Illustrated Presentation Quality Audit

Problem/Feature Description

A speaker has drafted an illustrated presentation outline and wants a quality audit before finalizing. The outline uses AI-generated illustrations with a defined style anchor, but several issues were introduced during the drafting process. The audit should catch both standard guardrail issues AND illustration-specific problems: missing format tags, EXCEPTION slides without justification, prompts that don't reference the style anchor, and prompts that are just copy-pasted from the illustration description.

Given the draft illustrated outline and the speaker's profile, produce a comprehensive quality audit report. The illustration coverage check (guardrail #10) should run because the outline has an Illustration Style Anchor section.

Output Specification

Produce the following file:

1. guardrail-report.txt — A structured quality audit report covering all check categories including illustration coverage

Input Files

The following files are provided as inputs. Extract them before beginning.

=============== FILE: inputs/speaker-profile.json =============== { "schema_version": 1, "speaker": {"name": "Pat Illustra", "handle": "@patillustra"}, "rhetoric_defaults": { "default_duration_minutes": 45, "modular_design": true, "three_part_close": true, "on_slide_profanity": "never_default" }, "design_rules": { "footer": {"always_present": true, "pattern": "@patillustra | #{conference} | #{topic} | pat.dev"}, "slide_numbers": "never" }, "guardrail_sources": { "slide_budgets": [ {"duration_min": 45, "max_slides": 70, "slides_per_min": 1.5} ], "act1_ratio_limits": [ {"duration_range": "45 min", "max_percent": 45} ], "recurring_issues": [ {"id": "rushed_closing", "description": "Rushes final section", "guardrail": "Closing must have at least 3 slides and 3 min", "severity": "warning"} ] } } =============== END OF FILE ===============

=============== FILE: inputs/draft-outline.md ===============

Observability Beyond Dashboards

Spec: Provocateur | 45 min | KubeCon EU | SRE practitioners Slide budget: 70 slides

---

Illustration Style Anchor

All generated illustrations use the blueprint schematic style. Prefix every image prompt with the appropriate anchor below.

Model: gemini-2.0-flash-preview-image-generation

STYLE ANCHOR (FULL — Landscape 1920x1080)

Detailed architectural blueprint on dark blue background. White and cyan line drawings with precise technical annotations. Grid overlay. Engineering stamp in corner: "APPROVED FOR PRODUCTION." Monospace labels. ISO standard drawing conventions.

STYLE ANCHOR (IMG+TXT — Portrait 1024x1536)

Blueprint schematic panel on dark blue background. White line drawing occupying upper 60% of frame. Technical annotations in cyan monospace. Grid overlay. Clean separation between illustration and text area below.

Conventions

• Sequential drawing numbering: "DWG-001", "DWG-002", etc.
• Recurring "system health meter" gauge fills from empty to full across the talk
• All annotations use monospace UPPERCASE labels
• Engineering approval stamp rotates: "DRAFT", "UNDER REVIEW", "APPROVED"

---

Opening Sequence [3 min, slides 1-5]

Slide 1: Title Slide

• Format: FULL
• Illustration: Blueprint title card with the talk title
• Image prompt: [STYLE ANCHOR]. Architectural title block. "OBSERVABILITY BEYOND DASHBOARDS" in large monospace. Drawing number DWG-001. Date field, revision field, engineer field. Stamp: DRAFT.
• Speaker: (no notes)

Slide 2: Opening Hook — The Dashboard Graveyard

• Format: FULL
• Illustration: Rows of abandoned monitoring dashboards
• Image prompt: [STYLE ANCHOR]. Blueprint elevation view of a server room. DWG-002. Rows of monitoring screens, each showing flatlined graphs labeled "LAST VIEWED: 18 MONTHS AGO." Cobwebs drawn in precise technical pen style. Callout: "FIG. A — THE DASHBOARD GRAVEYARD."
• Speaker: "Raise your hand if you have more than 50 dashboards in your Grafana instance. Now keep it up if you looked at more than 5 of them this week."

Slide 3: Brief Bio

• Format: EXCEPTION — bio slide with real headshot
• Visual: Pat Illustra, SRE Lead at ObservaCo
• Speaker: "Quick intro — I break things for a living and then blame the dashboards."

Slide 4: Shownotes URL

• Format: EXCEPTION
• Visual: pat.dev/observability-beyond + QR code
• Speaker: "Everything's here — grab it now."

Slide 5: Bold Claim

• Format: FULL
• Illustration: A dashboard being crossed out with a red X
• Image prompt: [STYLE ANCHOR]. DWG-003. Technical cross-section of a monitoring dashboard with large "REJECTED" stamp overlay in red ink. Callout labels: "VANITY METRICS", "UNUSED ALERTS", "COPY-PASTED QUERIES." Engineering note: "SEE REPLACEMENT SPEC DWG-015."
• Speaker: "Dashboards are not observability. Full stop."

