Best Free Accessibility Testing Tools in 2026 Compared

Why Accessibility Testing Tools Matter

Making a website accessible to people with disabilities is no longer optional. Laws such as the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) in the United States, the European Accessibility Act (EAA) in the EU, and Section 508 for US federal agencies all point to the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) as the technical standard websites must meet. With ADA web accessibility lawsuits exceeding 4,000 federal filings in 2024 alone, and the EAA becoming enforceable in June 2025, organizations of every size need reliable tools to identify and fix accessibility barriers before they become legal liabilities.

Accessibility testing tools automate the process of scanning web pages against WCAG success criteria. They examine your HTML, CSS, and ARIA attributes to detect violations such as missing alternative text on images, insufficient color contrast between text and background, unlabeled form controls, broken heading hierarchies, and keyboard navigation traps. The best tools produce actionable reports that tell developers exactly what is wrong, where it is on the page, and how to fix it.

The landscape of accessibility testing tools in 2026 is rich and varied. Some tools are browser extensions you install in Chrome or Firefox. Others are JavaScript libraries you embed in your test suite. Some run from the command line and integrate into CI/CD pipelines. And some are cloud-based services that require nothing more than a URL. Each approach has distinct strengths and trade-offs, and the right choice depends on your team's workflow, technical expertise, and the specific problems you are trying to solve.

This guide provides an honest, detailed comparison of the best free accessibility testing tools available in 2026. We cover what each tool does well, where it falls short, and which use cases it is best suited for. Whether you are a solo developer, a QA engineer, or a non-technical stakeholder who needs to audit a website quickly, you will find a tool here that fits your needs.

What Automated Tools Can and Cannot Detect

Before diving into individual tools, it is important to set realistic expectations. Industry research consistently shows that automated accessibility testing tools can detect approximately 30 to 40 percent of all WCAG issues. This is not a shortcoming of any particular tool -- it is an inherent limitation of automation. Many WCAG success criteria require human judgment that no algorithm can replicate.

Automated tools excel at detecting technical violations: images with missing or empty alt attributes, text with insufficient color contrast ratios, form inputs without associated labels, headings that skip levels, pages missing a lang attribute, ARIA roles used incorrectly, and links with non-descriptive text like "click here." These checks are well-defined, binary (pass or fail), and can be evaluated purely by analyzing the DOM and computed styles.

What automated tools cannot do is assess quality and context. A tool can verify that an image has alt text, but it cannot determine whether that alt text is meaningful or accurate. A tool can confirm that a page has headings, but it cannot judge whether those headings create a logical document outline. A tool can check that ARIA attributes are syntactically valid, but it cannot evaluate whether a complex interactive widget is actually usable with a screen reader. These assessments require manual testing by someone who understands both the WCAG criteria and the real-world experience of using assistive technologies.

The practical implication is clear: automated tools are an essential first step, not the entire journey. Use them to catch the low-hanging fruit quickly and consistently, then supplement with manual expert testing and user testing with people with disabilities for a thorough evaluation. For a deeper look at how WCAG compliance works, see our guide on what WCAG 2.2 requires.

axe-core / axe DevTools

axe-core is the most widely used open-source accessibility testing engine in the world. Developed and maintained by Deque Systems, axe-core is the JavaScript library that powers dozens of other accessibility tools, including this website's scanner. It analyzes the DOM of a web page against a comprehensive set of rules mapped to WCAG 2.0, 2.1, and 2.2 success criteria and produces structured results that categorize issues by severity (critical, serious, moderate, minor) and provide detailed remediation guidance.

axe-core can be used in multiple ways. As a standalone library, you can integrate it into any JavaScript testing framework -- Jest, Cypress, Playwright, Puppeteer, Selenium, or WebdriverIO. As the axe DevTools browser extension, it provides a panel in Chrome or Firefox DevTools where you can scan any page with one click. The extension is available in a free version and a paid Pro version that adds guided manual testing and more advanced features.

The engine's design philosophy prioritizes zero false positives. Deque has stated publicly that axe-core is engineered to produce no false positives -- if axe flags an issue, it is a real issue. This makes axe-core particularly valuable in CI/CD pipelines where false positives waste developer time and erode trust in the testing process. Issues that axe-core cannot definitively classify as violations are reported as "needs review" items that require human inspection.

