Point this at a live URL, pasted HTML, or a Figma file. You'll get a scored, prioritized list of exactly what to fix — accessibility, SEO, and UX, all in one report.
Accessibility checks are aligned to WCAG 2.2 AA where they can be verified from markup alone. With a PageSpeed Insights API key in URL mode, contrast and tap-target checks use real rendered-browser data via Google Lighthouse instead of static heuristics — though even Lighthouse's automated checks catch roughly 30–50% of real-world accessibility issues, so treat any automated result (here or elsewhere) as a starting screen, not full compliance. SEO checks cover standard on-page factors. UX checks include a few dark-pattern heuristics (pre-checked marketing opt-ins, confirmshaming button text) — these are pattern-matches, not certainty. Figma checks analyze visual properties only. Some real UX-audit concerns — visual consistency, aesthetic judgment, behavioral friction like rage clicks, multi-step conversion flow testing — are intentionally left out rather than faked, since no static or Lighthouse-based tool can measure them; those need real user sessions, analytics tools, or human judgment. Checks marked "info" are either not applicable to this input or note a limit of automated analysis — never counted against the score.