🎨 Palette: 키보드 사용자를 위한 툴팁 접근성 개선

[seonghobae]

💡 무엇을

상단 메타 정보 요약 영역의 .meta-value-card 요소 3개(전체일수, 계획진척률, 실적진척률)에 tabindex="0" 속성을 추가하고, 키보드 포커스 시 시각적으로 인지할 수 있도록 CSS :focus-visible 스타일을 보강했습니다.

🎯 왜

이 요소들은 title 속성을 통해 사용자에게 추가적인 설명(툴팁)을 제공하지만, 상호작용 가능한 요소(button, a 등)가 아니기 때문에 기본적으로 키보드 포커스를 받을 수 없습니다. 이로 인해 스크린 리더 및 키보드 전용 사용자는 해당 툴팁 정보에 접근할 수 없는 접근성 결함이 있었습니다.

📸 변경 전/후

• 변경 전: Tab 키를 눌러도 메타 카드 요소들에 포커스가 가지 않아 title 툴팁을 읽을 수 없음.
• 변경 후: Tab 키를 누르면 각 메타 카드 요소에 순차적으로 파란색 포커스 링이 표시되며, 스크린 리더가 툴팁 내용을 읽을 수 있음.

♿ 접근성

비상호작용 요소에 제공된 중요한 부가 정보(title)를 키보드 사용자와 스크린 리더 사용자 모두 동등하게 접근할 수 있도록 포커스 순서와 시각적 포커스 링을 제공했습니다.

---

PR created automatically by Jules for task 14462481713191588402 started by @seonghobae

[google-labs-jules]

👋 Jules, reporting for duty! I'm here to lend a hand with this pull request.

When you start a review, I'll add a 👀 emoji to each comment to let you know I've read it. I'll focus on feedback directed at me and will do my best to stay out of conversations between you and other bots or reviewers to keep the noise down.

I'll push a commit with your requested changes shortly after. Please note there might be a delay between these steps, but rest assured I'm on the job!

For more direct control, you can switch me to Reactive Mode. When this mode is on, I will only act on comments where you specifically mention me with @jules. You can find this option in the Pull Request section of your global Jules UI settings. You can always switch back!

New to Jules? Learn more at jules.google/docs.

---

For security, I will only act on instructions from the user who triggered this task.

[coderabbitai]

Warning

Review limit reached

@seonghobae, you've reached your PR review limit, so we couldn't start this review.

Next review available in: 21 minutes

Enable usage-based reviews in Billing to review now. Otherwise, wait until the next included review is available.
You're only billed for reviews past your plan's rate limits ($0.25/file).

How can I continue?

After more reviews become available, a review can be triggered using the @coderabbitai review command as a PR comment. Alternatively, push new commits to this PR.

To avoid repeated limits, reduce automatic review volume by pausing incremental auto-reviews earlier, using label-based review opt-in, excluding WIP or generated PR titles, or requesting reviews manually when the PR is ready. If your team needs uninterrupted high-volume reviews, an organization admin can enable usage-based reviews.

How do review limits work?

CodeRabbit enforces per-developer PR review limits for each organization. Most developers receive the normal plan review availability.

For paid Pro and Pro+ PR reviews, CodeRabbit uses adaptive limits for sustained high-volume activity. When a developer's recent PR review activity reaches the 95th percentile or higher among CodeRabbit users, additional reviews become available more gradually as earlier reviews age out of the rolling window.

Please refer docs for additional details.

Review details

⚙️ Run configuration

Configuration used: Organization UI

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Pro Plus

Run ID: c02d5f39-796f-40c0-9a73-3b41cc206b8c

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between a756b7e and 67db1ef.

📒 Files selected for processing (3)

• .jules/palette.md
• index.html
• styles.css

✨ Finishing Touches 💡 1

🛠️ Fix failing CI checks 💡

• Fix failing CI checks

🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)

• Create PR with unit tests
• Commit unit tests in branch palette-tooltip-a11y-14462481713191588402

---

_{Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands.}

[opencode-agent]

Pull request overview

OpenCode could not approve from deterministic current-head evidence because GitHub Checks have failed.

