Compliance-Only Accessibility vs. Inclusive Design in Practice

A product manager says: "Legal told us we just need to hit WCAG 2.1 AA to avoid liability. Let's scope accessibility work as a checklist against the AA success criteria and call it done."

1. Where would a compliance-only, checklist-driven approach likely fall short of what the Microsoft Inclusive Design framework would push you toward, even if every AA criterion technically passes?
2. Give a concrete example of a design decision that could pass a literal WCAG AA audit while still being a poor experience for a real user in one of the three impairment categories (permanent, temporary, situational).
3. How would you argue for going beyond the compliance checklist without making it sound like scope creep to a deadline-driven PM?