What automated accessibility checkers miss.

Automation is useful

Automated checks are good at finding patterns: missing alt attributes, empty buttons, unlabeled fields, duplicate IDs, iframe title problems, and some contrast issues. That is valuable because obvious problems are still problems.

Automation is incomplete

Machines cannot reliably judge whether alt text is meaningful, whether the page makes sense with a screen reader, whether focus order is logical, or whether a form is understandable during real use.

Manual checks that matter

• Use the page with only a keyboard.
• Check visible focus styles.
• Review the page with a screen reader.
• Confirm error messages are clear.
• Review PDFs, videos, charts, and interactive widgets separately.

How to use the SiteCheck report

Use the report to prioritize obvious fixes and create developer tickets. Then use the manual review list to check what the scan cannot prove.

Use the accessibility issue library to understand common findings and practical fixes before deeper manual review.

Practical next step

Run the checker on important templates, then work through the Canadian website accessibility checklist with keyboard and screen reader review.

Recommended next steps

Run a first-pass check Find obvious issues before manual testing. How to use your accessibility report Turn findings into tickets, client summaries, and manual review checklists. Use the issue library Read plain-English fixes for common report findings. Open the Canadian checklist Use keyboard, screen reader, document, and content checks. Generate a statement draft Document known limitations without overclaiming. Accessibility checks by page type Learn how review priorities differ for different page types. Small business guide Triage what matters on a limited budget. Agency checklist Build a repeatable QA process for client projects.