Agentic Web Accessibility Auditing: Authoring and Evaluating Per-Criterion Worker Agents for WCAG

Abstract

Automated accessibility assessments differ in the evidence they collect and the requirements they address. We present a framework that combines shared browser tools with criterion-specific worker agents, implementing 39 WCAG 2.1 Level A and AA criteria and one additional WCAG 2.2 criterion. We analyze archived predictions on 250 page-criterion records derived from professional audits of scholarly platforms. Workers recover 0.86 of positive reference labels, compared with 0.36 for axe-core and 0.67 for an uncued vision-language model, with lower precision. Criterion-level results, abstentions, development-exposure sensitivities, and separately instrumented runs qualify these comparisons. Inferred negative labels and differences between evaluated configurations limit conclusions about true accuracy and causal effects. We contribute the framework, its criterion-specific implementation, and an evaluation account that distinguishes detection, evidence availability, and resource use, motivating further study of inspectable automated assessments within professional auditing.