Loading skill
Install any skill in seconds. Free to start, no credit card required.
Get Started Free →Use when reviewing rendered HTML, interactive components, or design-system patterns related to Use unique IDs for ARIA references. Check native semantics first, then inspect keyboard behavior, focus flow, accessible names, and screen-reader output where relevant.
.claude/skills/thedaviddias-duplicate-id-aria/SKILL.md| Test case | Without → With | Effect | Δ tokens | Δ turns |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| case-04 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | -7% | 0% |
| case-10 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | -6% | 0% |
| case-17 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | 13% | 0% |
| case-15 | ✓→✗ | ▼ Worse | 15% | 0% |
| case-22 | ✓→✗ | ▼ Worse | 22% | 0% |
When ARIA attributes point to duplicate IDs, assistive technologies may read the wrong label or description, providing misleading information to the user.
Identify elements where an ARIA attribute references an id that appears multiple times in the DOM.
Ensure all elements referenced by ARIA attributes have unique IDs and update the references accordingly.
Explain how unique IDs are essential for establishing reliable relationships between ARIA attributes and their targets.
Review the rendered markup and interactive states that affect Use unique IDs for ARIA references. Flag exact elements, roles, labels, focus behavior, or keyboard interactions that violate the rule, and note how to verify the fix with browser accessibility tooling or assistive tech.
For full implementation details, code examples, and framework-specific guidance, see references/rule.md.
Rule page: https://frontendchecklist.io/en/rules/accessibility/duplicate-id-aria
| Case | Status | Duration (ms) | Turns | Tokens | Tool calls | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Without | With | Δ | Without | With | Δ | Without | With | Δ | Without | With | Δ | ||
case-09 | pass→pass | 12,912 | 10,175 | -21% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,409 | 2,028 | -16% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-01 | pass→pass | 11,435 | 8,797 | -23% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,341 | 2,041 | -13% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-02 | pass→pass | 12,645 | 13,512 | +7% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,382 | 3,168 | +33% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-03 | pass→pass | 13,635 | 12,423 | -9% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,270 | 2,475 | +9% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-04 | fail→pass | 17,915 | 15,604 | -13% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 3,891 | 3,609 | -7% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-05 | pass→pass | 4,082 | 4,234 | +4% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 790 | 1,063 | +35% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-06 | pass→pass | 12,444 | 7,313 | -41% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,610 | 1,583 | -39% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-07 | pass→pass | 8,998 | 6,910 | -23% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,721 | 1,589 | -8% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-08 | pass→pass | 10,558 | 9,563 | -9% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,954 | 2,014 | +3% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-10 | fail→pass | 13,115 | 11,994 | -9% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,408 | 2,259 | -6% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-11 | pass→pass | 12,273 | 10,049 | -18% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,458 | 2,450 | -0% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-12 | pass→pass | 11,548 | 10,154 | -12% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,487 | 2,301 | -7% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-13 | pass→pass | 12,641 | 10,358 | -18% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,104 | 2,134 | +1% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-14 | pass→pass | 9,729 | 7,293 | -25% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,089 | 1,686 | -19% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-15 | pass→fail | 11,288 | 9,715 | -14% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,102 | 2,425 | +15% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-16 | pass→pass | 9,271 | 10,706 | +15% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,829 | 2,553 | +40% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-17 | fail→pass | 12,826 | 12,848 | +0% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,517 | 2,835 | +13% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-18 | pass→pass | 10,357 | 8,818 | -15% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,684 | 1,922 | +14% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-19 | pass→pass | 7,603 | 7,271 | -4% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,614 | 1,781 | +10% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-20 | pass→pass | 6,701 | 6,609 | -1% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,276 | 1,672 | +31% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-21 | pass→pass | 6,621 | 6,011 | -9% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,450 | 1,491 | +3% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-22 | pass→fail | 8,200 | 8,231 | +0% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,584 | 1,928 | +22% | 0 | 0 | — |
DecimalAI ran this skill against gemini-3.6-flash twice over the same eval suite — once with the skill loaded and once without — and compared the two runs case by case. 22 cases were attempted. The headline lift of +5 percentage points is the difference between those two pass rates over the 22 comparable cases. 2 cases got worse with the skill loaded, and they are included in that figure.
Without the skill loaded, the model failed this case. With it loaded, the same prompt on the same model passed. This is one improved case from the latest verified run; every case, including any that regressed, is in the table above.
Other measured skills in the registry, with their headline benchmark lift.