Presentation Critique

VerifiedSafe

Review a website presentation before declaring it ready. Uses checklist validation and a five-dimension critique.

Sby Skills Guide Bot
TestingIntermediate
207/24/2026
Claude Code
#presentation-critique#design-review#quality-gate#checklist#anti-slop

Recommended for

Our review

This skill provides a structured framework for evaluating the quality of a web presentation before release, combining a validation checklist with a multi-dimensional critique.

Strengths

  • Explicit evaluation grid with priority levels (P0, P1, P2) to avoid vague decisions.
  • Critique across five dimensions (fit, hierarchy, execution, specificity, restraint) for a balanced assessment.
  • Anti-AI-slop audit to catch generic or excessive AI-generated artifacts.
  • Clear verdict (PASS, REVISION_NEEDED, BLOCKED) with recommended return path.

Limitations

  • Does not replace functional or performance testing.
  • Requires a good understanding of the reference documents to be effective.
  • Can be perceived as rigid if criteria are not adapted to the context.
When to use it

Use this skill when a presentation or web page is claimed as complete and needs rigorous validation before sign-off.

When not to use it

Do not use it for pages still in development or for purely aesthetic reviews without a release decision need.

Security analysis

Safe
Quality score88/100

The skill is purely instructional, describing a review process for presentations. It contains no executable commands, no exfiltration, and no destructive actions. It references only internal reference files, posing no security risk.

No concerns found

Examples

Review a home page redesign
I have a redesigned home page for our SaaS product. Run the full presentation critique on it using the checklist and five-dimension rubric. The target is the latest Figma mockup, version 2.1. Provide a verdict and blocking findings.
Check motion-heavy landing page
This landing page uses heavy animations and parallax. Apply the anti-slop audit and five-dimension critique. The current build is in staging. Give me a PASS/REVISION/BLOCKED verdict.
Validate presentation before client demo
We have a slide deck exported to HTML for a client demo tomorrow. Use the presentation critique skill to check it. Focus on specificity and restraint. Flag any P0 blockers.

description: "Review a WebsitePresent delivery before declaring it ready. Use when an HTML presentation, redesign, or motion-heavy page is about to be called done and needs checklist validation plus a five-dimension critique."

Presentation Critique

Use this skill before claiming a presentation artifact is complete.

This skill exists to make “looks okay” insufficient. It turns review into a real gate grounded in checklist evidence and a short, explicit critique rubric.

Read first

Before reviewing, read:

  • references/checklist.md
  • references/five-dimensions.md
  • references/anti-ai-slop.md

What this skill does

This skill checks whether a presentation output is:

  • directionally faithful,
  • structurally speakable,
  • visually coherent,
  • specific to the actual task,
  • restrained enough to stay credible.

It does not replace implementation validation. It sits on top of implementation validation and raises the quality floor.

Workflow

1. Confirm the target being reviewed

Be clear about:

  • which task
  • which version
  • which output surface
  • what this round intended to improve

Without that, critique becomes vague and unfair.

2. Run the checklist gate

Use references/checklist.md.

Treat P0 as mandatory. If a P0 item fails, the work is not ready.

P1 items should normally be addressed before release unless the user explicitly accepts them. P2 items are improvement opportunities, not automatic blockers.

3. Run the five-dimension critique

Use references/five-dimensions.md.

Judge the output on:

  • Fit
  • Hierarchy
  • Execution
  • Specificity
  • Restraint

If any one dimension is clearly weak, call it out directly and recommend where it should be repaired.

4. Run the anti-slop audit

Use references/anti-ai-slop.md.

The goal is not aesthetic purity. The goal is to catch lazy defaults, generic polish, fake specificity, and decorative excess before they ship.

5. Produce a release verdict

End with one of these:

  • PASS
  • REVISION_NEEDED
  • BLOCKED

Do not soften the verdict just to avoid friction.

Output contract

Your review output should include:

  • verdict
  • blocking findings
  • non-blocking risks
  • strongest positive traits
  • weakest dimension
  • recommended return path

The return path should name the right owner when possible:

  • SourceStrategist
  • NarrativeArchitect
  • ExperienceDirector
  • MotionDirector
  • FrontendProducer
  • ReviewGuardian

Principles

  • Evidence before vibes.
  • P0 means mandatory, not aspirational.
  • Specific critique beats broad praise.
  • A pass still needs a reason.
  • A block still needs a path forward.

What to avoid

  • passing work because it is “mostly there”,
  • only commenting on aesthetics,
  • using generic praise instead of a real verdict,
  • ignoring whether the page actually supports live explanation,
  • treating anti-slop items as optional style preferences.
Related skills