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
.mdfiles containingmarp: truefrontmatter - •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
- •
uvxavailable in the environment - •Network access to fetch SlideGauge from GitHub on first use
- •Optional:
jqif 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:

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:
- •Split slides - Break complex topics into multiple focused slides
- •Use groups - Organize related content under subheadings
- •Summarize - Replace lengthy explanations with key points
For Missing Elements:
- •Add titles - Every slide needs clear H1/H2 headings
- •Complete exercises - Ensure problem + solution/activity structure
- •Add context - Include brief explanations for code examples
For Accessibility:
- •Check contrast - Use tools or built-in Marp themes
- •Add alt text - Describe image content and purpose
- •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:
- •Show analysis first - Always display current scores before making changes
- •Get approval for major changes - Ask before splitting content or restructuring slides
- •Explain the reasoning - Help users understand why specific changes improve quality
- •Preserve technical accuracy - Focus on presentation quality, not content changes
- •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:
- •SlideGauge installation fails: Ensure uvx is available and network connectivity
- •No analysis results: Check that file contains
marp: truefrontmatter - •Unexpected low scores: Review rule documentation - some rules are strict by design
- •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
--verboseflag 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.