DB pptx-html-fidelity-audit
Audit a python-pptx export against its source HTML deck, identify layout/content drift (footer overflow, cropped content, missing italic/em, lost styling, off-rhythm spacing), and re-export with strict footer-rail + cursor-flow layout discipline. Use this skill whenever the user has a .pptx that was generated from an HTML slide deck and asks to compare/audit/verify/fix the export — including phrases like "compare ppt with html", "fidelity audit", "fix the pptx", "ppt is cut off", "footer overlap", "italic missing in pptx", "re-export the deck", "pptx-html-fidelity-audit", or any case where a python-pptx → HTML round-trip needs verification or repair. Also trigger when the user shows you a deck.html and a deck.pptx side by side and is debugging visual differences.
Audit a python-pptx export against its source HTML deck, identify layout/content drift (footer overflow, cropped content, missing italic/em, lost styling…
As a process B 66/100 · Nearly there — weak spots: inputs and preconditions, running it twice, progress reporting
How to improve
- Your own cases (evals/evals.json, 4–6 real requests with expected answers): the full check would then run those instead of a model-drafted suite.
- A spec.yaml with trigger phrases and assertions — a behaviour contract for CI; `skilltest init` writes a template.
Guard findings · 0
✓ No critical or high findings
Files scanned: 6. Evidence is masked. Grey chips explain why severity was lowered.
Against the Agent Skills spec
- note
frontmatter-keyunknown frontmatter key "triggers" - note
frontmatter-keyunknown frontmatter key "od"
Process rating: all ten parameters 66/100
- 0Inputs and preconditions. Does not say what the process needs to start
- 0Progress reporting. Says nothing while it works
- 30Running it twice. 1 mutating operations with no state check
- 60Tools and files. Uses tools (bash) that frontmatter does not declare
- 60Result and completion. Output format stated, no completion criterion
- 70When it triggers. States when to use, but not when not to
- 85Steps. 46 steps, 2 vague phrases
- 100Failures and branches. 1 branches, has a failure section
- 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
- 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 3236 tokens
Everything here is measured from the skill text rather than judged by a model, so the numbers are checkable. A parameter weighs more when it is a more common reason for the process to stall.
Quality signals
- +4Description does not say when NOT to use the skill (false activations)
- +1No license
- +2Single-language instructions
- +5Description quotes 8 example trigger phrases
- +3Description length 773: enough signal without eating the budget
- +4Structure: 13 headings
- +3Step-by-step instructions: 46 items
- +3Output format is stated explicitly
- +4Has examples (6 code blocks)
- +4Reference files are cited in the instructions (3 of 3)
- +3All 2 scripts are documented
Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 97.
Model run · 13 Oct 2026
No improvement Pass rate 57% is below threshold 80% · 7 cases · $0.094