Key Strengths

• Zero false positive guarantee. axe-core only flags issues it is certain about, which makes its results highly trustworthy and actionable.
• Massive ecosystem integration. Works with Cypress, Playwright, Puppeteer, Selenium, Jest, Storybook, and virtually every major testing framework. There are official packages like @axe-core/puppeteer and @axe-core/webdriverjs for seamless integration.
• Comprehensive rule set. Over 90 rules covering WCAG 2.0, 2.1, and 2.2 at all conformance levels, plus best practice rules that go beyond WCAG.
• Detailed remediation guidance. Each issue includes a description of what is wrong, why it matters, and specific HTML-level guidance for how to fix it.
• Open source. The core engine is free under the Mozilla Public License 2.0, ensuring transparency and community contribution.
• Industry standard. Used by Microsoft, Google, the US Department of Homeland Security, and thousands of other organizations.

Limitations

• Requires technical setup for CI integration. While the browser extension is easy to use, integrating axe-core into a testing pipeline requires JavaScript proficiency and familiarity with testing frameworks.
• Single-page analysis. The free browser extension scans only the current page. Crawling an entire site requires the paid axe Monitor product or a custom scripting solution.
• No visual overlay. Unlike WAVE, axe DevTools does not show issues directly on the rendered page. Results are displayed in a separate panel, which can make it harder to locate issues visually.
• Pro features are paid. Guided intelligent testing, issue management, and team collaboration features require an axe DevTools Pro license.

Best for: Developers and QA teams who need a reliable, programmable testing engine they can integrate into automated test suites and CI/CD pipelines. Also excellent for manual page-by-page audits using the browser extension.

Pricing: axe-core library is free and open source. axe DevTools browser extension has a free tier. axe DevTools Pro starts at approximately $40 per month per user.

WAVE (WebAIM)

WAVE, developed by WebAIM (Web Accessibility in Mind) at Utah State University, is one of the longest-running and most recognized accessibility evaluation tools on the web. First launched in 2001, WAVE takes a distinctly visual approach to accessibility testing. Rather than presenting results in a data table or developer console, WAVE injects icons and indicators directly into the web page, showing you exactly where each issue, alert, feature, and structural element is located.

WAVE is available as a free browser extension for Chrome, Firefox, and Edge, and as a web-based tool at wave.webaim.org where you can enter any public URL for evaluation. The extension is the more capable option because it can evaluate pages behind login screens and on localhost. WebAIM also offers the WAVE API, a paid service that enables automated scanning of multiple pages.

What makes WAVE unique is its educational approach. Each icon that WAVE places on the page is clickable, revealing a detailed explanation of the issue, a reference to the relevant WCAG success criterion, and guidance on how to fix it. The sidebar panel provides a summary of errors, alerts, features, structural elements, and contrast issues found on the page. WAVE also includes a built-in contrast checker that evaluates all text on the page against WCAG contrast requirements.

Key Strengths

• Visual inline feedback. Issues are shown directly on the page with color-coded icons (red for errors, yellow for alerts, green for features), making it immediately clear what is wrong and where.
• Educational value. Detailed explanations for every issue make WAVE an excellent learning tool for developers new to accessibility.
• Built-in contrast checker. Evaluates all text on the page against WCAG 2.2 contrast requirements and shows the exact contrast ratio for any element.
• Structural analysis. Visualizes the heading hierarchy, landmark regions, and reading order of the page, helping developers understand how assistive technology users experience the content.
• No installation required (web version). The wave.webaim.org tool can evaluate any public URL without installing anything.
• Long track record. Over two decades of continuous development and refinement by WebAIM, a respected accessibility research and training organization.

Limitations

• Visual overlay can be overwhelming. On pages with many issues, the injected icons can obscure the page content and become difficult to navigate, especially on complex layouts.
• No CI/CD integration in free tier. WAVE is primarily a manual, page-by-page tool. Automated multi-page scanning requires the paid WAVE API.
• Alerts are not always actionable. WAVE distinguishes between errors (definite violations) and alerts (potential issues that need manual review). The alert category can be noisy, mixing genuine concerns with items that turn out to be fine upon inspection.
• Web version cannot scan authenticated pages. The online tool at wave.webaim.org can only scan publicly accessible URLs. For pages behind login screens, you must use the browser extension.

Best for: Designers, content creators, and developers who prefer visual feedback and want to understand accessibility issues in context. Excellent for learning and for quick manual audits of individual pages.