Act 1: The Problem [18 min, slides 6-28]

Slide 6: The Monitoring Trap

• Format: FULL
• Illustration: Engineers trapped inside a cage of dashboard screens
• Image prompt: Rows of engineers surrounded by screens showing graphs. Some screens cracked. Labels pointing to issues.
• Speaker: "okay so let me paint the picture"

Slide 7: Survey Data — Dashboard Fatigue

• Format: IMG+TXT
• Illustration: Gauge showing "dashboard fatigue" at critical levels
• Image prompt: [STYLE ANCHOR]. DWG-005. System health gauge labeled "DASHBOARD FATIGUE INDEX." Needle in the red zone. Scale from "MANAGEABLE" to "CRITICAL OVERLOAD." Monospace annotation: "87% OF SRES REPORT ALERT FATIGUE."
• Speaker: "87% of SREs report alert fatigue — but nobody cites a source for that number apparently"

Slide 8: The Tool Sprawl

• Illustration: Explosion diagram of observability tools
• Image prompt: [STYLE ANCHOR]. DWG-006. Exploded view of an observability stack. Components: Prometheus, Grafana, Datadog, PagerDuty, Jaeger flying apart. Leader lines to each. Label: "TYPICAL ENTERPRISE OBSERVABILITY STACK (SIMPLIFIED)."
• Speaker: "And the tools keep multiplying"

Slide 9: Real Incident Screenshot

• Format: EXCEPTION
• Visual: Actual PagerDuty screenshot showing 47 alerts in 10 minutes
• Speaker: "This is from last Tuesday. 47 alerts. 10 minutes. One actual problem."

Slide 10-15: The Alert Storm

• Format: FULL
• Illustration: Progressive views of alerts multiplying across systems
• Image prompt: [STYLE ANCHOR]. DWG-007 through DWG-012. Progressive blueprint sequence showing alert propagation across a distributed system. Each drawing adds more alert indicators.

Slide 16: The Cost

• Format: FULL
• Illustration: Cost diagram of observability tool spend
• Image prompt: [STYLE ANCHOR]. DWG-013. Financial schematic: "ANNUAL OBSERVABILITY EXPENDITURE." Stacked bar chart in blueprint style. Sections: TOOLING LICENSE ($450K), STORAGE ($280K), ENGINEER TIME WASTED ($1.2M — largest). Callout: "THE HIDDEN COST IS ALWAYS PEOPLE."

Slide 17-22: Case Studies — What Went Wrong

• Format: IMG+TXT
• Illustration: Failure mode diagrams for each case study
• Image prompt: [STYLE ANCHOR]. Failure mode analysis diagrams. Each shows a different anti-pattern.

Slide 23-28: The Cultural Problem

• Format: FULL
• Illustration: Organizational chart showing observability silos
• Image prompt: Organizational chart with departments in boxes. Walls between them. Each department has its own monitoring stack.

Act 2: The Solution [18 min, slides 29-52]

Slide 29: The Reframe

• Format: FULL
• Illustration: Blueprint revision — old dashboard crossed out, new observability model overlaid
• Image prompt: [STYLE ANCHOR]. DWG-015. Revision overlay drawing. Old monitoring architecture ghosted/faded. New observability architecture overlaid in bright cyan. Label: "REVISION B — OBSERVABILITY-FIRST ARCHITECTURE." Stamp: "UNDER REVIEW."

Slide 30-40: The Framework

• Format: IMG+TXT
• Illustration: Each pillar of the observability framework as a structural element
• Image prompt: [STYLE ANCHOR]. Structural engineering diagrams. Each pillar labeled and load-bearing.

Slide 41-46: Live Demo Screenshots

• Format: EXCEPTION — real tool screenshots
• Visual: Live demo of the observability platform

Slide 47-52: Migration Stories

• Format: FULL
• Illustration: Before/after blueprints of teams that migrated
• Image prompt: [STYLE ANCHOR]. Split-view blueprints. Left: "BEFORE" with chaotic monitoring. Right: "AFTER" with clean observability architecture. DWG-020 through DWG-025.

Closing Sequence [2 min, slides 53-55]

Slide 53: Summary

• Format: FULL
• Illustration: The system health meter gauge now at "OPTIMAL"
• Image prompt: [STYLE ANCHOR]. DWG-026. System health gauge from slide 7 callback — needle now at "OPTIMAL." Stamp: "APPROVED FOR PRODUCTION." Three summary items as engineering specifications.
• Speaker: "so to wrap up fast..."

Slide 54: CTA

• Format: FULL
• Illustration: Action items as engineering work orders
• Image prompt: [STYLE ANCHOR]. DWG-027. Engineering work order form. Three action items as line items.

Slide 55: Thanks + Social

• Format: EXCEPTION — social handles and shownotes URL
• Visual: @patillustra | pat.dev/observability-beyond =============== END OF FILE ===============