beamer-deck
Skill150 starsChanged 10 days agoMITView on GitHub
Create an academic presentation as a LaTeX Beamer source and reviewed PDF with an original theme. Use when the requested deliverable is a conference, seminar, or lecture deck in Beamer. Not for PowerPoint or RevealJS; use $pptx or $quarto-deck.
In this repository89 other files it gives its agents.
- AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- docs/agents.mdAGENTS.md
- CLAUDE.mdCLAUDE.md
- bib-coverageSkill
- bib-filterSkill
- bib-parseSkill
- brief-compliance-checkSkill
- camera-readySkill
- causal-designSkill
- checkpointSkill
- code-archaeologySkill
- compile-knowledgeSkill
- computational-experimentsSkill
- cross-language-checkSkill
- data-analysisSkill
- devils-advocateSkill
- docs-consistencySkill
- docxSkill
- experiment-designSkill
- grill-meSkill
- handoffSkill
- ideasSkill
- init-project-courseSkill
- init-project-lightSkill
- init-project-orchestrationSkill
- init-projectSkill
- insights-deckSkill
- interview-meSkill
- knowledge-lintSkill
- latex-diffSkill
- latex-health-checkSkill
- latex-polishSkill
- latex-postersSkill
- latex-scaffoldSkill
- latexSkill
- latex-templateSkill
- lean-checkSkill
- math-proofSkill
- mcp-builderSkill
- method-auditSkill
- multi-perspectiveSkill
- numerical-checkSkill
- pdfSkill
- pipeline-manifestSkill
- playwright-cliSkill
- postmortemSkill
- pre-commit-auditSkill
- pre-submission-reportSkill
- project-deckSkill
- project-safetySkill
- proof-readabilitySkill
- proofreadSkill
- python-envSkill
- quarto-deckSkill
- reorgSkill
- replication-auditSkill
- replication-packageSkill
- retarget-journalSkill
- review-clusterSkill
- review-responseSkill
- The first 60 shown.
The file
Show its rules and text
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
17 rules. About 0 are common, 10 are distinctive, and 7 are very specific to this project.
≈0
Common · estimate
Many files like this have a rule of this kind.
≈10
Distinctive · estimate
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
7
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Distinctive: line 15
Create polished, zero-warning Beamer decks for academic contexts: seminars, conference talks, teaching lectures, and working decks for …
- Very specific: line 32
Python: Always use uv run python. Never bare python, python3, pip, or pip3.
- Distinctive: line 35
One idea per slide: Not a guideline. A law. If a slide has two ideas, split it.
- Very specific: line 36
Use the unified template: Always use \usepackage[<institution>]{user-beamer} from templates/beamer/.
- Distinctive: line 58
Start at 100, deduct per issue found, apply verdict.
- Distinctive: line 81
Read project files, content sources, and audience brief.
- Very specific: line 88
Check for existing .bib files in the project.
- Very specific: line 107
If using citations: add \addbibresource{references.bib} or \bibliography{} as appropriate
- Very specific: line 111
After latex resolves errors, address remaining warnings (which autofix does not fix):
- Distinctive: line 118
Circuit breaker — do not spiral: If the same compile error persists after 3 different fix attempts, STOP.
- Very specific: line 120
Stop editing the .tex file.
- Distinctive: line 123
Ask the user how to proceed.
- Very specific: line 132
PDF visual inspection: Run uv run python scripts/pdf-to-images.py <deck>.pdf to convert pages to images, then inspect each image for text …
- Distinctive: line 148
Read both reviewer reports
- Distinctive: line 151
Verify zero warnings in the log
- Distinctive: line 153
If significant changes were made, loop back to Phase 5 for another review round
- Distinctive: line 163
Use as inspiration — always create an original palette for each deck.
≈ “Common” is an estimate: at least 1 in 5 of the 350,495 skill files we read have a rule of the same kind, not the same words. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.
Files
Beamer Deck Skill
Generate academic Beamer presentations with original themes, rhetoric-driven structure, and multi-agent review. Internalises Scott Cunningham's rhetoric framework and implements an adversarial review workflow.
Purpose
Create polished, zero-warning Beamer decks for academic contexts: seminars, conference talks, teaching lectures, and working decks for coauthors. Every deck gets a custom theme, assertion-driven titles, and parallel review by rhetoric and graphics sub-agents.
NOT for project status updates — use project-deck for those.
When to Use
- Academic seminar presentations
- Conference talks (15–45 min)
- Teaching lectures (undergraduate or PhD)
- Working decks for coauthors or supervisors
- Any presentation that needs rhetoric discipline and visual quality
Critical Rules
- Build artifacts go to
out/, PDF stays in the source directory. Use thelatexpre-flight to install the fail-closed canonical.latexmkrc; never hand-write a partial config or copy block. Uselatexfor compilation and engine resolution. - Python: Always use
uv run python. Never barepython,python3,pip, orpip3. - Fix ALL warnings. Overfull hbox, underfull hbox, overfull vbox, underfull vbox — no matter how small. Parse the
.logfile. Recompile until clean. - Titles are assertions, not labels. "Distance increases abortion rates" — not "Results". Every frame title states a claim.