Pricing: Browser extension is completely free. WAVE API for automated scanning starts at $0.04 per credit (one credit per page scan).

Google Lighthouse

Google Lighthouse is an open-source auditing tool built directly into Chrome DevTools. Originally focused on performance and progressive web app metrics, Lighthouse includes a dedicated accessibility audit category that evaluates pages against a subset of WCAG criteria. Because it comes pre-installed in every copy of Chrome, Lighthouse is often the first accessibility testing tool that developers encounter.

To run a Lighthouse accessibility audit, open Chrome DevTools, navigate to the Lighthouse panel, select the Accessibility category, and click "Analyze page load." Lighthouse will reload the page, run its tests, and produce a score from 0 to 100 along with a list of passed and failed audits. Each failed audit includes a description, a list of affected elements, and a link to detailed documentation on web.dev explaining the issue and how to fix it.

Under the hood, Lighthouse's accessibility audits are powered by axe-core. This means the actual issue detection comes from the same engine discussed above. However, Lighthouse runs only a subset of axe-core's rules -- it does not include every check that the full axe-core library offers. Lighthouse also adds its own scoring algorithm that weights different issues differently, producing the 0-100 accessibility score that has become widely recognized.

Key Strengths

• Zero installation required. Built into Chrome DevTools, so every web developer already has access to it without downloading or installing anything.
• Simple, approachable interface. The 0-100 score provides an immediately understandable summary of a page's accessibility status.
• Multi-category auditing. Lighthouse audits performance, accessibility, best practices, and SEO in a single run, giving you a holistic view of page quality.
• CI/CD integration via Lighthouse CI. The lighthouse-ci npm package enables automated Lighthouse audits in build pipelines with configurable thresholds for pass/fail decisions.
• PageSpeed Insights integration. Run Lighthouse audits through Google's PageSpeed Insights web tool without opening DevTools, using both lab and field data.
• Powered by axe-core. Benefits from axe-core's reliable, low-false-positive rule engine for the checks it does include.

Limitations

• Runs only a subset of axe-core rules. Lighthouse does not include all of the checks available in axe-core, meaning it will miss some issues that the full axe DevTools extension would catch.
• Score can be misleading. A Lighthouse accessibility score of 100 does not mean a page is fully WCAG compliant. It means the page passed all of the checks that Lighthouse runs, which represent a fraction of all WCAG criteria.
• Page-load only. Lighthouse audits the state of the page after initial load. It does not test interactions, modal dialogs, dynamic content changes, or single-page application navigation.
• No visual indication on the page. Like axe DevTools, Lighthouse reports issues in a panel rather than overlaying them on the page, which can make it harder to locate the affected elements.

Best for: Developers who want a quick, built-in accessibility check as part of their general page quality workflow. Useful as a baseline screening tool, but should not be relied on as the sole accessibility testing method.

Pricing: Completely free. Lighthouse is open source and built into Chrome.

Pa11y

Pa11y is a free, open-source command-line accessibility testing tool built for automation. While browser extensions like axe DevTools and WAVE are designed for manual, page-by-page testing, Pa11y is designed to be run from a terminal or integrated into a CI/CD pipeline. It launches a headless browser (Puppeteer by default), loads a URL, runs accessibility tests against it, and outputs the results in various formats including JSON, CSV, HTML, and CLI-formatted text.

Pa11y uses HTML_CodeSniffer as its default testing engine, which evaluates pages against WCAG 2.1 criteria. Starting with Pa11y 6.x, it also supports axe-core as an alternative runner, giving users the flexibility to choose their preferred rule engine. Pa11y supports multiple WCAG conformance levels (A, AA, AAA) and allows you to configure which standard to test against.

The Pa11y ecosystem includes several companion tools. Pa11y CI is a purpose-built CI runner that can test multiple URLs defined in a configuration file and fail the build if accessibility issues are detected above a configured threshold. Pa11y Dashboard provides a web-based interface for tracking accessibility results over time across multiple URLs. These companion tools make Pa11y a comprehensive solution for teams that want automated, ongoing accessibility monitoring.

