Why Automated Accessibility Tools Are Not Enough
Many organisations begin their accessibility journey by running an automated checker. It feels quick, reassuring, and gives instant results. Green ticks appear, scores improve, and it can look as though the problem has been solved.
Unfortunately, this is where many organisations are misled.
Automated tools have a role, but they only ever show part of the picture. Relying on them alone leaves serious accessibility barriers undiscovered and unresolved.
What Automated Tools Can Identify
Automated tools are good at identifying technical issues that can be detected by rules. They can spot missing alt text, some colour contrast failures, missing form labels, or obvious HTML errors.
What they cannot do is understand context, intent, or real user experience.
A page can pass an automated scan and still be completely unusable for someone navigating by keyboard or using a screen reader.
That gap is where most accessibility failures live.
The Barriers Automation Cannot Detect
Accessibility is not just about code. It is about how people actually use a website.
Automated tools cannot tell you whether a screen reader user can understand the purpose of a page, whether a keyboard user can complete a key task without getting trapped, or whether content order makes sense when read aloud.
These are human problems, not technical ones.
Only manual testing reveals them.
The Risk Of False Confidence
One of the biggest dangers of automated testing is false reassurance. Organisations believe they are compliant when they are not.
This leads to accessibility statements that do not reflect reality, increased legal exposure, and frustration for disabled users who encounter barriers that tools never flagged.
This is why a proper web accessibility audit goes beyond automation and includes human testing with assistive technologies.
Why Manual Testing Matters
Manual testing involves real people using real tools, including screen readers, keyboard navigation, voice control, and magnification software.
This kind of testing answers practical questions about whether users can complete tasks and where they encounter difficulty.
Automated tools and human testing are not competitors. They serve different purposes.
Automation helps surface obvious technical issues quickly. Manual testing uncovers the barriers that prevent real access.
Together, they provide a realistic picture of accessibility and a clear path forward.
Accessibility Is About Real Use
Accessibility is not a score, a badge, or a plugin. It is about whether people can use your website without barriers.
When organisations move beyond automation and focus on real user experience, accessibility stops being overwhelming and starts becoming meaningful.