Marp Slide Quality Skill

Marp Slide Quality Skill

Analyze and improve Marp markdown presentations using the SlideGauge tool to create higher-quality, more effective slide decks.

When This Skill Activates

This skill automatically activates when:

• Working with .md files containing marp: true frontmatter
• User mentions Marp presentations, slide quality, or slide analysis
• User asks to check, validate, improve, or fix presentation slides
• User wants to analyze slide quality metrics or scoring

Main Workflow

Follow this 4-step process for analyzing and improving Marp presentations:

Step 1: Analyze Baseline

First, install SlideGauge (if not already installed) and analyze the current state:

# Install SlideGauge using uvx
uvx --from git+https://github.com/​kantord/​SlideGauge slidegauge --version

# Analyze the presentation
uvx --from git+https://github.com/​kantord/​SlideGauge slidegauge analyze presentation.md

# Get detailed JSON output for deeper analysis
uvx --from git+https://github.com/​kantord/​SlideGauge slidegauge analyze --output json presentation.md | jq

Step 2: Prioritize Fixes

Review the analysis and prioritize slides based on their scores:

• Critical: Slides scoring below 70 points (failing threshold)
• Important: Slides scoring 70-80 points (below good quality)
• Good: Slides scoring 80+ points (acceptable quality)

Focus on failing slides first, then work on improving the rest.

Step 3: Apply Fixes

Use specific patterns and fixes from the reference documentation below. Common issues include:

• Too many bullet points or lines of content
• Missing slide titles or required elements
• Accessibility issues (low contrast, missing alt text)
• Code formatting problems
• Layout and visual design issues

Step 4: Validate Improvements

After making changes, re-run the analysis to verify improvements:

uvx --from git+https://github.com/​kantord/​SlideGauge slidegauge analyze presentation.md

Compare before/​after scores to ensure meaningful improvements.

Requirements

• uvx available in the environment
• Network access to fetch SlideGauge from GitHub on first use
• Optional: jq if you want to pretty-print JSON output locally

SlideGauge Rules Reference

Scoring System

• Starting Score: 100 points per slide
• Passing Threshold: 70 points
• Good Quality: 80+ points
• Excellent: 90+ points

Content Rules (Most Common Issues)

Too Many Bullets (-15 points)

Rule: Slides should have 6 or fewer bullet points Example Fix:

<!-- Before (8 bullets) -->
- First point
- Second point
- Third point
- Fourth point
- Fifth point
- Sixth point
- Seventh point
- Eighth point

<!-- After (split into 2 slides) -->
## Key Points
- First point
- Second point
- Third point
- Fourth point

## Additional Points
- Fifth point
- Sixth point
- Seventh point
- Eighth point

Too Many Lines (-15 points)

Rule: Slides should have 16 or fewer lines (including headers and code blocks) Strategy: Split complex slides or use more concise phrasing

Missing Title (-30 points)

Rule: Every slide must have a title (H1 or H2) Fix: Add appropriate headings to structure content

Missing Required Elements (-25 points)

Rule: Exercise/​TODO slides need problem statement AND solution/​activity Example:

## Exercise: Database Normalization

### Problem
Normalize the following unstructured data:
(Provide sample data)

### Solution Requirements
1. Identify entities and relationships
2. Create normalized tables
3. Define foreign key constraints

Accessibility Rules

Low Contrast Text (-20 points)

Rule: Text must have sufficient contrast ratio Fix: Ensure dark text on light backgrounds or use explicit contrast settings

Missing Alt Text (-10 points)

Rule: Images must have descriptive alt text Example:

![Diagram showing microservices architecture](./​diagram.png)

Color Rules

Too Many Colors (-10 points)

Rule: Slides should use consistent, limited color schemes Fix: Use Marp's theme colors or define a limited palette

Code Rules

Long Code Blocks (-10 points)

Rule: Code blocks over 30 lines should be split or simplified Strategy: Show key concepts, move detailed code to separate files

Unclear Code Purpose (-10 points)

Rule: Code examples should clearly demonstrate their purpose Fix: Add explanatory comments or use more illustrative examples

Common Fix Patterns

For Content Overload:

1. Split slides - Break complex topics into multiple focused slides
2. Use groups - Organize related content under subheadings
3. Summarize - Replace lengthy explanations with key points

For Missing Elements:

1. Add titles - Every slide needs clear H1/​H2 headings
2. Complete exercises - Ensure problem + solution/​activity structure
3. Add context - Include brief explanations for code examples

For Accessibility:

1. Check contrast - Use tools or built-in Marp themes
2. Add alt text - Describe image content and purpose
3. Use semantic structure - Proper heading hierarchy

Practical Examples

Example 1: Too Many Bullets Fix

Before: 8 bullet points on a single slide (Score: 70) After: 2 slides with 4 bullets each (Score: 95)

Example 2: Missing Title Fix

Before: Slide starts directly with content (Score: 65) After: Added "## Database Design Overview" header (Score: 95)

Example 3: Code Block Optimization

Before: 45-line code block (Score: 75) After: 20-line key example + "See full implementation in: src/​database.py" (Score: 90)

Working with Users

Best Practices:

1. Show analysis first - Always display current scores before making changes
2. Get approval for major changes - Ask before splitting content or restructuring slides
3. Explain the reasoning - Help users understand why specific changes improve quality
4. Preserve technical accuracy - Focus on presentation quality, not content changes
5. Offer alternatives - When multiple solutions exist, present options

Sample Interaction:

I've analyzed your presentation and found 3 slides scoring below 70:

Slide 3: "Architecture Overview" - Score: 65 (missing title)
Slide 7: "Code Implementation" - Score: 55 (35-line code block)
Slide 12: "Database Design" - Score: 60 (8 bullet points)

Would you like me to fix these issues? I'll:
- Add proper titles
- Split the long code example
- Break down the complex bullet slide

Should I proceed with these improvements?

Usage Tips

Configuration Options:

# Custom passing threshold
uvx slidegauge analyze --threshold 75 presentation.md

# Only analyze specific slides
uvx slidegauge analyze --slides "1,3,5-7" presentation.md

# Verbose output with detailed explanations
uvx slidegauge analyze --verbose presentation.md

Integration with Workflow:

• Run analysis after major content changes
• Use before presentations or reviews
• Include in CI/​CD for documentation quality
• Great for team collaboration and standards

Team Usage:

• Share scoring thresholds for consistency
• Use common fix patterns across presentations
• Document team-specific SlideGauge configurations
• Include quality checks in presentation templates

Troubleshooting

Common Issues:

1. SlideGauge installation fails: Ensure uvx is available and network connectivity
2. No analysis results: Check that file contains marp: true frontmatter
3. Unexpected low scores: Review rule documentation - some rules are strict by design
4. Code analysis issues: Ensure code blocks are properly formatted with language markers

Getting Help:

• Check the complete SlideGauge documentation at https://github.com/kantord/SlideGauge
• Review rule reference for detailed explanations
• Test with simple presentations to understand baseline behavior
• Use --verbose flag for detailed analysis output

Quality Checklist

Before finalizing a presentation, ensure:

• All slides have titles (H1/​H2)
• No slide exceeds 6 bullet points
• No slide exceeds 16 lines total
• Code blocks are 30 lines or less
• Images have descriptive alt text
• Color contrast is sufficient
• Exercise slides have problem + solution
• Overall presentation scores 70+ on all slides

Following these guidelines will help create professional, accessible, and effective Marp presentations that communicate your ideas clearly and effectively.