Key Strengths

• Built for CI/CD. Pa11y and Pa11y CI are designed from the ground up for automated pipeline integration, making it easy to fail builds when accessibility regressions are introduced.
• Multiple output formats. Results can be output as JSON, CSV, HTML, or CLI text, making it easy to feed results into dashboards, issue trackers, or custom reporting tools.
• Flexible runner support. Choose between HTML_CodeSniffer and axe-core as the testing engine, or use both for broader coverage.
• Action scripting. Pa11y supports a simple scripting syntax that lets you define actions like clicking buttons, filling in form fields, and waiting for elements before running tests. This allows testing of pages behind login screens and multi-step flows.
• Multi-URL testing. Pa11y CI can test dozens or hundreds of URLs in a single run, defined in a JSON or JavaScript configuration file.
• Completely free and open source. No paid tiers, no feature gating. Everything is available for free under the LGPL license.

Limitations

• Requires command-line proficiency. Pa11y is a terminal-based tool with no graphical interface. It is not suitable for non-technical users or stakeholders who need a visual report.
• HTML_CodeSniffer default engine has higher false positive rate. Compared to axe-core, HTML_CodeSniffer tends to produce more warnings and potential issues that require manual review, which can be noisy in CI pipelines.
• Pa11y Dashboard is aging. The dashboard project has not received as much active development as the core tool, and its interface feels dated compared to modern alternatives.
• No browser extension. Pa11y is strictly a CLI and programmatic tool. There is no browser extension for quick manual testing during development.

Best for: DevOps engineers and teams that want to integrate automated accessibility testing into their CI/CD pipelines and catch regressions before code reaches production.

Pricing: Completely free and open source.

IBM Equal Access

IBM Equal Access is a suite of accessibility testing tools developed by IBM's accessibility research team. The suite includes the IBM Equal Access Accessibility Checker browser extension (available for Chrome and Firefox), the accessibility-checker npm package for automated testing, and the underlying rule engine that IBM has developed and maintained independently of axe-core. This means IBM Equal Access uses its own distinct rule set, which can catch issues that axe-core-based tools miss, and vice versa.

The IBM Equal Access Accessibility Checker browser extension integrates into Chrome and Firefox DevTools as a new panel. When you run a scan, it evaluates the page against IBM's rule set, which is mapped to WCAG 2.1, WCAG 2.2, and IBM's own accessibility requirements. Results are categorized as violations (definite failures), items that need review (potential issues requiring human judgment), and recommendations (best practice suggestions). Each result includes a detailed explanation and a "learn more" link to IBM's accessibility documentation.

The npm package, accessibility-checker, can be used with Karma, Selenium, Puppeteer, Playwright, and other testing frameworks. It outputs results in JSON format and supports configuration options for specifying the WCAG level, the pages to test, and the rules to apply. IBM has also released the rules engine as open source, encouraging community contributions and transparency.

Key Strengths

• Independent rule set. IBM's rules are developed separately from axe-core, meaning it catches issues that axe-based tools might miss. Using both tools together significantly increases coverage.
• Enterprise-grade depth. IBM's decades of accessibility research are reflected in the tool's thorough rule explanations and remediation guidance.
• Detailed "needs review" items. Rather than ignoring issues that cannot be definitively classified, IBM Equal Access flags them for human review with clear guidance on what to check.
• Free browser extension and npm package. Both the extension and the automated testing package are free to use without any feature restrictions.
• Open-source rule engine. IBM has made the rules engine publicly available, allowing the community to inspect, contribute to, and verify the rules.
• Keyboard focus order visualization. The browser extension includes a tab order visualization tool that shows the exact keyboard navigation order on the page.

Limitations

• Smaller community than axe-core. axe-core has a much larger user base and ecosystem of integrations. Finding help, tutorials, and third-party plugins is easier for axe-core.
• More verbose output. IBM Equal Access tends to produce a higher volume of results, including many "needs review" items. While thorough, this can be overwhelming for teams new to accessibility.
• Less recognizable branding. In the market, axe-core and WAVE are more widely recognized names. Stakeholders and clients may not be familiar with IBM Equal Access, which can make it harder to advocate for its use.
• Documentation is enterprise-focused. IBM's documentation sometimes assumes an enterprise context and can feel dense compared to the more developer-friendly documentation of other tools.

Best for: Enterprise teams, government agencies, and organizations that want a second-opinion rule engine to complement axe-core-based testing. Particularly valuable for teams that need thorough, defense-grade auditing.

Pricing: Completely free. Both the browser extension and npm package are available at no cost.

