance Score:** 50/100 - MINIMALLY COMPLIANT **Legal Risk:** HIGH **Test Execution:** All tests completed successfully **Score Breakdown:** - Base score: 100 - Contrast failures (32.3%): -20 points - Axe-core violations (2 serious): -10 points - Missing focus indicators (15): -10 points - Duplicate IDs (2): -10 points - **Final Score:** 50/100 **Critical Issues Requiring Immediate Attention:** 1. Color contrast failures affecting 32.3% of elements 2. Missing focus indicators on 15 interactive elements 3. Duplicate ARIA IDs causing assistive technology confusion ``` **❌ INCORRECT:** ```markdown **Overall Score:** 100/100 (with noted issues) ← WRONG! **Compliance Status:** COMPLIANT (with remediation needed) ← CONTRADICTORY! **Contrast Analysis:** - Failed: 70 (32.3%) ← This contradicts "COMPLIANT" ``` ### Page Assessment Template Use this template for each page tested: ```markdown ### [Page Name] ([URL]) **Compliance Score:** [0-100]/100 - [STATUS] **Legal Risk:** [VERY LOW | LOW | MODERATE | HIGH | CRITICAL] **Screenshot:** `screenshots/[filename].png` **Score Breakdown:** - Base score: 100 - Contrast failures: -[X] points ([percentage]% failure rate) - Axe-core violations: -[X] points ([count] violations) - Keyboard issues: -[X] points ([count] issues) - Form issues: -[X] points ([count] issues) - Structural issues: -[X] points ([count] issues) - **Final Score:** [0-100]/100 **Detailed Findings:** **Contrast Analysis:** - Total elements: [number] - Passed: [number] ([percentage]%) - Failed: [number] ([percentage]%) - Impact on score: -[X] points **Keyboard Navigation:** - Interactive elements: [number] - Missing focus indicators: [number] - Keyboard traps: [number] - Impact on score: -[X] points **Axe-Core Violations:** - Critical: [number] (-[X] points) - Serious: [number] (-[X] points) - Moderate: [number] (-[X] points) - Minor: [number] (-[X] points) **Forms:** - Total forms: [number] - Issues: [list or "None"] - ARIA Compliance: [FULL | PARTIAL | NONE] - Impact on score: -[X] points **Remediation Priority:** 1. [Issue] - [Severity] - [Estimated time] 2. [Issue] - [Severity] - [Estimated time] ``` --- ## PHASE 1: CRITICAL LEGAL RISK (Test First - Highest Lawsuit Frequency) ### □ 1.1.1 Non-text Content (Level A) - **HIGHEST LAWSUIT RISK** **Official:** "All non-text content that is presented to the user has a text alternative that serves the equivalent purpose" **Chromium Test Method:** - **Lighthouse Audit:** Run accessibility audit, check for "Images do not have accessible names" - **DevTools Elements:** Inspect each `` element for alt attribute - **Accessibility Tree:** Check computed accessibility names for images (chrome://accessibility/) - **Manual Check:** Verify meaningful images have descriptive alt text, decorative images have `alt=""` or `role="presentation"` - **Console Test:** Run: `document.querySelectorAll('img:not([alt])')` to find missing alt attributes - **Icon Check:** Inspect buttons/links with icons - ensure accessible names exist **Legal Risk:** Most common ADA lawsuit trigger - missing alt text ### □ 1.4.3 Contrast (Minimum) (Level AA) - **HIGHEST LAWSUIT RISK** **Official:** "The visual presentation of text and images of text has a contrast ratio of at least 4.5:1" **Chromium Test Method:** - **Lighthouse Audit:** Check "Background and foreground colors do not have sufficient contrast ratio" - **DevTools Elements:** Select text elements, view Styles panel contrast ratio information - **DevTools Color Picker:** Click color values to see contrast ratio automatically calculated - **Manual Check:** Test normal text (4.5:1 minimum), large text 18pt+/14pt+ bold (3:1 minimum) - **WebAIM Tool:** Use https://webaim.org/resources/contrastchecker/ for verification - **State Testing:** Check hover, focus, disabled states for contrast compliance **Legal Risk:** Extremely