If aI simplification removes necessary definitions, start by preserving one representative example. It gives the investigation a concrete reference and makes the eventual correction easier to judge.
Find the likely cause
Shortening is treated as the same thing as accessibility.
Treat this as an explanation to verify against the actual work. Look at the input, the relevant decision, and the final result together. If the evidence does not support this diagnosis, investigate the mismatch before applying a convenient but unrelated fix.
Make the targeted correction
Explain unfamiliar terms plainly while retaining essential detail.
Accessible content communicates its structure and meaning in ways that work across different reading and interaction needs.
Check that the repair worked
Ask a newcomer to explain the instruction back in their own words.
Repeat the check on the final version that the reader or customer will encounter. An approved draft, a preview, and a published result can differ; the acceptance decision should concern the version people actually use.
Prevent the next related failure
A separate issue to watch for is this: headings are chosen for appearance rather than structure. Use a logical heading order and style it separately.
Monitor the useful outcome
Track unresolved accessibility defects and successful completion of representative reading tasks.
Keep a short record of the original symptom, the evidence behind the diagnosis, and the result of the acceptance check. That record makes the solution reusable when the same condition appears again, without assuming that every superficially similar problem has the same cause.
Official reference for the platform or standard discussed: W3C WAI: image alternatives.