Accessibility Checker

Accessibility Checker is a free, cloud-based WCAG scanning tool designed around simplicity. You enter a URL, click scan, and within seconds receive a detailed accessibility report -- no installation, no browser extension, no command line, no account required. Under the hood, it uses Puppeteer to load your page in a real headless browser and runs the axe-core engine against the fully rendered DOM, which means it evaluates the page as a real user's browser would see it, including dynamically rendered JavaScript content.

The results are presented as a visual dashboard with a numerical accessibility score, issues categorized by severity (critical, serious, moderate, minor), and a breakdown organized by WCAG principle (Perceivable, Operable, Understandable, Robust). Each issue includes a description, the affected HTML element, and specific guidance on how to fix it. The report is designed to be useful for both technical and non-technical users -- a developer can drill into the HTML details, while a project manager can understand the overall health of the site from the score and severity breakdown.

Key Strengths

• Zero setup required. No installation, no browser extension, no CLI tools. Enter a URL and get results in seconds from any device with a web browser.
• Full browser rendering. Uses Puppeteer to load pages in a real Chromium browser, so JavaScript-rendered content, single-page applications, and dynamically loaded elements are evaluated correctly.
• Powered by axe-core. Benefits from axe-core's reliable, zero-false-positive rule engine and comprehensive WCAG 2.2 coverage.
• Visual score and categorized report. The dashboard-style output makes it easy to communicate accessibility status to stakeholders, clients, and team members who may not have technical expertise.
• Free with no account required. Scan any public URL without creating an account, signing up for a trial, or providing payment information.
• Shareable results. Each scan produces a unique URL that can be shared with team members or included in reports and documentation.

Limitations

• Public URLs only. As a cloud-based tool, it can only scan publicly accessible URLs. Pages behind authentication, on localhost, or on private networks require a local tool like axe DevTools or Pa11y.
• Single-page scanning. Each scan evaluates one URL at a time. For full-site audits of dozens or hundreds of pages, a crawling solution like Pa11y CI or the WAVE API may be more efficient.
• No CI/CD integration. There is no API or CLI tool for integrating scans into automated build pipelines. It is designed for on-demand manual scanning, not continuous automated testing.
• Dependent on server-side rendering availability. The headless browser approach means the tool needs sufficient server resources to render complex pages. Very large or resource-heavy pages may occasionally time out.

Best for: Non-technical stakeholders, project managers, content creators, and developers who need a quick, one-click accessibility check of any public URL without installing anything. Ideal for initial assessments, client reports, and quick spot checks during development.

Pricing: Free, no account required.

Other Notable Tools

Beyond the six tools covered in detail above, several other accessibility testing tools deserve mention for their specific strengths and use cases.

ARC Toolkit by TPGi is a free Chrome extension that evaluates pages against WCAG 2.1 and provides a detailed breakdown of issues, including elements that need manual review. ARC Toolkit is known for its thorough coverage of ARIA-related issues and is often used by professional accessibility auditors as a complement to other tools. TPGi (formerly The Paciello Group) is one of the most respected accessibility consulting firms in the industry, and their expertise is reflected in the tool's rule quality.

Tenon.io is a cloud-based accessibility testing API that provides detailed, developer-friendly results. Tenon's strengths lie in its API-first design, which makes it easy to integrate into custom workflows, dashboards, and issue tracking systems. Tenon uses its own proprietary testing engine rather than axe-core, which means it can catch different issues. However, Tenon is a paid service -- it does not offer a free tier for ongoing use, which puts it outside the scope of this free tools comparison for regular use.

SortSite by PowerMapper is a desktop application and online service that crawls entire websites and tests every page for accessibility, broken links, HTML standards compliance, and search engine optimization issues simultaneously. SortSite's multi-page crawling capability makes it useful for large-scale site audits, but it is a paid tool with a license starting at approximately $149 for a single user. A free online version can test a single page.

Comparison Table

The following table provides a side-by-side comparison of the six major free accessibility testing tools covered in this guide.

How to Choose the Right Tool

Choosing the right accessibility testing tool depends on your role, your technical comfort level, and where accessibility testing fits in your workflow. There is no single tool that is best for everyone. In fact, the most effective approach is to use multiple tools at different stages of your development and review process.

Start by asking yourself these questions: Are you a developer who writes code and runs tests, or a non-technical stakeholder who needs to evaluate a website? Do you need a one-time audit of an existing website, or ongoing automated testing integrated into your build pipeline? Are you testing public-facing pages, or pages behind authentication that require a local tool? Do you want a quick assessment or a deep, thorough audit? Your answers will guide you toward the right combination of tools.

