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 Link table cells to headers using IDs. Check native semantics first, then inspect keyboard behavior, focus flow, accessible names, and screen-reader output where relevant.
.claude/skills/thedaviddias-td-headers-attr/SKILL.md| Test case | Without → With | Effect | Δ tokens | Δ turns |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| case-22 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | 10% | 0% |
| case-14 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | -15% | 0% |
| case-19 | ✓→✗ | ▼ Worse | -27% | 0% |
| case-02 | ✓→✓ | ＝ Same ✓ | 55% | 0% |
| case-03 | ✓→✓ | ＝ Same ✓ | -3% | 0% |
In complex tables with multi-level headers, explicit header-to-cell linking ensures screen readers accurately announce the relationship between data and its context.
headers attribute for complex tables where scope isn't enoughheaders attribute references valid id values of <th> elementsVerify that td headers attributes reference valid and existing th IDs.
Correct the headers attribute to reference the appropriate th IDs.
Explain when to use the headers attribute instead of scope for complex table structures.
Review the rendered markup and interactive states that affect Link table cells to headers using IDs. 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/td-headers-attr
| Case | Status | Duration (ms) | Turns | Tokens | Tool calls | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Without | With | Δ | Without | With | Δ | Without | With | Δ | Without | With | Δ | ||
case-02 | pass→pass | 2,478 | 2,811 | +13% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 476 | 737 | +55% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-03 | pass→pass | 9,414 | 8,229 | -13% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,816 | 1,756 | -3% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-22 | fail→pass | 10,529 | 9,876 | -6% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,022 | 2,225 | +10% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-01 | pass→pass | 8,379 | 6,504 | -22% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,662 | 1,536 | -8% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-04 | pass→pass | 5,774 | 4,229 | -27% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,150 | 1,130 | -2% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-05 | pass→pass | 2,511 | 2,607 | +4% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 514 | 749 | +46% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-06 | pass→pass | 17,528 | 13,559 | -23% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,953 | 2,758 | -7% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-07 | pass→pass | 2,261 | 2,263 | +0% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 453 | 689 | +52% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-08 | pass→pass | 9,009 | 8,628 | -4% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,530 | 1,770 | +16% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-09 | pass→pass | 16,715 | 11,677 | -30% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,550 | 2,211 | -13% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-10 | pass→pass | 14,468 | 11,584 | -20% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,531 | 2,333 | -8% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-11 | fail→fail | 3,601 | 2,680 | -26% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 690 | 826 | +20% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-12 | pass→pass | 10,190 | 5,699 | -44% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,903 | 1,362 | -28% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-13 | pass→pass | 8,766 | 6,558 | -25% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,506 | 1,424 | -5% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-14 | fail→pass | 11,881 | 9,082 | -24% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,100 | 1,789 | -15% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-15 | pass→pass | 3,249 | 3,084 | -5% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 623 | 842 | +35% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-16 | pass→pass | 5,752 | 3,055 | -47% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,023 | 807 | -21% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-17 | pass→pass | 2,705 | 5,087 | +88% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 553 | 1,274 | +130% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-18 | pass→pass | 12,628 | 7,453 | -41% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,250 | 1,646 | -27% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-19 | pass→fail | 13,368 | 8,117 | -39% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,333 | 1,694 | -27% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-20 | fail→fail | 4,715 | 4,569 | -3% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 827 | 1,007 | +22% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-21 | pass→pass | 12,519 | 12,009 | -4% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,342 | 2,626 | +12% | 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. 1 case got worse with the skill loaded, and it is 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.