pitch-deck
When the user wants to create, review, or restructure a fundraising pitch deck for seed or Series A. Also activates when the user mentions "deck", "pitch", "investor presentation", or "slide structure".
86
83%
Does it follow best practices?
Impact
Pending
No eval scenarios have been run
Passed
No known issues
Quality
Discovery
89%Based on the skill's description, can an agent find and select it at the right time? Clear, specific descriptions lead to better discovery.
This is a solid description with excellent trigger terms and clear 'when' guidance, making it highly functional for skill selection. Its main weakness is that the 'what' portion could be more specific about the concrete actions and outputs the skill provides (e.g., slide-by-slide structure, financial projections, narrative frameworks). Overall, it would perform well in a multi-skill environment.
Suggestions
Add more specific concrete capabilities, e.g., 'Generates slide-by-slide outlines, writes compelling narrative arcs, structures financial projections and traction slides' to improve specificity.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | The description names the domain (fundraising pitch decks) and some actions (create, review, restructure), but doesn't list specific concrete capabilities like 'generate financial slides, write executive summaries, structure problem/solution narratives'. The actions are somewhat generic. | 2 / 3 |
Completeness | Clearly answers both 'what' (create, review, or restructure a fundraising pitch deck for seed or Series A) and 'when' (explicit activation triggers including specific keywords like 'deck', 'pitch', 'investor presentation', 'slide structure'). | 3 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | Includes strong natural trigger terms: 'deck', 'pitch', 'investor presentation', 'slide structure', plus contextual terms like 'fundraising', 'seed', 'Series A'. These are terms users would naturally use when requesting this kind of help. | 3 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | Clearly scoped to fundraising pitch decks for early-stage startups, with distinct triggers like 'investor presentation' and 'Series A' that are unlikely to conflict with general presentation or document skills. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 11 / 12 Passed |
Implementation
77%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
This is a strong, well-structured skill that provides highly actionable guidance for building pitch decks. Its main strengths are the concrete 12-slide framework with common mistakes, the clear workflow, and the excellent example output. Its weaknesses are moderate verbosity (some general advice Claude already knows) and a monolithic structure that could benefit from splitting detailed reference material into separate files.
Suggestions
Move the detailed 12-slide framework table and stage-specific guidance into a referenced file (e.g., SLIDE-FRAMEWORK.md) to keep the main SKILL.md leaner and improve progressive disclosure.
Trim general design/presentation advice that Claude already knows (e.g., font/color limits, 'data beats adjectives') to improve conciseness.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The skill is fairly well-written but includes some content that Claude would already know (e.g., general pitch deck advice like 'use no more than 3 fonts and 2 brand colors', 'Data beats adjectives'). The table and narrative arc rules are useful but could be tightened. Overall mostly efficient with some padding. | 2 / 3 |
Actionability | The skill provides highly concrete, actionable guidance: a specific 12-slide framework with purposes and common mistakes, a detailed output format with five components per slide, a complete example showing exactly what a good slide output looks like, and clear stage-specific guidance. The example output snippet is copy-paste ready. | 3 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | The 6-step workflow is clearly sequenced with logical progression: read context → determine deck type → draft narrative arc → write slides → review through investor lens → produce output. Step 5 serves as a validation checkpoint (reviewing against investor questions and flagging weak spots), and step 1 includes a gap-flagging mechanism. For a content-generation skill (non-destructive), this is thorough. | 3 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | The skill references related skills (investor-research, data-room, fundraising-email) and external context files, which is good. However, the content is quite long and monolithic — the detailed 12-slide framework table, narrative arc rules, stage-specific guidance, and principles could potentially be split into a referenced file. Everything is inline in one document. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 10 / 12 Passed |
Validation
90%Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.
Validation — 10 / 11 Passed
Validation for skill structure
| Criteria | Description | Result |
|---|---|---|
frontmatter_unknown_keys | Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata | Warning |
Total | 10 / 11 Passed | |
- Repository
- shawnpang/startup-founder-skills
- Commit
4ad31b4
- Reviewed
Table of Contents
Is this your skill?
If you maintain this skill, you can claim it as your own. Once claimed, you can manage eval scenarios, bundle related skills, attach documentation or rules, and ensure cross-agent compatibility.