Accessibility Tester
Free, no signup. Audit a rendered page with axe-core for WCAG 2.2 A/AA patterns, then turn each finding into a targeted engineering fix.
Checks run from our server; we fetch the URL you enter and don't keep the results. This launches a metered browser audit. Stylesheets are allowed for computed accessibility checks; media and fonts are blocked. Automated checks catch only part of WCAG issues and never replace manual testing. Anonymous run-level outcome counters may be used for aggregate research; URLs, domains, IPs, and identifiers are never included, and no statistic is released below 100 runs.
Sample report
Illustrative example — axe rule output for fixed markup
CRITICAL · Images must have alternate text (1)
Add a meaningful alt value when the image conveys information, or alt="" when it is decorative.
<img class="hero" src="product.jpg">Element does not have an alt attribute.
The example shows an automated rule result, not a judgment about what the correct alternative text should say.
How to use it
- Enter a public page URL and run the metered browser audit.
- Start with critical and serious violations, but review every rule and affected selector.
- Use the HTML excerpt, error summary, and targeted repair guidance to locate the component.
- Retest after fixing, then complete manual keyboard, screen-reader, zoom, content, and task-flow checks.
Current target
Recent checks appear below. Use the star beside any saved site, page, or list to favorite it.
Create a named list
Target filled from your local choices.
Site passport Local context for this saved site
Local data
Saved targets, named lists, and recent check summaries remain only in this browser.
Rate this tool
What the results mean
Each card is one axe rule with an impact level and affected-node count. Selectors identify elements in the audited DOM; HTML and error summaries explain the observed pattern. A zero-violation run only means no enabled automated rule fired.
How it works
A metered browser loads the public page with stylesheets enabled for computed checks while media and fonts are blocked. It runs axe-core against WCAG 2.2 A/AA-tagged rules and returns bounded violations and nodes. The page formats severity and adds rule-specific repair guidance.
Features
- Rendered-browser axe-core audit.
- WCAG 2.2 A/AA rule selection.
- Impact, selectors, HTML excerpts, and error summaries.
- Targeted repair guidance for supported axe rules.
- Explicit not-evaluated state when the browser audit cannot complete.
Limitations
Automation catches only part of accessibility. The audit does not use your login, perform interactions, cover every application state, judge meaningful alt text, or replace testing with disabled users and assistive technologies. Blocked media/fonts and dynamic timing can also change the rendered state.
Frequently asked questions
Does passing axe mean a page is WCAG compliant?
No. Automated checks detect only a portion of accessibility barriersWeb accessibility means designing sites so people with disabilities can use them, per the W3C's WCAG guidelines. It overlaps with SEO in specific, checkable ways — alt text, heading structure, descriptive link text, captions, and page speed all serve both audiences — but Google has said accessibility itself is not a ranking factor, and most WCAG success criteria (keyboard focus order, ARIA live regions, form labels) have no SEO effect at all.. WCAG conformance requires manual keyboard, screen-reader, content, focus, error, and task-flow testing in addition to automation.
Which WCAG level does this test?
The browser run uses axe-core rules tagged for WCAG 2.2 Level A and AA. The result is a rule-violation report, not a conformance certificate.
Why might the audit miss a modal or logged-in screen?
The metered browser loads the supplied public URL without your authenticated session or scripted interaction. Hidden states, personalized flows, consent choices, and components opened later may not be evaluated.
What does a violation severity mean?
Critical, serious, moderate, and minor are axe impact levels used to prioritize review. Impact does not replace the associated WCAG criterion, user context, or engineering investigation.
Feature requests for Accessibility Checker
Upvote what you want most. New ideas can be submitted from the floating Feedback menu; requests appear here once approved, and the most-wanted rise to the top.
You won't be emailed about that request anymore.
Loading…
➕ Request a feature
New requests are reviewed before they appear here.
Common issues & how to fix them
- Errors Image lacks an accessible text alternative Fix: Add concise alt text that conveys the image’s purpose, or alt="" when the image is purely decorative.
- Errors Form control lacks a label Fix: Associate a visible label with the control using for/id, or supply an accurate accessible name with aria-label/aria-labelledby when no visible label fits.
- Errors Link lacks an accessible name Fix: Give the link meaningful text or an accessible name that identifies its destination instead of relying on an unlabeled icon.
- Warnings Heading levels are skipped Fix: Restructure headings into a logical outline without skipping levels merely for visual sizing; use CSS for appearance.
- Warnings Document language is missing Fix: Set the root html lang attribute to the page’s primary BCP 47 language tag, and mark passages that switch language.
- Warnings Duplicate element IDs are present Fix: Make every id unique and update labels, ARIA references, fragments, and scripts that referenced the renamed element.
- Errors Text color contrast fails Fix: Adjust foreground or background colors until the measured ratio meets WCAG AA for the affected text size and state.
- Information Keyboard behavior requires manual verification Fix: Tab through every interactive control, test activation and focus order, and fix any unreachable, trapped, or invisible focus state before sign-off.