---
name: presentation-data-dense
title: "Data-dense Presentation (Consulting)"
description: "Build a consulting-style deck — navy action-title band at the top of every slide, data-rich body, footer with date + slide number. Use for board decks, analyst presentations, data-heavy recommendations."
category: creative
status: active
priority: 6
tools_granted:
  - create_presentation
  - canvas_snapshot
  - search_vault
  - query_knowledge
triggers:
  - "consulting deck"
  - "analyst presentation"
  - "mckinsey style"
  - "bcg style"
  - "data-dense slides"
  - "board deck"
  - "data-heavy presentation"
  - "recommendation deck"
---

## Instructions

Build a deck in the **data-dense** theme — the McKinsey / BCG / Bain
look: a navy action-title band at the top of every slide, data-rich
body below, footer with date and slide number. Titles STATE the
insight; the body PROVES it.

1. **Clarify scope** — Ask about audience, decision being made, and
   any must-include facts or metrics. Consulting decks exist to
   support a decision; start from the decision.

2. **Gather evidence first** — Use `search_vault` and `query_knowledge`
   aggressively. Every claim needs data: a number, a quote, a source.
   If the data isn't there, the slide can't exist in this style — say
   so to the user and stop before fabricating.

3. **Structure rigorously**
   - Title slide with subtitle (objective + date)
   - Executive summary / table of contents (1 slide)
   - 1 slide per claim in the argument chain
   - Summary of recommendations
   - Appendix (optional — for backup data)

4. **Action titles are the craft**
   Consulting headlines are complete sentences stating the finding:
   - ❌ *"Revenue analysis"*
   - ✅ *"Revenue grew 34% in H2, driven entirely by enterprise renewals"*
   - ❌ *"Competitive landscape"*
   - ✅ *"Three of four competitors raised prices 15%+ in Q3 — we have room"*

   The reader should understand the argument by scanning ONLY the
   action titles in sequence. If the titles don't read as a coherent
   argument, restructure.

5. **Body carries the proof**
   - 4–6 bullets per slide is acceptable (the style tolerates density).
   - Lead each bullet with the FACT, then the source/caveat.
   - Reference sources inline: *"(Source: Q3 board pack, p. 12)"* or
     *"(Source: internal pipeline report, 2025-10)"*.
   - If a slide needs a chart, describe the chart in speaker notes
     and recommend the user add the chart manually — this skill
     produces text decks, not data visualizations.

6. **Call `create_presentation`** with `theme="data-dense"` and
   `show_on_canvas=true`. The engine paints the navy header band,
   applies Georgia for action titles, Calibri for body, draws the
   footer on every slide, AND pushes one themed HTML card per slide
   to the live Canvas so the user can preview the argument chain.

## Rules

- **Always pass `theme="data-dense"`** when calling `create_presentation`
  from this skill.
- **Pass `show_on_canvas=true`** so the user can scan the argument
  chain (action titles in sequence) directly on the Canvas — essential
  for this style, since the whole point is that the titles read as a
  coherent argument. Only skip if the user says "pptx only".
- **Immediately after `create_presentation` returns with a populated
  `canvas` field, call `canvas_snapshot({name: "<deck-title>"})`** so
  the argument chain is restorable if the cards get closed. Board decks
  especially deserve a named checkpoint — you rehearsed them, keep them.
  Skip only if `show_on_canvas` was false.
- **Every action title must state an insight, not a topic.** If the
  title is a noun phrase, rewrite as a complete sentence stating the
  finding.
- **Every body claim must cite its source.** Inline attribution
  required. Unsupported claims belong in speaker notes, flagged
  *[TODO: confirm]*.
- **No fabrication.** If the data doesn't exist in vault/knowledge,
  name the gap and ask the user for the input. Never invent a number
  or attribute a source that wasn't provided.
- Read the action titles in sequence before calling the tool — if
  they don't form a coherent argument, restructure the deck.

## Examples

- input: "Build a board deck on why we should hire 3 more engineers"
  output: |
    [calls search_vault for hiring data, engineering velocity, pipeline]
    [calls query_knowledge for project status + open tasks]
    [confirms data exists for each claim; flags gaps to user]
    [calls create_presentation with theme="data-dense", action titles stating findings, each bullet sourced]
    Created engineering-hire-case.pptx (theme: Data-dense (Consulting), 8 slides) → projects/hiring/output/engineering-hire-case.pptx

- input: "Data-dense analysis of our Q4 performance for the board"
  output: |
    [calls search_vault + query_knowledge for Q4 metrics]
    [notes 2 metrics are missing; asks user before proceeding]
    [calls create_presentation with theme="data-dense", 10 slides, action titles, inline sources]
    Created q4-performance-review.pptx (theme: Data-dense (Consulting), 11 slides)
