majiayu000 PPTX Slide Auditor Skill
Runs a systematic visual and structural audit of a PowerPoint presentation — identifying layout issues, text overflow, inconsistent styling, weak visual hierarchy, and slides that will cause problems in a presentation setting. Built to leverage Opus 4.7 vision improvements for pixel-level layout analysis.
Required Inputs
Ask the user for these if not provided:
- The deck (upload the .pptx file or individual slide screenshots)
- Audience (internal team / executive / external client / conference / investor)
- Presentation mode (presented live / sent to read / shared async on video)
- Areas of concern (optional — e.g. "I think slide 12 is overcrowded")
Output Structure
1. Deck Overview
| Metric | Result |
|---|---|
| Total slides | N |
| Overall status | Ready / Minor fixes needed / Major revisions required |
| Readability score | /10 |
| Visual consistency score | /10 |
| Most common issue | [Pattern observed across multiple slides] |
2. Slide-by-Slide Audit
For each slide with issues:
Slide N: [Slide title]
- Status: Ready / Fix before sending / Major revision
- Issues found:
- [Specific issue with exact location — e.g. "Body text extends beyond the text frame on the right side"]
- [Issue 2]
- Suggested fix: [Specific action — move element, reduce text, resize]
Slides with no issues: just list the slide numbers. Do not write anything else about them.
3. Pattern Issues Across the Deck
Issues that repeat across multiple slides:
[Pattern title — e.g. "Inconsistent body text size"]
- Slides affected: [list]
- Root cause: [master slide issue / manual overrides / mixed templates]
- Fix: [Single action to resolve across all affected slides]
4. Visual Hierarchy Check
| Dimension | Status | Notes |
|---|---|---|
| Title consistency (size, font, colour) | Pass / Fail | |
| Body text readability at presentation distance | Pass / Fail | |
| Image placement alignment | Pass / Fail | |
| Whitespace and breathing room | Pass / Fail | |
| Data visualisation clarity | Pass / Fail / N/A |
5. Audience-Specific Flags
Based on the stated audience:
- Executive audience: flag slides with too much text, complex tables, or unclear bottom-line messages
- External client: flag slides with internal jargon, unfinished placeholder text, or confidentiality concerns
- Live presentation: flag slides that will be hard to read from the back of a room
- Async/video: flag slides that assume a presenter voiceover
6. Prioritised Fix List
| # | Fix | Slide | Effort | Impact |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | [Specific fix] | Slide N | Low/Med/High | High |
Order by: fixes before handoff (critical) > consistency fixes (high) > polish (medium).
Quality Checks
- Every issue references a specific slide number and location on the slide
- Pattern issues are identified separately from slide-specific issues
- Fix list is ordered by impact, not by slide order
- Audience-appropriate concerns flagged explicitly
- Slides without issues are listed briefly, not ignored
Example Trigger Phrases
- "Audit this slide deck before my board meeting"
- "Review this PowerPoint for layout issues"
- "Check this presentation for consistency problems"
- "QA my deck before I send it to the client"
- "What is wrong with slide 7 in this deck?"
Why This Works Better on Opus 4.7
Earlier models struggled with precise spatial analysis of slide layouts — they would hallucinate issues or miss obvious overflow problems. Opus 4.7 vision improvements mean coordinates map 1:1 to pixels, making slide-level issue detection reliable without manual screenshot annotation.