Warder is continuous WCAG 2.1 monitoring for real websites. It runs axe-core, tracks issues in projects with full history, and offers exports and read-only share links. Starter and Pro add scheduled daily/weekly scans and email; Pro adds Slack, webhooks, a REST API, and 365-day history. One-off audits miss regressions; we built this so teams can prove the live site stayed accessible. Optional Lighthouse (when enabled) adds performance context.
No reviews yetBe the first to leave a review for Warder
Maker
📌
I kept seeing teams treat accessibility like a one-time checkbox: run an audit, fix the worst issues, then ship. A month later, a new deploy breaks labels, focus order, or contrast, and nobody notices until a customer or legal does. I built Warder to close that gap: continuous WCAG 2.1 checks on the live site (via axe-core), with history so you can see when something regressed, not just a snapshot.
Early on it was a local scanner; the hard part was turning that into projects, schedules, and alerts people would actually use week after week. The product grew when I focused on what agencies and small product teams need: clear reports, shareable links, webhooks, and a real API on Pro, honest automated testing instead of “mystery” overlay products. I’m here all day to answer how we run scans, what’s on the roadmap, and what you’d need to trust this in your workflow, ask anything.
Report
Nice work Michael! I like the framing that accessibility shouldn’t be treated as a one-time audit.
I tried out a free scan and could pretty much understand the violations, passed rules, inapplicable rules, and incomplete/manual-review items. One thing I liked was the little description next to each rule.
One thing I suggest especially for single developers who are not too familiar with this terminology is to offer some sort of specific suggestions to help take immediate action. Nothing crazy but more to guide the user.
I'm curious if you are willing to offer services that help implement fixes for the user in the near future. Do you think this would be feasible or are you more interested on more product than services?
Report
Maker
@danush_singla Thank you, Danush. I really appreciate the thoughtful feedback and that you took the time to try out the scan.
I agree that the results should do more than just explain what was found. For developers who are newer to accessibility terminology, it would be helpful to include more specific next steps, examples, and practical suggestions so they can start fixing issues right away.
And yes, I do think offering implementation help is feasible. My main focus is building Warder as a product, but I also see a lot of value in offering services alongside it for people who want help turning scan results into real fixes. I’d like Warder to work as both a self-serve tool and a starting point for more hands-on accessibility support when needed. So adding some language around people reaching out for help is also something I will consider adding!
Nice work Michael! I like the framing that accessibility shouldn’t be treated as a one-time audit.
I tried out a free scan and could pretty much understand the violations, passed rules, inapplicable rules, and incomplete/manual-review items. One thing I liked was the little description next to each rule.
One thing I suggest especially for single developers who are not too familiar with this terminology is to offer some sort of specific suggestions to help take immediate action. Nothing crazy but more to guide the user.
I'm curious if you are willing to offer services that help implement fixes for the user in the near future. Do you think this would be feasible or are you more interested on more product than services?
@danush_singla Thank you, Danush. I really appreciate the thoughtful feedback and that you took the time to try out the scan.
I agree that the results should do more than just explain what was found. For developers who are newer to accessibility terminology, it would be helpful to include more specific next steps, examples, and practical suggestions so they can start fixing issues right away.
And yes, I do think offering implementation help is feasible. My main focus is building Warder as a product, but I also see a lot of value in offering services alongside it for people who want help turning scan results into real fixes. I’d like Warder to work as both a self-serve tool and a starting point for more hands-on accessibility support when needed. So adding some language around people reaching out for help is also something I will consider adding!