accommodation-request
Request a reasonable accommodation at work or in education — frame it around the barrier and the adjustment (not your diagnosis), cite the right process, and navigate the back-and-forth constructively. Use when someone says 'I need a workplace accommodation', 'request reasonable adjustments', 'ADA/Equality Act accommodation', or 'how do I ask for accommodations for my disability/condition'. Produces the request letter, a barriers-and-adjustments map, disclosure guidance, and a plan for the interactive process. Not legal advice — routes to the formal process and to advocacy where needed.
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/mohitagw15856/pm-claude-skills /tmp/accommodation-request && cp -r /tmp/accommodation-request/exports/openclaw/accommodation-request ~/.claude/skills/accommodation-requestSKILL.md
# Accommodation Request Skill
Reasonable accommodations (US: ADA; UK: reasonable adjustments under the Equality Act;
similar elsewhere) are a right, but getting them often stalls on how the request is
framed: people over-share medical detail, ask for a vague "help," or frame it as a
favor rather than an adjustment to a barrier. Employers and institutions respond best
to a specific request that names the *barrier* and the *adjustment that removes it* —
they generally don't need your diagnosis, only the functional limitation and what
helps. This skill writes that request, guides how much to disclose, and prepares you
for the interactive back-and-forth that follows. It is not legal advice; it routes to
the formal process and to advocacy if you hit resistance.
## What This Skill Produces
- A **barriers-and-adjustments map**: for each thing that's hard, the specific
workplace/course barrier and the concrete adjustment that removes it (framed as an
adjustment to a barrier, not a personal favor)
- The **request letter/email**: to the right person (HR, disability services, manager
per the process), citing the process, naming the adjustments, and inviting the
interactive dialogue
- **Disclosure guidance**: how much to share (usually the functional limitation and
what helps, not the diagnosis), what you're not obliged to reveal, and where medical
documentation is genuinely needed
- A **process plan**: the interactive/good-faith dialogue that's expected, how to
handle "that's not possible," alternatives, and escalation to advocacy or the formal
complaint route if needed
## Required Inputs
Ask for (if not already provided):
- The setting (workplace or education) and country/system, since the legal framework
and process differ
- The specific difficulties and the tasks/situations where they bite (the barrier),
and what adjustments would help
- What the user is comfortable disclosing and to whom, and whether there's an existing
process (HR policy, disability services office)
- Any history (a prior refusal, a difficult manager) that shapes strategy
## Framework
1. **Frame around barrier → adjustment, not diagnosis.** The request names the barrier
("open-plan noise makes focused work impossible," "fixed exam timing conflicts with
medication effects") and the specific adjustment that removes it (noise-cancelling/
a quiet space, extra time/a separate room). The employer's duty attaches to the
barrier and the reasonable fix, not to your medical history.
2. **Disclose the minimum that works.** Generally you must share enough functional
information to justify the adjustment and may need medical documentation of the
limitation — but not your full diagnosis or records. The skill helps calibrate:
enough to establish the need, no more, and names what you're not obliged to reveal.
3. **Send it to the right process.** Route to whoever owns adjustments (HR, disability/
access services, occupational health) rather than only a manager who can't approve,
cite the relevant policy/law framing, and put it in writing so there's a record.
4. **Expect the interactive dialogue — and engage it.** These processes are meant to be
a good-faith back-and-forth: they may propose alternatives, ask for documentation, or
push back on cost/feasibility. The skill preps constructive responses, the
"undue-hardship/reasonableness" conversation, and holding firm on the barrier while
being flexible on the exact fix.
5. **Know the escalation and get support.** If met with refusal, delay, or retaliation:
the formal grievance/complaint route, disability advocacy organizations, and (where
warranted) legal advice. Retaliation for requesting accommodations is itself usually
unlawful — flag it, and route to real help rather than adjudicating it here.
## Output Format
```
## Barriers → adjustments
| The barrier (situation/task) | The adjustment that removes it |
## Your request (send this)
[To the right owner · cites the process · names the adjustments · invites the
interactive dialogue · in writing]
## What to disclose (and what you needn't)
[The functional info to share · documentation if genuinely needed · what you're not
obliged to reveal]
## The back-and-forth
[Expect a good-faith dialogue · handling "not possible"/alternatives · firm on barrier,
flexible on fix]
## If you hit a wall
[Grievance/complaint route · disability advocacy orgs · legal advice · retaliation is
usually unlawful — get help]
⚠ Not legal advice. Frameworks differ by country and situation; route to the formal
process and to an advocate/lawyer if you meet resistance.
