Multi-agent comprehensive slide review (visual + pedagogy + proofreading, plus TikZ / parity / substance conditionally). Use when user says "full review", "excellence pass", "comprehensive check", "review everything", "pre-release review", "slide excellence", or before teaching / shipping a deck. Fanout wrapper — for a single lens, use `/visual-audit`, `/pedagogy-review`, or `/proofread` directly.
Multi-agent comprehensive slide review (visual + pedagogy + proofreading, plus TikZ / parity / substance conditionally). Use when user says "full review", "excellence pass", "comprehensive check", "review everything", "pre-release review", "slide excellence", or before teaching / shipping a deck. Fanout wrapper — for a single lens, use `/visual-audit`, `/pedagogy-review`, or `/proofread` directly.
argument-hint
[QMD or TEX filename] [--fast] [--skip-substance | --acknowledge-template-domain-reviewer]
allowed-tools
["Read","Grep","Glob","Write","Bash","Task"]
context
fork
Slide Excellence Review
Run a comprehensive multi-dimensional review of lecture slides. Multiple agents analyze the file independently, then results are synthesized.
Which slide-review skill do I want?
/slide-excellence (this skill) — multi-agent fanout (visual + pedagogy + proofread, plus TikZ / parity / substance conditionally). Best for pre-teaching or pre-release checks.
/visual-audit — single lens, layout/overflow/font/spacing only. Fast.
/pedagogy-review — single lens, narrative/prerequisites/worked-examples/notation.
/proofread — single lens, grammar/typos/overflow/terminology.
/qa-quarto — adversarial Beamer ↔ Quarto parity (critic-fixer loop).
/devils-advocate — 5-7 pointed challenges, not a full review.
Important: this orchestrator does conditional dispatch — it only spawns the subagents that can actually produce useful output for the given file. No more running tikz-reviewer on a file with zero TikZ, or quarto-critic on a deck without a counterpart.
Step 1: Identify the File
Parse $ARGUMENTS for the filename. Resolve path in Quarto/ or Slides/.
Determine the file type:
.tex → Beamer
.qmd → Quarto
.md → Markdown slides
Step 2: Pre-flight — Detect Conditions
Before spawning any agent, probe the file to determine which reviews make sense:
FILE="$resolved_path"# Has TikZ diagrams?
has_tikz=$(grep -c '\\begin{tikzpicture}'"$FILE" 2>/dev/null); has_tikz=${has_tikz:-0}# For .qmd: is there a paired .tex in Slides/?
has_tex_pair="false"if [[ "$FILE" == *.qmd ]]; then
base="$(basename "$FILE" .qmd)"# Common Beamer suffixes: _Topic, _Lecture, exact matchfor candidate in"Slides/${base}.tex""Slides/Lecture${base}.tex"; doif [ -f "$candidate" ]; then
has_tex_pair="true"
tex_pair="$candidate"breakfidonefi# For .tex: is there a paired .qmd in Quarto/?
has_qmd_pair="false"if [[ "$FILE" == *.tex ]]; then
base="$(basename "$FILE" .tex)"for candidate in"Quarto/${base}.qmd""Quarto/${base#Lecture}.qmd"; doif [ -f "$candidate" ]; then
has_qmd_pair="true"
qmd_pair="$candidate"breakfidonefi# Has R code chunks or referenced R scripts?
has_r="false"if grep -qE '```\{r|source\(.*\.R\)'"$FILE" 2>/dev/null; then
has_r="true"fi
Report the detection:
File: path/to/file.tex
Type: Beamer (.tex)
TikZ blocks: 3
Quarto pair: Quarto/Lecture2.qmd (found)
R chunks: none
Step 3: Domain-reviewer customization check (MANDATORY for .tex)
Before spawning the substance-review agent on a .tex file, verify .claude/agents/domain-reviewer.md has been customized for this project. The ship-state domain-reviewer is a template — running it unmodified produces generic "are assumptions stated?" feedback, not real domain review.