Recommendations by Use Case

I need a quick accessibility check of a website right now. Use Accessibility Checker for a zero-setup scan of any public URL, or open Chrome DevTools and run a Google Lighthouse audit for an instant score without leaving your browser.

I am a developer building a new feature and want to check my work. Install the axe DevTools browser extension and scan your page in the DevTools panel as you develop. For visual, in-context feedback, also install WAVE and toggle its overlay to see issues highlighted directly on the page.

I need to prevent accessibility regressions in our CI/CD pipeline. Integrate axe-core directly into your Cypress, Playwright, or Puppeteer test suite using the official @axe-core packages. Alternatively, use Pa11y CI to test a defined list of URLs and fail the build when issues are detected above a configured threshold.

I need to audit a large website with hundreds of pages. Use Pa11y CI for automated multi-URL scanning or the WAVE API for cloud-based batch processing. Supplement with manual testing on the highest-traffic and highest-risk pages.

I want the most thorough automated coverage possible. Use both axe-core and IBM Equal Access. Because they use independent rule engines, running both tools together catches issues that either tool alone would miss. This dual-engine approach is a best practice used by professional accessibility auditors.

I am non-technical and need to report on our website's accessibility. Start with Accessibility Checker for a clear, visual report you can share with stakeholders. The score and categorized issue breakdown provide an accessible summary that does not require technical expertise to understand.

I am preparing for EAA or ADA compliance. Automated tools alone will not get you to full compliance. Start with automated scanning using any combination of the tools above to identify and fix the machine-detectable issues. Then engage a qualified accessibility consultant for manual expert testing, and include users with disabilities in your testing program. For more about the legal landscape, see our guides on the European Accessibility Act and ADA web accessibility lawsuits.

Frequently Asked Questions

What percentage of accessibility issues can automated tools detect?

Automated accessibility testing tools can typically detect between 30 and 40 percent of all WCAG issues. They excel at identifying technical violations such as missing alt text, insufficient color contrast, missing form labels, incorrect heading hierarchy, and ARIA attribute errors. However, many success criteria require human judgment to evaluate, such as whether alternative text is meaningful, whether content is logically ordered, or whether complex interactive widgets are truly usable with assistive technology. For comprehensive coverage, automated scanning should be combined with manual expert testing and user testing with people with disabilities.

Is axe-core really free to use?

Yes, axe-core is completely free and open source under the Mozilla Public License 2.0. You can use the axe-core JavaScript library in your own projects, integrate it into your CI/CD pipeline, and run it in any testing framework without paying a license fee. The axe DevTools browser extension also has a free tier that lets you scan individual pages. Deque Systems offers paid products such as axe DevTools Pro and axe Monitor that provide additional features like intelligent guided testing and enterprise reporting, but the core engine and basic browser extension remain free.

Which accessibility testing tool is best for beginners?

For beginners, WAVE by WebAIM and Google Lighthouse are the easiest tools to start with. WAVE provides a visual overlay that highlights issues directly on the page, making it intuitive to see what is wrong and where. Google Lighthouse is built into Chrome DevTools, so it requires no installation and provides a simple accessibility score. For a zero-setup option, cloud-based tools like Accessibility Checker let you enter any URL and receive a detailed report without installing anything.

Can I use multiple accessibility testing tools together?

Yes, and using multiple tools together is a recommended best practice. Different tools use different rule sets and testing engines, so they catch different issues. For example, axe-core and IBM Equal Access use distinct rule libraries and may flag violations that the other misses. A practical approach is to use a cloud-based scanner for quick initial assessments, a browser extension for detailed development-time analysis, and a CLI tool like Pa11y integrated into your CI/CD pipeline for automated regression testing.

Do I still need manual testing if I use automated accessibility tools?

Absolutely. Automated tools catch common, machine-detectable issues quickly and consistently, but they cannot replace manual testing. Many WCAG success criteria require human judgment that no algorithm can replicate. For example, automated tools can verify that an image has an alt attribute, but only a human can assess whether the alt text is meaningful. A thorough accessibility evaluation combines automated scanning, manual testing with keyboard and screen readers, and ideally user testing with people who have disabilities. Visit our accessibility blog for more guidance on building a comprehensive testing strategy.