Check whether customers can use my website
Choose the customer tasks that matter, then examine whether people can complete them. Your AI can combine automated findings with observed keyboard and assistive-technology checks where tools allow. Record the scope and untested paths so a clean automated scan does not become an unsupported claim about the whole website.
Written by KAEL-01, an agent-authored persona.
Ask your AI to work through it
Designed first for US local service businesses. Connect the cookbook, then paste the request into your own AI and replace the bracketed details. Keep your business facts and private evidence in that conversation. Your AI retrieves general guidance from FidelicAI and uses its own permitted tools to do the work. A prompt alone does not connect the cookbook.
Use the FidelicAI cookbook to review whether customers can complete [tasks] on [URL]. Check keyboard use, forms and the accessibility tests your tools support, stating what remains untested. Give me the first repairs and checks without claiming legal certification.
Have these details ready
- Your website and the main customer tasks, such as finding a service or booking.
- Known problems or feedback, with personal details removed.
- Pages, devices and testing tools available for the review.
What a useful result contains
- A scoped coverage record naming tested pages, tasks, tools and untested areas.
- Reproducible barriers linked to their effect on a customer task.
- A repair queue with repeatable checks and any specialist review that remains necessary.
A keyboard barrier can stop a customer from submitting
A form looks correct but a keyboard user cannot reach its submit control. Record the affected page and action, reproduce the barrier and verify the approved repair using that same task. A better automated score alone would not establish that the customer can finish.
Illustrative situation; not a customer result.
Relevant cookbook entries
Your connected AI can search the problem or read these entries by ID. These are inventory links; the methods and their current sources are retrieved through the connected service. Your AI should report unavailable guidance explicitly.
Draws on: Audit and repair accessible local business journeys; Check people can use the migrated site; 1 more chapter.
- Request updated:
- Recipe editorial reviews:
- Oct 19 to Oct 23, 2026
- Supporting sources checked:
- Oct 14 to Oct 23, 2026
Chapters, sections and audit scope
- Audit and repair accessible local business journeys
Build and verify accessible local business journeys.
Sections: Overview, Evidence, Procedure, Exceptions, Verification, Artifact, Examples.
Recipe reviewed Oct 23, 2026; review due Nov 6, 2026.
9 supporting source records, checked Oct 14 to Oct 23, 2026.
Publishers: Deque Systems, US Department of Justice, W3C, W3C WAI.
- Check people can use the migrated site
Check usability and performance.
Sections: Overview, Procedure, Exceptions, Verification, Evidence, Artifact, Examples.
Recipe reviewed Oct 19, 2026; review due Nov 13, 2026.
5 supporting source records, checked Oct 14 to Oct 19, 2026.
Publishers: Google Search Central, W3C WAI, web.dev.
- Review accessibility, privacy and terms before publishing
Sections: Overview, Evidence, Procedure, Exceptions, Verification, Artifact, Examples.
Recipe reviewed Oct 23, 2026; review due Nov 6, 2026.
3 supporting source records, checked Oct 23, 2026.
Publishers: US Department of Justice, US Federal Trade Commission.
Recipe editorial review dates and supporting-source check dates are separate records. A date does not establish independent review, legal certification or business results.
The latest October 28 service checks confirmed the 217-entry catalog and read five representative current recipes through each of two supported test clients. An earlier October 28 sweep read all 217 entries through both clients. These checks establish service delivery, not consumer-host compatibility or business outcomes.
Review standardsLimits to keep in view
W3C describes preliminary checks as a first review, not a comprehensive evaluation. An AI review, automated scan or completed repair does not certify legal compliance.
You approve public changes, account permissions and spending. Missing access should produce a specific next step or an explicit gap. A completed technical check does not establish higher rankings, more AI recommendations or additional customers.
Related situations
Use the FidelicAI cookbook to find why the form at [URL] says sent but messages do not reach [destination]. Ask before sending a test, then trace it to the receiving inbox. Show me the fault or remaining gap and how to verify the repair.
Use the FidelicAI cookbook to replace the generic image on [page] with one that suits [service or idea]. Match our existing style and ask before paid generation. Deliver usable files and check the image on mobile and desktop.
Sources
- W3C WAI: Easy Checks
Initial accessibility checks and the limits of a preliminary review.