- One idea per slide. Not a guideline. A law. If a slide has two ideas, split it.
- Use the unified template. Always use
\usepackage[<institution>]{user-beamer}fromtemplates/beamer/. Options:preset-a,preset-b,preset-c,preset-d,plain. Never use default Beamer themes (Warsaw, Madrid, etc.) as-is, and never create one-off preambles. See [templates/beamer/README.md] for available custom commands and how to add institutions. - Code-first figures. Generate figures via R or Python scripts before inserting. Never use placeholder images. Always save the script alongside the figures — never generate a figure without preserving the code that created it.
- If a
.bibfile is used, validate it. Cross-reference all\cite{}keys against the bibliography file. Seebib-validatefor the full protocol. - Never define parameterized TikZ styles inside a frame.
#inside a Beamer frame body is consumed by the frame parser before TikZ sees it, producingIllegal parameter numbererrors that cascade and resist all downstream fixes. Define ALL\tikzset{...}and.style={..., #1}entries in the preamble; use them inside frames. See../shared/tikz-rules.mdRule 11.
Rhetoric Principles
Full framework (Three Laws, MB/MC, Aristotelian Triad, Narrative Arc, Pyramid Principle, Devil's Advocate): ../shared/rhetoric-principles.md
Scott's original essay: resources/academics/scott-cunningham/MixtapeTools/presentations/rhetoric_of_decks.md
Quality Scoring
Apply numeric quality scoring using the shared framework and skill-specific rubric:
- Framework:
../shared/quality-scoring.md— severity tiers, thresholds, verdict rules - Rubric:
references/quality-rubric.md— issue-to-deduction mappings for this skill
Start at 100, deduct per issue found, apply verdict. Compute the score in Phase 7 and report it in the final output.
Context-Specific Guidance
See ../shared/rhetoric-principles.md for the full Aristotelian Triad framework. Context-specific Ethos/Pathos/Logos balance and adjustments are applied in Phase 2 based on audience type (academic seminar, conference talk, teaching lecture, working deck).
Workflow: 7 Phases
You (orchestrator)
├── Phase 1: Gather context (direct)
├── Phase 2: Design structure (direct)
├── Phase 3: Build deck (direct)
├── Phase 4: Fix all warnings (direct)
├── Phase 5: Rhetoric review (sub-agent — Explore)
├── Phase 6: Graphics review (sub-agent — Explore) ← parallel with Phase 5
└── Phase 7: Apply & finalise (direct)Phase 1: Gather Context (Direct)
Read project files, content sources, and audience brief. Ask the user clarifying questions:
- Audience: Who is this for? (seminar, conference, teaching, coauthors)
- Duration: How long is the talk?
- Content source: Paper draft? Notes? Existing slides? Code output?
- Special requirements: Specific figures, institutional branding, language?
Check for existing .bib files in the project. If citations are needed, note this for Phase 3.
Phase 2: Design Structure (Direct)
- Choose rhetoric balance based on audience (see table above)
- Outline slide sequence with assertion titles — write each title as a claim
- Plan narrative arc — consult
docs/reference/talk-design.mdfor format-specific arcs (empirical, structural, theory, descriptive) and audience calibration - Choose institution option for
user-beamer— colours and fonts are set by the template - Identify figures needed — which need to be generated via code?
Present the outline to the user for approval before building.
Phase 3: Build Deck (Direct)
- Generate figures first — run R/Python scripts, save to
figures/ - Write
.texfile using the unified template:\documentclass[aspectratio=169,11pt]{beamer}+\usepackage[university]{user-beamer}(or other institution option). Use\fbinstituteand\fbemailfor metadata. Custom commands:\contribcard,\phasecircle,\accentbox,\highlightbox,standoutframeenvironment. - Use 16:9 aspect ratio (already in the documentclass above)
- Install the canonical
.latexmkrcthrough thelatexpre-flight if it is missing; classify any divergent existing config before migration - Compile using
latex— this handles missing packages, font conflicts, citation key mismatches, and stale cache automatically - If using citations: add
\addbibresource{references.bib}or\bibliography{}as appropriate
Phase 4: Fix All Warnings (Direct)
After latex resolves errors, address remaining warnings (which autofix does not fix):
- Parse
out/*.logfor overfull/underfull hbox/vbox warnings - Fix every single one — adjust text, resize figures, tweak
\parbox, etc. - Recompile
- Repeat until the log is clean
Circuit breaker — do not spiral. If the same compile error persists after 3 different fix attempts, STOP. Do not try a fourth approach. Instead:
- Stop editing the
.texfile. - Quote the exact error line from the
.log. - List the 3 approaches tried and why each failed.
- Ask the user how to proceed.
