Enlarging text is useful only when the complete instruction remains readable and its related action or explanation still works. A larger type size is not a successful improvement if a fixed box cuts off the ending and changes what the sentence communicates.
Why the missing ending matters
Hypothetical example: a fictional gem legend displays the sentence “The pale gem marks a choice that is not selected”. At normal size, the whole sentence appears. After enlargement, a fixed-width box shows only “The pale gem marks a choice that is”. The words “not selected” disappear, so the reader may misunderstand the status of the gem. This is content loss, not merely an untidy visual layout.
Compare wrapping, not just size
Place the same full sentence in a version that wraps onto two lines. The first line may end after “choice that is”, while the second line contains “not selected”. This comparison checks whether enlargement preserves the complete meaning. The larger text now fits its container.
Check the nearby explanatory link as well. In the hypothetical legend, “Learn what the symbols mean” should remain visible, identifiable and usable after enlargement. A box that keeps the first sentence but hides this adjacent explanation still prevents access to part of the information.
What a practical check should confirm
Check text enlargement up to 200%, including intermediate steps, using a supported method. Read every line. The instruction, its final words, and the adjacent explanatory link should remain available without loss of content or function. The relevant WCAG guidance covers text, excluding captions and images of text, and describes resizing up to 200% without such loss: W3C guidance on resizing text.
This example concerns a fictional static legend sentence only. It does not establish that any particular gem-game page has a tested control, scaling method or conformance result.