web-quality-audit▌
addyosmani/web-quality-skills · updated Apr 8, 2026
MDX-style export adds YAML metadata + attribution linking explainx.ai and this canonical listing URL.
Comprehensive quality review covering performance, accessibility, SEO, and best practices across 150+ checks.
- ›Analyzes code and projects across four audit categories: Performance (Core Web Vitals, resource optimization, loading strategy), Accessibility (perceivable, operable, understandable, robust), SEO (crawlability, on-page, technical), and Best Practices (security, standards, UX patterns)
- ›Categorizes findings by severity (Critical, High, Medium, Low) with specific, actionable recomm
Web quality audit
Comprehensive quality review based on Google Lighthouse audits. Covers Performance, Accessibility, SEO, and Best Practices across 150+ checks.
How it works
- Analyze the provided code/project for quality issues
- Categorize findings by severity (Critical, High, Medium, Low)
- Provide specific, actionable recommendations
- Include code examples for fixes
Audit categories
Performance (40% of typical issues)
Core Web Vitals — Must pass for good page experience:
- LCP (Largest Contentful Paint) < 2.5s. The largest visible element must render quickly. Optimize images, fonts, and server response time.
- INP (Interaction to Next Paint) < 200ms. User interactions must feel instant. Reduce JavaScript execution time and break up long tasks.
- CLS (Cumulative Layout Shift) < 0.1. Content must not jump around. Set explicit dimensions on images, embeds, and ads.
Resource Optimization:
- Compress images. Use WebP/AVIF with fallbacks. Serve correctly sized images via
srcset. - Minimize JavaScript. Remove unused code. Use code splitting. Defer non-critical scripts.
- Optimize CSS. Extract critical CSS. Remove unused styles. Avoid
@import. - Efficient fonts. Use
font-display: swap. Preload critical fonts. Subset to needed characters.
Loading Strategy:
- Preconnect to origins. Add
<link rel="preconnect">for third-party domains. - Preload critical assets. LCP images, fonts, and above-fold CSS.
- Lazy load below-fold content. Images, iframes, and heavy components.
- Cache effectively. Long cache TTLs for static assets. Immutable caching for hashed files.
Accessibility (30% of typical issues)
Perceivable:
- Text alternatives. Every
<img>has meaningfulalttext. Decorative images usealt="". - Color contrast. Minimum 4.5:1 for normal text, 3:1 for large text (WCAG AA).
- Don't rely on color alone. Use icons, patterns, or text alongside color indicators.
- Captions and transcripts. Video has captions. Audio has transcripts.
Operable:
- Keyboard accessible. All functionality available via keyboard. No keyboard traps.
- Focus visible. Clear focus indicators on all interactive elements.
- Skip links. Provide "Skip to main content" for keyboard users.
- Sufficient time. Users can extend time limits. No auto-advancing content without controls.
Understandable:
- Page language. Set
langattribute on<html>. - Consistent navigation. Same navigation structure across pages.
- Error identification. Form errors clearly described and associated with fields.
- Labels and instructions. All form inputs have associated labels.
Robust:
- Valid HTML. No duplicate IDs. Properly nested elements.
- ARIA used correctly. Prefer native elements. ARIA roles match behavior.
- Name, role, value. Interactive elements have accessible names and correct roles.
SEO (15% of typical issues)
Crawlability:
- Valid robots.txt. Doesn't block important resources.
- XML sitemap. Lists all important pages. Submitted to Search Console.
- Canonical URLs. Prevent duplicate content issues.
- No noindex on important pages. Check meta robots and headers.
On-Page SEO:
- Unique title tags. 50-60 characters. Primary keyword included.
- Meta descriptions. 150-160 characters. Compelling and unique.
- Heading hierarchy. Single
<h1>. Logical heading structure. - Descriptive link text. Not "click here" or "read more".
Technical SEO:
- Mobile-friendly. Responsive design. Tap targets ≥ 48px.
- HTTPS. Secure connection required.
- Fast loading. Performance directly impacts ranking.
- Structured data. JSON-LD for rich snippets (Article, Product, FAQ, etc.).
Best practices (15% of typical issues)
Security:
- HTTPS everywhere. No mixed content. HSTS enabled.
