Hey @bcherny and @trq212 , I think the PowerPoint skill in Claude, which probably gets mainly invoked in Code/Cowork, could be substantially improved. It's making pretty slides but missing some fairly key design principles that are well-tested for most business decks (e.g., pyramid principle). I think that you should have some initial instruction at the top of the skill to ask whether the user wants something pretty for presentation, or more of a McKinsey-style deck, then if the latter, enforce design principles like making all the slide titles arguments not just topic headings, pyramid principle for messaging, etc. This is relevant since in success many users will use this for thinking and you want them to be thinking rigorously and well! I had Claude write up our feedback, below. ----- Feedback: PPTX Skill Needs a "Structured Argument" Mode The Problem The current PPTX skill produces decks optimized for visual design — color palettes, icons, varied layouts. This is fine for startup pitches and creative presentations, but it's the wrong default for most professional and analytical use cases. The skill has no concept of: Action titles: Every slide should have a complete sentence at the top stating the takeaway — not a topic label. This is the single most impactful formatting principle in professional presentations. Reading just the action titles top-to-bottom should convey the full argument. Storylining and logic flow: Slides should build a structured argument (situation → complication → resolution, or similar). The current skill treats each slide as an independent design problem. Exhibit discipline: Charts, tables, and frameworks should each have a clear "so what." The current guidance to put a visual element on every slide and decorate with icons actively works against clarity. Sparse, communication-first design: The priority hierarchy should be argument structure > data > layout > aesthetics. The current skill inverts this. Who This Affects Anyone using Claude to build decks for board meetings, investor updates, policy briefings, internal strategy reviews, client deliverables, or any context where the audience is evaluating the reasoning, not the graphic design. This is a large share of professional users — arguably the majority of people asking an AI to make a business presentation. Proposed Solution Add switching logic at the top of the skill. Something like: First, determine what type of deck the user needs.Analytical / structured argument (board decks, strategy presentations, policy briefings, consulting-style deliverables, investor updates, internal reviews): Follow the structured deck guidelines. Visual / narrative (startup pitches, marketing decks, creative presentations, event decks): Follow the current design-forward guidelines. Default to structured for business contexts unless the user signals otherwise. Then add a parallel set of guidelines for structured decks covering: Action titles: Every slide gets a complete-sentence title stating the takeaway. No topic labels. ...