```
## Quality Checks
- [ ] Every request is framed as barrier → adjustment, not as a diagnosis disclosure or
a favor
- [ ] Disclosure is calibrated to the minimum needed, and what's not required is stated
- [ ] It's routed to the actual owner of the process, in writing
- [ ] The interactive/good-faith dialogue is anticipated with constructive responses
- [ ] An escalation/advocacy path and the not-legal-advice line are present
## Anti-Patterns
- [ ] Do not over-disclose medical detail — the barrier and the fix are what matter
- [ ] Do not assert specific legal entitlements or "undue hardship" thresholds as fact —
they vary; route to the process and to advocacy
- [ ] Do not frame it as asking a favor — it's a request to remove a barrier, often a legal duty
- [ ] Do not counsel giving up at first refusal — the interactive process and escalation
exist for exactly that
- [ ] Do not treat retaliation as normal — flag it and route to real help
## Related
[[disability-disclosure-decision]] for the whether/how of telling work at all;
[[disability-benefit-appeal]] for the benefits side; [[venue-access-check]] and
[[accessible-travel-planner]] for physical access; [[nt-translator]] for the workplace-
communication layer.Design a 360-degree feedback survey or write a structured 360 feedback report. Use when asked to build a 360 feedback process, write 360 feedback for a colleague, design a feedback survey, or produce a feedback report. Produces either a complete survey instrument with rating scales and open-ended questions, or a structured narrative feedback report with themes, strengths, and development areas.
Decode a 401k or workplace retirement plan — the real cost of its funds, the match's fine print, vesting math, and the plan features worth using or avoiding. Use when someone asks 'is my 401k any good', 'decode my 401k plan', 'which funds should I look at', or 'what fees am I paying'. Produces a fee decode in dollars-over-time, match and vesting math, a fund-lineup triage by cost, and the questions for HR or the plan administrator.
Design statistically rigorous A/B tests for product features, UI changes, onboarding flows, and pricing experiments. Use when asked to set up an experiment, design an A/B test, calculate sample size, or interpret test results. Produces a complete test plan with hypothesis, variant definitions, sample size, duration estimate, guardrail metrics, and a results interpretation guide.
Analyse a finished A/B test and write the readout — the result, whether it's statistically and practically significant, what it means, and the ship/no-ship call. Use when asked to analyse experiment results, write an A/B test readout, interpret test data, or decide whether to ship a variant. Produces a clear verdict with the lift and confidence, segment cuts, the risks (peeking, novelty, sample), and a recommendation. Distinct from planning a test — this reads results.
Generate a WCAG 2.2 accessibility audit checklist and remediation suggestions for any UI or design. Use when asked to audit for accessibility, check WCAG compliance, review a design for a11y issues, or create an accessibility remediation plan. Produces a prioritised checklist with pass/fail assessments and specific fixes.
Plan a trip that actually works with a disability or access need — confirm real accessibility (not just 'accessible' labels), book the assistance in advance, plan for equipment and medication, and build in the contingencies for when access breaks down. Use when someone says 'plan an accessible trip', 'travelling with a wheelchair/disability', 'book assistance for my flight', or 'will this hotel actually work for me'. Produces an access-verified itinerary, an assistance-booking checklist, an equipment/medication plan, and contingency scripts. Verify specifics with providers.
Build a structured account plan for any key customer or target account. Use when asked to create an account plan, key account strategy, strategic account review, or territory plan. Produces a complete account plan with relationship map, growth opportunities, risks, and 90-day action plan.
Get back into a locked or hacked account the right way — the official recovery routes, what proof you'll need, and how to re-secure it so it doesn't happen again. Use when asked I'm locked out of my account, my account got hacked, help me recover my [email/social/bank] account, or I lost access to 2FA. Produces the official recovery path for the account type, the identity proof to prepare, a re-securing checklist for after you're back in, and warnings about fake 'recovery' services and support scams.