- No vulnerable libraries. Keep dependencies updated.
- CSP headers. Content Security Policy to prevent XSS.
- No exposed source maps. In production builds.
Modern Standards:
- No deprecated APIs. Replace
document.write, synchronous XHR, etc. - Valid doctype. Use
<!DOCTYPE html>. - Charset declared.
<meta charset="UTF-8">as first element in<head>. - No browser errors. Clean console. No CORS issues.
UX Patterns:
- No intrusive interstitials. Especially on mobile.
- Clear permission requests. Only ask when needed, with context.
- No misleading buttons. Buttons do what they say.
Severity levels
| Level | Description | Action |
|---|---|---|
| Critical | Security vulnerabilities, complete failures | Fix immediately |
| High | Core Web Vitals failures, major a11y barriers | Fix before launch |
| Medium | Performance opportunities, SEO improvements | Fix within sprint |
| Low | Minor optimizations, code quality | Fix when convenient |
Audit output format
When performing an audit, structure findings as:
## Audit results
### Critical issues (X found)
- **[Category]** Issue description. File: `path/to/file.js:123`
- **Impact:** Why this matters
- **Fix:** Specific code change or recommendation
### High priority (X found)
...
### Summary
- Performance: X issues (Y critical)
- Accessibility: X issues (Y critical)
- SEO: X issues
- Best Practices: X issues
### Recommended priority
1. First fix this because...
2. Then address...
3. Finally optimize...
Quick checklist
Before every deploy
- Core Web Vitals passing
- No accessibility errors (axe/Lighthouse)
- No console errors
- HTTPS working
- Meta tags present
Weekly review
- Check Search Console for issues
- Review Core Web Vitals trends
- Update dependencies
- Test with screen reader
Monthly deep dive
- Full Lighthouse audit
- Performance profiling
- Accessibility audit with real users
- SEO keyword review
References
For detailed guidelines on specific areas:
How to use web-quality-audit on Cursor
AI-first code editor with Composer
Prerequisites
Before installing skills in Cursor, ensure your development environment meets these requirements:
- ›Cursor installed and configured on your development machine
- ›Node.js version 16.0+ with npm package manager (verify with
node --version) - ›Active project directory or workspace where you want to add web-quality-audit
Execute installation command
Execute the skills CLI command in your project's root directory to begin installation:
The skills CLI fetches web-quality-audit from GitHub repository addyosmani/web-quality-skills and configures it for Cursor.
Select Cursor when prompted
The CLI will show a list of available agents. Use arrow keys to navigate and space to select Cursor:
Verify installation
Confirm successful installation by checking the skill directory location:
Reload or restart Cursor to activate web-quality-audit. Access the skill through slash commands (e.g., /web-quality-audit) or your agent's skill management interface.
Security & Verification Notice
We perform automated surface-level scans (Gen AI Scanner, Socket, Snyk) during installation. These checks detect common vulnerabilities but do not guarantee complete security. Always review skill source code and verify the publisher's reputation before production use.
Skills execute code in your development environment. Always verify the publisher's identity, review recent commits, and test in isolated environments before production deployment.
List & Monetize Your Skill
Submit your Claude Code skill and start earning
Use Cases▌
User Story & Requirements Generation
Create detailed user stories, acceptance criteria, and feature specs
Example
Generate user stories for 'password reset feature' with acceptance criteria, edge cases, and test scenarios
Reduce spec writing time by 50%, ensure comprehensive coverage
Competitive Analysis
Research competitors, compare features, identify gaps
Example
Analyze 5 competitor products, create feature comparison matrix, suggest differentiation opportunities
Complete competitive research in 2 hours instead of 2 days
Roadmap Prioritization
Evaluate features using frameworks (RICE, ICE, Kano) and create prioritized backlogs
Example
Score 20 feature ideas using RICE framework, generate prioritized roadmap with rationale
Make data-driven prioritization decisions faster
Stakeholder Communication
Draft PRDs, status updates, and stakeholder presentations
Example
Create executive summary of Q3 roadmap, monthly progress report, feature launch announcement
Save 3-5 hours/week on communication overhead
Implementation Guide▌
Prerequisites
- ›Claude Desktop or compatible AI client
- ›Access to product documentation and roadmap tools (Jira, Notion, etc.)
