1. Automated Tools Can’t See Everything — Here’s Why That Matters
Automated accessibility tools are a great starting point. They scan thousands of lines of code in seconds, flag color contrast issues, missing alt text, or empty links — all things that can trip up compliance with WCAG 2.2.
But the truth? These tools only catch around 30–40% of accessibility problems. They don’t understand context, design intention, or human frustration when a form refuses to behave. Accessibility isn’t just technical; it’s about real people trying to use your site without barriers.
2. The Hidden Gaps Automation Misses in WCAG Testing
Tools can’t tell if your link text actually makes sense out of context, or whether the focus jumps randomly across a form. They don’t know how confusing it feels when a CAPTCHA blocks a screen reader user, or when labels sound mismatched with their input fields.
That’s where manual and user testing step in — to catch those subtle, real-world issues automation never will.
3. Manual Testing: Where Real Accessibility Checks Begin
Manual testing means someone goes through your website like a real user would — navigating by keyboard, testing color contrast, checking heading levels, and listening through a screen reader.
This is where human intuition matters. A tester can tell when a design “looks fine” but behaves terribly for accessibility. They can catch focus traps, inaccessible buttons, or unlabeled form elements that a tool proudly reports as “100% compliant.”
4. Why User Testing Changes Everything
There’s no substitute for feedback from people who actually rely on assistive technology.
When users with disabilities test your site, they reveal what no automated or manual method can — how it feels to use. They’ll show you when a dropdown breaks under a screen reader, or when a keyboard sequence is maddeningly illogical.
That’s the moment developers understand accessibility isn’t about passing tests; it’s about creating equal experience.
5. The Power Trio: Automated, Manual, and User Testing Together
Automation is quick, manual testing is smart, and user testing is honest.
Combine all three, and you cover every layer — code, design, and real experience. That’s how teams move from “mostly compliant” to truly accessible. Each type of testing fills the other’s blind spots, creating a cycle of learning, fixing, and improving.
6. Turning Test Results into Real WCAG Compliance
Once issues are discovered, the next step is acting on them — not just fixing what the tool flags.
- Document the findings
- Prioritize issues that block access
- Verify each fix manually
That’s how you earn genuine WCAG 2.2 compliance — the kind that holds up in audits and in real use.
7. Accessible Websites Don’t Just Happen — They’re Tested by People
Building an accessible web isn’t about chasing perfect scores. It’s about empathy, attention, and collaboration.
And here’s the funny twist: many of those “automated accessibility testing tools” have interfaces that aren’t even accessible themselves. The irony isn’t lost on those of us who use screen readers daily.
If you’re struggling with testing or just want a clearer roadmap to WCAG compliance, feel free to reach out. I’ve spent years navigating, laughing at, and learning from these tools — and helping others build websites that actually work for everyone.