本文へ移動
cccskills
無料GitHub で公開

presentation-design

Designs slide decks and one-pagers that carry an argument rather than decorate one — deck structure, headlines that state the takeaway, charts that make a single point, and the different rules board decks and conference talks follow. Use this to build or fix a pitch deck, board deck, or conference talk, to design a one-pager, or when a deck is dense, unfocused, or being read aloud from the slides. For social graphics, carousels and infographics, use `marketing:visual-content` instead.

インストール方法を見る

含まれるファイル(1)

  • SKILL.md4.5 KB

SKILL.md(原文)

インストールする前に、エージェントに与えられる指示の中身を確認できます。

Presentation design

Decks

The deck is not the talk. Slides that contain the argument make the speaker redundant and the reader confused. Decide which artifact you are making — a spoken-support deck or a read-alone document — because they have opposite rules and the hybrid fails at both.

One idea per slide. If a slide needs a sub-argument, it is two slides. The cost of an extra slide is zero; the cost of a crowded one is that nothing on it lands.

Structure carries more than styling:

  1. Open with the change in the world that makes this matter now.
  2. State the problem in the audience's terms, not yours.
  3. The argument, in the smallest number of steps that hold.
  4. The evidence — one chart per claim, not a dashboard.
  5. The ask, stated explicitly. A deck that ends without an ask was a briefing.

On slides: headline states the takeaway, not the topic — "Churn concentrates in month two," not "Churn analysis." If the reader only reads headlines, they should get the argument.

Charts: one message each, labeled directly rather than through a legend, with the axis honest. Strip everything that is not carrying information.

Board decks and conference talks follow different rules

The structure above is shaped for persuasion to a room you are in. Two of the artifacts this skill is asked for are not that.

A board deck is read before the meeting, not presented at it. It goes out days ahead and is expected to be read, so it has to stand alone — which makes it the read-alone document, not the spoken-support deck.

  • Separate what is for decision from what is for information, and say which is which on the page. A board meeting spent walking through updates is a board meeting with no decisions in it.
  • Keep the format identical period over period. The value of a board pack is comparison across time, and a redesign destroys it. Same sections, same order, same metrics with the same definitions.
  • Lead with what is not working. A pack that buries the problem on page nineteen costs credibility permanently once someone finds it, and they do.
  • Bring the open question, not only the resolved one. A board shown finished thinking cannot help and eventually stops trying.

For how the meeting itself should be run and what belongs at which cadence, see operations:operating-cadence; for what has to be formally recorded, legal-risk:corporate-governance.

A conference talk is a performance with visual support, and it fails in the opposite direction from a board pack.

  • Fewer words than feels safe. Slides are read faster than you speak, so text competes with you and wins. Images, one phrase, a single number.
  • Design for the back of a large room and for the bottom third being invisible behind heads.
  • The talk has to survive the projector — assume poor contrast and bad color reproduction, and never rely on a subtle tonal difference to carry meaning.
  • Nothing on a slide should require the handout to be understood. If the deck will be shared afterward, that is a second artifact, not the same one.

One-pagers

A single surface has one job: get one idea across at a glance, and reward a closer read.

  • Establish a focal point immediately — largest element, most contrast, positioned where the eye lands first.
  • Hierarchy in three levels at most. More reads as noise.
  • Everything aligns to a grid, including the things that look like exceptions.
  • Design for where it will actually be read. A page printed and handed across a table, attached to an email, and projected in a room impose different minimum type sizes, and the one you designed on screen at full width is usually the least representative of the three.

Social graphics, carousels and infographics are a different job with different constraints — the feed decides how they are seen. marketing:visual-content covers them.

Never

  • Read the slide aloud.
  • Use a chart type because it is interesting rather than because it fits the comparison.
  • Let a template's layout decide your argument's structure.

レビュー

まだレビューはありません。使ってみた感想をお寄せください。

同じリポジトリのスキル

概要と使いどころ

Designs and audits who can reach what — authentication, authorization models, privileged access, service credentials, and joiner-mover-leaver process. Use this to design a permissions model, run an access review, reduce standing privilege, handle offboarding, set up SSO or MFA, manage service and machine credentials, or diagnose why permissions have sprawled.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

cbrock84/headcount2,0282026年9月18日 更新

Concentrates marketing and sales effort on a named set of accounts rather than on volume — qualifying whether the model fits your economics at all, building the account list and the buying group inside each, tiering effort against account value, coordinating so the account experiences one campaign rather than several, and measuring account progression instead of leads. Use this to decide whether to run an account-based program, build one, or work out why an existing one produces activity and no pipeline.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

cbrock84/headcount2,0282026年9月18日 更新

Gets new users from signup to first real value — signup flow, onboarding, time-to-value, and the early experience that determines whether someone becomes a user or a lapsed account. Use this to design or fix signup and onboarding, diagnose why signups do not convert to active use, reduce time-to-value, or decide what a new user must accomplish first.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

cbrock84/headcount2,0282026年9月18日 更新

Designs orchestrator-and-subagent hierarchies for a repository — splitting agents by exclusive write surface, pairing every producer with an independent auditor, and enforcing the split with a script that runs in CI. Use this whenever the user wants to set up, expand, audit, or fix a multi-agent or subagent structure for a codebase; asks how to divide work between agents; wants agent charters, roles, or a surface map written; or is hitting agents that collide on the same files, review their own work, or drift from their remit. Also use when sizing a roster or deciding whether a new agent is justified.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

cbrock84/headcount2,0282026年9月18日 更新

Governs models and AI systems in production — intended use, evaluation, monitoring, human oversight, documentation, and the decision to deploy or retire. Use this before deploying a model or AI feature, when defining evaluation criteria, when a model's behavior has drifted, when assessing AI risk or regulatory exposure, or when deciding whether an AI system is fit for a consequential decision.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

cbrock84/headcount2,0282026年9月18日 更新

Produces executive-level research — market sizing, competitor mapping, trend analysis, and strategic intelligence — grounded in cited sources with the confidence in each claim made explicit. Use this to analyze a market or industry, map competitors, evaluate a market-entry or build-versus-buy decision, produce a research brief, or assemble evidence for a decision. Also use when comparing options that need a structured, evidence-based verdict rather than an opinion.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

cbrock84/headcount2,0282026年9月18日 更新

cbrock84 のスキルをすべて見る

このスキルの問題を報告する