Detection heuristic (any of these → still template):
Contains the marker token AUTO-DETECT-TEMPLATE-MARKER anywhere in the file (present in the shipped template; removed/replaced when customized). Detection is a substring match — the marker can span lines.
Contains any <!-- Customize: ... --> or [Customize: ...] placeholder (both forms are checked).
The five lenses are identical to the shipped template's wording (diff against .claude/agents/domain-reviewer.md on the v1.3.0 tag — if zero lines changed, it's still template).
If the template marker is present:
⚠️ domain-reviewer.md has not been customized for your field.
Running it in its shipped state produces generic checks ("are assumptions
stated?") rather than field-specific review. Options:
1. Customize .claude/agents/domain-reviewer.md — replace the 5 lenses
with checks for your field. The /configure-project skill will scaffold
this interactively (coming in PR D of the plan).
2. Run slide-excellence with --skip-substance to proceed without the
substance-review agent. Other reviewers still run.
3. Run slide-excellence with --acknowledge-template-domain-reviewer to
proceed anyway (you'll get generic feedback from the substance agent).
What would you like to do?
Wait for user input. Do NOT silently run domain-reviewer on a template.
Agent D: TikZ Review (tikz-reviewer) — only if has_tikz > 0.
Measurement-based collision audit (Bézier, gaps, boundaries, margins).
Save: quality_reports/[FILE]_tikz_review.md.
Agent E: Content Parity (quarto-critic) — only if the file has a counterpart (has_tex_pair or has_qmd_pair).
Frame count comparison, environment parity, content drift between .tex ↔ .qmd.
Save: quality_reports/[FILE]_parity_report.md.
Agent F: R Code Review (r-reviewer) — only if has_r == true.
Code correctness for any embedded R chunks or referenced scripts.
Save: quality_reports/[FILE]_r_review.md.
Agent G: Substance Review (domain-reviewer) — MANDATORY for .tex, OPTIONAL for .qmd, GATED by Step 3.
Domain correctness via the 5-lens framework.
Save: quality_reports/[FILE]_substance_review.md.
De-duplication: if the user has already run one of these skills on this file in the current session (e.g., ran /proofread first, now running /slide-excellence), ask whether to reuse the existing report or re-run. Default: reuse (saves tokens).
This is fan-out → reduce (orchestrator-protocol.md): each agent returns FINDINGs + a SCORECARD in the shared schema (orchestration-schemas.md), and this step stacks the typed scorecards rather than re-reading each report by eye. The Overall Quality Score is the gate predicate over summed CRITICAL/MAJOR/MINOR counts. (Conditional dispatch means a skipped lens contributes no findings, not zeros to average.)
Only include sections for agents that actually ran.
Spawned N agents; approx token usage ~XXk. Sequential fallback
(one agent at a time) would cost ~XXk but take ~5× longer. For
cost-conscious reviews, run individual subagent skills directly
(/proofread, /visual-audit, /pedagogy-review).
Flag Reference
Flag
Effect
--skip-substance
Don't spawn Agent G (domain-reviewer). Useful if you haven't customized domain-reviewer.md yet.
--acknowledge-template-domain-reviewer
Proceed with the un-customized domain-reviewer anyway; you accept that the substance review will be generic.
--fast
Spawn a single synthesis agent reading the file directly, rather than parallel subagents. Cheaper (~8k vs ~50k tokens) but less thorough.
Quality Score Rubric
Score
Critical
Medium
Meaning
Excellent
0-2
0-5
Ready to present
Good
3-5
6-15
Minor refinements
Needs Work
6-10
16-30
Significant revision
Poor
11+
31+
Major restructuring
Why conditional dispatch matters
The previous version of this orchestrator spawned all 6 subagents regardless of file type. Running tikz-reviewer on a TikZ-free deck produced an empty report (wasted tokens). Running quarto-critic without a counterpart file produced a "no pair to compare" report (wasted tokens). And running domain-reviewer without customization produced generic "are assumptions stated?" feedback that authors learned to ignore (eroded trust in the whole orchestrator).
Conditional dispatch cuts token cost roughly in half on typical .qmd-only files and doubles trust by never running a reviewer that can't produce useful output.