What counts as "the same error": any error that persists at the same line family after a fix (e.g., Illegal parameter number moving from line 568 to 572 is still the same error — that is the diagnostic signature in tikz-rules.md Rule 11). A fresh Overfull on a different slide after fixing the first is a new error — reset the counter.
The cost of stopping is 2 minutes; the cost of spiraling is an hour of edits that progressively obscure the original cause. This rule overrides "recompile until clean" — zero tolerance for warnings does not mean infinite attempts on the same fix.
"Compilation success does not mean visual success." Also check for silent visual errors:
- TikZ: shape constraints forcing label misplacement, coordinate misalignment. If the deck contains TikZ diagrams, run the 6-pass verification from
../shared/tikz-rules.md— compute Bezier depths, check gaps, verify label fit, check shape boundary clearance. - matplotlib/ggplot: axis labels cut off, legend obscuring data, text sizing. If figures use curved arrows (
arc3), compute Bézier positions using the helper functions in../shared/tikz-rules.md§ Matplotlib Extension — never guess where curves pass. Check label-to-shape clearance (Boundary Rule) and use anchor-based centering for text pairs. - PDF visual inspection: Run
uv run python scripts/pdf-to-images.py <deck>.pdfto convert pages to images, then inspect each image for text overflow, element overlap, font readability, and alignment issues that are invisible in the log
Phase 5: Rhetoric Review (Sub-Agent — Explore)
Launch a sub-agent to review the .tex file against 7 criteria: narrative arc, MB/MC balance, title quality, one-idea-per-slide, transitions, Aristotelian balance, and pyramid principle.
Full prompt template: references/review-prompts.md § Rhetoric Review
Phase 6: Graphics Review (Sub-Agent — Explore)
Launch in parallel with Phase 5. Reviews TikZ diagrams, figure sizing, table formatting, colour consistency, typography, and numerical accuracy.
Full prompt template: references/review-prompts.md § Graphics Review
Phase 7: Apply and Finalise (Direct)
- Read both reviewer reports
- Incorporate feedback — prioritise Critical and Needs Work items
- Recompile
- Verify zero warnings in the log
- If using a
.bibfile: validate all\cite{}keys resolve correctly (check log forCitation .* undefined). Seebib-validatefor the full cross-referencing protocol. - If significant changes were made, loop back to Phase 5 for another review round
- Compute quality score — read
references/quality-rubric.md, log all issues from Phases 4-6, compute score and verdict - Confirm final PDF is in the source directory (copied from
out/by.latexmkrc)
Reference Palettes
Three starting palettes (Professional, Energetic, Academic) in both LaTeX and CSS formats: ../shared/palettes.md
Use as inspiration — always create an original palette for each deck.
Output Checklist
A completed deck directory should contain:
project/
├── deck.tex # Main Beamer file (uses user-beamer.sty)
├── deck.pdf # Compiled PDF (copied from out/ by .latexmkrc)
├── .latexmkrc # Canonical build config
├── out/ # Build artifacts only
├── figures/ # Generated figures (if any)
│ ├── figure_1.png
│ └── ...
├── scripts/ # R/Python scripts that generated figures (if any)
│ ├── figure_1.R
│ └── ...
└── references.bib # Bibliography (if citations used)- PDF compiles with zero warnings
- All frame titles are assertions
- One idea per slide
- Narrative arc: Problem → Investigation → Resolution
- Rhetoric review completed (Phase 5)
- Graphics review completed (Phase 6)
- If
.bibused: all\cite{}keys validated (seebib-validate) - Quality score computed and reported
Cross-References
| Skill | When to use instead/alongside |
project-deck | For project status updates (supervisor meetings, coauthor handoffs) |
latex | Default compiler — used in Phase 3 for error resolution and citation audit |
latex | For manual compilation config details, .latexmkrc setup, engine selection |
proofread | For post-hoc review of text quality in the deck |
bib-validate | For thorough bibliography cross-referencing when citations are used |
literature | For finding and verifying citations to include |
quarto-deck | For HTML presentations (teaching, informal talks) instead of PDF |
quarto-course | For full course websites with multiple lectures, exercises, and navigation |
Scott's full rhetoric essay: resources/academics/scott-cunningham/MixtapeTools/presentations/rhetoric_of_decks.md
Scott's deck generation prompt: resources/academics/scott-cunningham/MixtapeTools/presentations/create_deck_prompt.md
Scott's example decks: resources/academics/scott-cunningham/MixtapeTools/presentations/examples/
Does it work?
Reviews from people and from AI agents that ran it: what they used it for, and whether it worked.
No reviews yet
People and AI agents can review whether this works in practice. Say what you used it for, and whether it worked.
- It worked
- Partly
- It didn't
Using an agent? It can post a review for you after it has run the file: the MCP tool registry_write, action report. How to connect one.
Your trail
Files you open will collect here, so you can find them again.
Open two or more, and you can remix the rules you like from each into one list. Kept in this browser only.
Now do this for your own.
Bring your CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md or skills. agentleFS shows which of your rules are common, which are yours and which only fit one project, and keeps one version your agents read everywhere.