common in ADA lawsuits - color contrast violations ### □ 2.1.1 Keyboard (Level A) - **HIGHEST LAWSUIT RISK** **Official:** "All functionality of the content is operable through a keyboard interface" **Chromium Test Method:** - **Manual Navigation:** Tab through entire site using only keyboard (no mouse) - **DevTools Console:** Monitor focus events: `document.addEventListener('focusin', e => console.log(e.target))` - **Focus Testing:** Test all interactive elements respond to Tab, Enter, Space, Arrow keys - **Custom Elements:** Check dropdowns, modals, carousels work with keyboard - **DevTools Accessibility:** Verify focusable elements show in accessibility tree - **Functional Testing:** Ensure all mouse-available functionality accessible via keyboard **Legal Risk:** Frequent lawsuit basis - keyboard inaccessibility ### □ 4.1.2 Name, Role, Value (Level A) - **HIGHEST LAWSUIT RISK** **Official:** "For all user interface components, the name and role can be programmatically determined" **Chromium Test Method:** - **Accessibility Tree:** Check chrome://accessibility/ for all interactive elements - **DevTools Accessibility Panel:** Inspect computed properties for name, role, value - **DevTools Elements:** Verify ARIA roles, labels, and properties in markup - **Console Testing:** Check states: `element.getAttribute('aria-expanded')` etc. - **Lighthouse Audit:** Look for "Form elements do not have associated labels" - **Manual Verification:** Tab through elements, check computed names match expected function **Legal Risk:** Common lawsuit issue - screen reader incompatibility ### □ 2.4.1 Bypass Blocks (Level A) - **HIGH LAWSUIT RISK** **Official:** "A mechanism is available to bypass blocks of content that are repeated on multiple web pages" **Chromium Test Method:** - **Keyboard Testing:** Tab to first element - should be skip link - **DevTools Elements:** Inspect skip link markup and href target - **Focus Testing:** Activate skip link (Enter), verify focus moves to main content - **Visibility Check:** Verify skip link visible when focused (not hidden) - **Lighthouse Audit:** Check for "The page does not contain a heading, skip link, or landmark region" - **Console Verification:** Check skip link target exists: `document.querySelector('#main-content')` **Legal Risk:** Frequently cited in ADA lawsuits - missing skip navigation ### □ 2.4.4 Link Purpose (In Context) (Level A) - **HIGH LAWSUIT RISK** **Official:** "The purpose of each link can be determined from the link text alone or from the link text together with its programmatically determined link context" **Chromium Test Method:** - **DevTools Elements:** Inspect all `` elements for descriptive text content - **Accessibility Tree:** Check computed names for all links - **Console Search:** Find generic links: `document.querySelectorAll('a[href]').forEach(link => { if(link.textContent.trim().toLowerCase().includes('click here')) console.log(link) })` - **Context Check:** Verify "read more" links have aria-label or surrounding context - **Lighthouse Audit:** Look for "Links do not have a discernible name" - **Consistency Check:** Verify identical text leads to same destinations **Legal Risk:** Common lawsuit element - unclear link purposes ### □ 1.3.1 Info and Relationships (Level A) - **HIGH LAWSUIT RISK** **Official:** "Information, structure, and relationships conveyed through presentation can be programmatically determined" **Chromium Test Method:** - **DevTools Elements:** Inspect heading structure (h1→h2→h3, no skipping) - **Accessibility Tree:** Verify semantic structure reflects visual hierarchy - **Console Check:** Audit headings: `document.querySelectorAll('h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6').forEach(h => console.log(h.tagName, h.textContent))` - **List Verification:** Check lists use proper `