- ›Understanding of product management frameworks (RICE, Jobs-to-be-Done, etc.)
- ›Stakeholder contact information and communication channels
Time Estimate
30-60 minutes to see productivity improvements
Installation Steps
- 1.Install product management skill
- 2.Start with user story generation for known feature
- 3.Progress to competitive analysis: research 2-3 competitors
- 4.Use for roadmap prioritization: apply RICE/ICE scoring
- 5.Draft stakeholder communications and refine based on feedback
- 6.Build template library for recurring PM tasks
- 7.Share effective prompts with product team
Common Pitfalls
- ⚠Not validating competitive research—verify facts before sharing
- ⚠Accepting user stories without involving engineering team
- ⚠Over-relying on frameworks without qualitative judgment
- ⚠Not customizing outputs to company culture and communication style
- ⚠Skipping stakeholder validation of generated requirements
Best Practices▌
✓ Do
- +Validate research and competitive analysis with real data
- +Collaborate with engineering when generating technical requirements
- +Customize frameworks and templates to your company context
- +Use skill for first drafts, refine with stakeholder input
- +Document successful prompt patterns for PM tasks
- +Combine AI efficiency with human judgment and intuition
✗ Don't
- −Don't publish competitive analysis without fact-checking
- −Don't finalize user stories without engineering review
- −Don't make prioritization decisions solely on AI scoring
- −Don't skip customer validation of generated requirements
- −Don't ignore company-specific context and culture
💡 Pro Tips
- ★Provide context: company goals, constraints, customer feedback
- ★Ask for alternatives: 'Show 3 ways to prioritize this roadmap'
- ★Request stakeholder-specific formatting: 'Executive summary vs. engineering spec'
- ★Use skill for 70% generation + 30% customization to company needs
When to Use This▌
✓ Use When
Use for user story writing, competitive research, roadmap prioritization, stakeholder communication, and PRD drafting. Best for reducing repetitive documentation and research work.
✗ Avoid When
Avoid for strategic product vision (requires deep customer empathy), pricing decisions (needs market and financial expertise), or when face-to-face customer discovery is more valuable than speed.
Learning Path▌
- 1Basic: user stories, feature specs, status updates
- 2Intermediate: competitive analysis, prioritization frameworks, PRDs
- 3Advanced: product strategy, go-to-market planning, OKR setting
- 4Expert: product vision, market positioning, business model innovation
Discussion
Product Hunt–style comments (not star reviews)- No comments yet — start the thread.
Ratings
4.5★★★★★28 reviews- ★★★★★Naina Chen· Dec 12, 2024
Solid pick for teams standardizing on skills: web-quality-audit is focused, and the summary matches what you get after install.
- ★★★★★Shikha Mishra· Dec 8, 2024
Registry listing for web-quality-audit matched our evaluation — installs cleanly and behaves as described in the markdown.
- ★★★★★Ganesh Mohane· Dec 4, 2024
web-quality-audit has been reliable in day-to-day use. Documentation quality is above average for community skills.
- ★★★★★Yuki Gonzalez· Dec 4, 2024
We added web-quality-audit from the explainx registry; install was straightforward and the SKILL.md answered most questions upfront.
- ★★★★★Sakshi Patil· Nov 23, 2024
Solid pick for teams standardizing on skills: web-quality-audit is focused, and the summary matches what you get after install.
- ★★★★★Yuki Bhatia· Nov 23, 2024
Keeps context tight: web-quality-audit is the kind of skill you can hand to a new teammate without a long onboarding doc.
- ★★★★★Fatima Nasser· Nov 11, 2024
Registry listing for web-quality-audit matched our evaluation — installs cleanly and behaves as described in the markdown.
- ★★★★★Layla Wang· Nov 3, 2024
web-quality-audit has been reliable in day-to-day use. Documentation quality is above average for community skills.
- ★★★★★Layla Nasser· Oct 22, 2024
Keeps context tight: web-quality-audit is the kind of skill you can hand to a new teammate without a long onboarding doc.
- ★★★★★Chaitanya Patil· Oct 14, 2024
We added web-quality-audit from the explainx registry; install was straightforward and the SKILL.md answered most questions upfront.
showing 1-10 of 28