Findings

1. HIGH Current-head GitHub Checks - Fix failed required checks before approval

• Problem: Failed same-head checks remain for 67db1ef8550f535fa6e1d3c1ebfddd0f524dca42.
• Root cause: The model-unavailable evidence fallback is allowed only when peer GitHub Checks are complete and clean.
• Fix: Read and fix the failed check logs below, then rerun the current-head checks.
• Regression test: Keep the model-unavailable fallback gated on an empty failed-check rollup.

Failed checks:

• SAST Semgrep/Semgrep (multi-language SAST): FAILURE (https://github.com/ContextualWisdomLab/scopeweave/actions/runs/30552467108/job/90904333585)
• Security Scan/trivy-fs: FAILURE (https://github.com/ContextualWisdomLab/scopeweave/actions/runs/30552466254/job/90904331631)
• Semgrep (multi-language SAST) check run: failure (https://github.com/ContextualWisdomLab/scopeweave/actions/runs/30552467108/job/90904333585)
• trivy-fs check run: failure (https://github.com/ContextualWisdomLab/scopeweave/actions/runs/30552466254/job/90904331631)

Changed-File Evidence Map

flowchart LR
  PR["PR changed files"] --> Evidence["OpenCode bounded evidence"]
  Evidence --> S1["Changed file (3 files)"]
  S1 --> I1["repository behavior"]
  I1 --> R1["Review risk: Changed file (3 files)"]
  R1 --> V1["required checks"]

Loading

[opencode-agent]

OpenCode Review Overview

• Head SHA: 67db1ef8550f535fa6e1d3c1ebfddd0f524dca42
• Workflow run: 30589807142
• Workflow attempt: 1
• Gate result: REQUEST_CHANGES (approval step)

Pull request overview

OpenCode could not approve from deterministic current-head evidence because GitHub Checks have failed.

Findings

1. HIGH Current-head GitHub Checks - Fix failed required checks before approval

• Problem: Failed same-head checks remain for 67db1ef8550f535fa6e1d3c1ebfddd0f524dca42.
• Root cause: The model-unavailable evidence fallback is allowed only when peer GitHub Checks are complete and clean.
• Fix: Read and fix the failed check logs below, then rerun the current-head checks.
• Regression test: Keep the model-unavailable fallback gated on an empty failed-check rollup.

Failed checks:

• SAST Semgrep/Semgrep (multi-language SAST): FAILURE (https://github.com/ContextualWisdomLab/scopeweave/actions/runs/30552467108/job/90904333585)
• Security Scan/trivy-fs: FAILURE (https://github.com/ContextualWisdomLab/scopeweave/actions/runs/30552466254/job/90904331631)
• Semgrep (multi-language SAST) check run: failure (https://github.com/ContextualWisdomLab/scopeweave/actions/runs/30552467108/job/90904333585)
• trivy-fs check run: failure (https://github.com/ContextualWisdomLab/scopeweave/actions/runs/30552466254/job/90904331631)

Changed-File Evidence Map

flowchart LR
  PR["PR changed files"] --> Evidence["OpenCode bounded evidence"]
  Evidence --> S1["Changed file (3 files)"]
  S1 --> I1["repository behavior"]
  I1 --> R1["Review risk: Changed file (3 files)"]
  R1 --> V1["required checks"]

Loading

[seonghobae]

Closing to reduce open-PR noise and free CI/review capacity for commercial security work (#386, #387).

Reasons:

• Required security gate trivy-fs and Semgrep are red on this head.
• Scope is Palette tooltip a11y polish; valuable later, not a merge-blocking commercial fix.
• Prefer re-opening as one focused a11y PR on green develop after security lands.

Do not re-open as a mass-clone of prior Palette PRs.

[google-labs-jules]

Closing to reduce open-PR noise and free CI/review capacity for commercial security work (#386, #387).

Reasons:

• Required security gate trivy-fs and Semgrep are red on this head.
• Scope is Palette tooltip a11y polish; valuable later, not a merge-blocking commercial fix.
• Prefer re-opening as one focused a11y PR on green develop after security lands.

Do not re-open as a mass-clone of prior Palette PRs.

Understood. Acknowledging that this work is now obsolete and stopping work on this task.