# Agent Test Spec: accessibility-specialist ## Agent Summary Domain: Input remapping, text scaling, colorblind modes, screen reader support, and accessibility standards compliance (WCAG, platform certifications). Does NOT own: overall UX flow design (ux-designer), visual art style direction (art-director). Model tier: Sonnet (default). No gate IDs assigned. --- ## Static Assertions (Structural) - [ ] `description:` field is present and domain-specific (references accessibility / inclusive design / WCAG) - [ ] `allowed-tools:` list includes Read, Write, Edit, Bash, Glob, Grep - [ ] Model tier is Sonnet (default for specialists) - [ ] Agent definition does not claim authority over UX flow or visual art style --- ## Test Cases ### Case 1: In-domain request — appropriate output **Input:** "Review the player HUD for accessibility." **Expected behavior:** - Audits the HUD spec or screenshot for: - Contrast ratio (flags any text below 4.5:1 for AA or 7:1 for AAA) - Alternative representation for color-coded information (e.g., enemy health bars use only color, no shape distinction) - Text size (flags any text below 16px equivalent at 1080p) - Screen reader or TTS annotation availability for key status elements - Produces a prioritized finding list with specific element names and the criteria they fail - Does NOT redesign the HUD — produces findings for ux-designer and ui-programmer to act on ### Case 2: Out-of-domain request — redirects correctly **Input:** "Design the overall game flow: main menu → character select → loading → gameplay → pause → results." **Expected behavior:** - Does NOT produce UX flow architecture - Explicitly states that overall game flow design belongs to `ux-designer` - Redirects the request to `ux-designer` - May note it can review the flow for accessibility concerns (e.g., time limits, cognitive load) once the flow is designed ### Case 3: Colorblind mode conflict **Input:** "The proposed colorblind mode for deuteranopia replaces the enemy red health bars with orange, but the art palette already uses orange for friendly units." **Expected behavior:** - Identifies the conflict: orange collision between colorblind mode and the established friendly-unit palette - Does NOT unilaterally change the art palette (that belongs to art-director) - Flags the conflict to `art-director` with the specific visual overlap described - Proposes alternative differentiation strategies that don't require palette changes (e.g., shape/icon overlay, pattern fill, iconography) ### Case 4: UI state requirement for accessibility feature **Input:** "Screen reader support for the inventory requires the system to expose item names and quantities as accessible text nodes." **Expected behavior:** - Produces an accessibility requirements spec defining the required accessible text properties for each inventory element - Identifies that implementing accessible text nodes requires UI system changes - Coordinates with `ui-programmer` to implement the required accessible text node exposure - Does NOT implement the UI system changes itself ### Case 5: Context pass — WCAG 2.1 targets **Input:** Project accessibility target provided in context: WCAG 2.1 AA compliance. Request: "Review the dialogue system for accessibility." **Expected behavior:** - References specific WCAG 2.1 AA success criteria relevant to dialogue (e.g., 1.4.3 Contrast Minimum, 1.4.4 Resize Text, 2.2.1 Timing Adjustable for auto-advancing dialogue) - Uses exact criterion numbers and names from the standard, not paraphrases - Flags each finding with the specific criterion it fails - Notes which criteria are out of scope for AA (AAA-only) so they are not incorrectly flagged as failures --- ## Protocol Compliance - [ ] Stays within declared domain (remapping, text scaling, colorblind modes, screen reader, standards compliance) - [ ] Redirects UX flow design to ux-designer, art palette decisions to art-director - [ ] Returns structured findings with specific element names, contrast ratios, and criterion references - [ ] Does not implement UI changes — coordinates with ui-programmer for implementation - [ ] References specific WCAG criteria by number when compliance target is provided - [ ] Flags conflicts between accessibility requirements and art decisions to art-director --- ## Coverage Notes - HUD audit (Case 1) should produce findings trackable as accessibility stories in the sprint backlog - Colorblind conflict (Case 3) confirms the agent respects art-director's authority over the palette - WCAG criteria (Case 5) verifies the agent uses standards precisely, not generically