Individual skill
partner-review-checklist
Runs a deck through a partner-grade review checklist covering story, titles, exhibits, layout, and consistency, returning a prioritized fix list before review.
skills/partner-review-checklist/SKILL.md
Source commit 45f80c2fab1ea7fc4d78b09b3c7c51d0ab4fc44a
What was checked
- Matches the observed repository HEAD
- Yes
- Scanner rules are current
- No
- Repository scan complete
- No
- Skill scan complete
- No
- Observed behavior
- Not checked yet
- Last checked
- Nov 11, 2026
These are observations at the recorded commit, not a guarantee of safety. Review the source before running it.
Install this skill
Choose an agent in your Stack or copy a command below. Commands fetch the pinned commit and copy only this skill directory. Existing destinations are refused. Copying a command does not install anything.
An install command is unavailable: current rules, complete repository and skill scans, an eligible behavior level and a permitted license are required.
Repository context
- Repository stars (not skill ratings)
- 26
- Repository last updated
- Sep 8, 2026
- License
- MIT
Observed agent integration: No specific integration evidence. Standard SKILL.md installation does not imply verified compatibility.
- agent-skills Repository topic
- anthropic Repository topic
- claude Repository topic
- claude-code Repository topic
- claude-skills Repository topic
- consulting-slides Repository topic
- deck-design Repository topic
- powerpoint Repository topic
- pptx Repository topic
- presentations Repository topic
- engineering Derived category
Files and excerpt
File metadata and permitted, redacted excerpts come from the recorded scan. Source links are pinned to that commit.
Read excerpt
# Partner Review Checklist
## When to use
Use this before sending a deck to a partner, MD, or client. Use it as a self-review on your own deck after building. Use it when you have an hour before a review and need to know what to fix first.
## What it does
It evaluates a deck against the standard a senior reviewer applies and returns a prioritized list of fixes. It checks the argument first, then the slide craft, so the most important problems surface before cosmetic ones.
## Method
A partner reviews top-down: story before slides, message before format. Apply the checklist in that order so the prioritized list reflects real impact.
1. Story and answer. Is there one clear recommendation, stated up front? Does the deck answer the audience's actual question? Read the executive summary alone; can the decision be made from it?
2. Title chain. Read the action titles in sequence. Do they argue the case with no gaps? Is every title a claim, not a topic? Does each title match what its slide proves?