Pitch Deck

Pitch Deck Skill

Build investor-ready pitch decks from raw materials — meeting notes, uploaded decks, DD reports, and strategy docs — and output as branded PPTX.

This skill is built for The Studio (Utopia Capital). The default audience is co-investors and syndicate partners. When helping portfolio founders build their own decks, adapt the branding and voice accordingly.

Before You Start

1. Read the pptx skill: view /mnt/skills/public/pptx/SKILL.md — then read pptxgenjs.md for from-scratch creation
2. Read references/slide-frameworks.md — Global Context and Growth Flywheel frameworks (the two signature slides)
3. Read references/slide-best-practices.md — research-backed guidance for every slide in the deck
4. Read references/scoring-rubric.md — the 15-dimension scoring framework (score inputs and outputs)
5. Read assets/utopia-branding.md — Studio brand defaults
6. If a DD report exists or is mentioned, read references/dd-integration.md for extraction patterns

All reference paths are relative to this skill's directory.

Step 1: Ingest Source Materials

Read and parse everything the user provides. Typical inputs:

• Granola meeting notes — founder call transcripts; extract claims, metrics, positioning, and team context
• Uploaded pitch decks (PDF/PPTX) — use markitdown or the pdf-reading skill to extract content; note what's strong and what's missing
• Technical DD reports — if available, pull key findings, risk flags, and technology assessments (see references/dd-integration.md)
• Ad-hoc docs — strategy briefs, financials, brainstorm notes, Notion exports

From these materials, extract and organize:

If critical data is missing, ask specific questions before generating. Never fabricate metrics, financials, or traction numbers. Use [NEEDS INPUT] placeholders for gaps the user must fill.

Score the Input Materials

After ingesting all source materials, score them using the 15-dimension framework in references/scoring-rubric.md. Present the input scores to the user before generating the deck — this sets expectations about what the source materials support and where research or user input is needed to improve the output.

For any dimension scoring 6 or below, flag it immediately and ask for additional information or approval to research.

Step 2: Research Industry Context

Supplement the user's materials with current market intelligence using web search:

• Industry trends — recent developments, growth forecasts, regulatory shifts
• Competitive landscape — key competitors, recent rounds, positioning moves
• Market sizing — validate or source TAM/SAM/SOM from credible reports
• Investor sentiment — what matters to investors in this space right now

Cross-reference any numbers from the source materials against public data. Flag discrepancies for the user rather than silently correcting.

Step 3: Structure the Deck

The standard co-investor deck follows this sequence. Adapt based on what the materials contain — not every company needs every slide, and some need extras.

Standard Investor Deck (12–15 slides)

The Global Context (slide 2) and Growth Flywheel (slide 9) are the two signature slides that distinguish a Studio deck from a generic pitch. They are non-negotiable for co-investor decks. Read references/slide-frameworks.md before generating these.

Audience Adaptation

• Co-investor / syndicate (default) — lead with market thesis, emphasize structural forces, highlight risk-adjusted returns, include DD-backed technical assessment if available
• Founder coaching — help the founder tell their story; adapt branding to the portfolio company; focus on what investors in their specific round will care about

Step 4: Generate Slide Content

For each slide, consult references/slide-best-practices.md for research-backed guidance on what great looks like, what to avoid, and how investors evaluate that specific slide. Then produce:

• Headline — an insight, not a label. "A $47B market growing 23% annually" beats "Market Size"
• Body content — 3–5 bullets or a concise paragraph with evidence
• Visual direction — what chart, diagram, or layout would strengthen this slide
• Speaker notes — 2–3 sentences of talking points

Content Principles

• Every claim must be backed by data from the source materials or research
• Use specific numbers: "3,200 MAU" not "thousands of users"
• One key message per slide — if it has two, split it
• Write for the audience's priorities (co-investors care about returns and risk; founders care about traction and vision)

Industry-Specific Emphasis

Adapt language and metrics by sector:

Step 5: Build the PPTX

Use the pptx skill's pptxgenjs approach (from-scratch creation). Before writing code:

1. Re-read /mnt/skills/public/pptx/pptxgenjs.md for the full API reference
2. Apply the branding from assets/utopia-branding.md (Studio default) or the portfolio company's brand if specified
3. Follow the pptx skill's design guidance — no boring slides, vary layouts, use visual elements on every slide

Branding Logic

• Studio deck for co-investors → Use Studio branding (Deep Navy, Steel Blue, Gold accent, Arial). Include "The Studio — Utopia Capital" footer and "Strictly Confidential" marking.
• Founder coaching deck → Ask the user for the company's brand colors, logo, and font preference. Fall back to a clean neutral palette if not provided.

Layout Variety

Do not repeat the same layout across slides. Rotate through:

• Title + large stat callouts
• Two-column (text left, visual right)
• Icon + text rows in grid
• Full-width visual with overlay text
• Comparison columns (before/after, us/them)
• Timeline or process flow
• The Global Context three-column layout
• The Flywheel circular/cyclical diagram

Step 6: QA

Follow the pptx skill's QA process exactly:

1. Convert to images: python scripts/office/soffice.py --headless --convert-to pdf output.pptx then pdftoppm
2. Visually inspect every slide — check for overlaps, cut-off text, alignment issues, low contrast
3. Content check: python -m markitdown output.pptx — verify no missing content or placeholder text
4. Fix issues and re-verify

Step 7: Score the Output & Review

After generating the deck, score it again using the same 15-dimension framework from references/scoring-rubric.md. Present a before/after comparison:

PITCH DECK QUALITY SCORECARD
                              Input    Output    Delta
 1. Narrative Clarity          X/10     X/10     +X
 2. Problem Definition         X/10     X/10     +X
 ...
TOTAL                         X/150    X/150    +X
GRADE                                  [A/B/C/D/F]

Then provide:

• Gap analysis — flag slides with weak evidence or [NEEDS INPUT] markers
• Narrative check — does the story flow from global context → problem → solution → proof → ask?
• Data verification — confirm statistics are sourced
• Dimension-specific recommendations — for any dimension still scoring 6 or below, explain what's missing, what to do, and how many points it could gain
• Top 3 priorities — the three most impactful improvements the user can make

Target a minimum grade of B (90+/150) before sharing a deck with co-investors. Anything below B needs another iteration.

Handling Edge Cases

Sparse Source Material

• Build a skeleton deck with all slides
• Mark gaps with [NEEDS INPUT: specific question]
• Offer to research publicly available information
• Ask targeted questions: "What's your current MRR?" not "Tell me more about traction"

Multiple Sources / Contradictions

• Synthesize overlapping information
• Prioritize the most recent data when conflicts exist
• Flag contradictions for the user to resolve

Existing Deck Improvement

When the user uploads an existing pitch deck and asks to improve it:

• Extract all content first
• Identify structural gaps (missing Global Context? No flywheel?)
• Propose specific improvements before rebuilding
• Preserve any content the founder has clearly crafted carefully

DD Report Available

When a Technical DD report exists:

• Read references/dd-integration.md for extraction patterns
• Pull technology assessment findings into the Product and Solution slides
• Surface risk flags in speaker notes (not on-slide — these are for the presenter)
• Reference the DD report's evidence ratings where relevant