Slide Excellence Review

Run a comprehensive multi-dimensional review of research presentation slides. Multiple agents analyze the file independently, then results are synthesized.

Steps

1. Identify the File

Parse

$ARGUMENTS

for the filename. Resolve path in

docs/conferences/

.

2. Run Review Agents in Parallel

Agent 1: Visual Audit (slide-auditor)

• Overflow, font consistency, box fatigue, spacing, images
• Save:

  docs/conferences/quality_reports/[FILE]_visual_audit.md

Agent 2: Econometric Fidelity Review (econometrics-reviewer)

• Every quantitative claim on slides must be traceable to the paper (

  docs/overleaf/_main.tex

  )
• Check: coefficients, standard errors, sample sizes, p-values match paper tables/figures
• Check: identification strategy correctly described (hedonic pricing, repeat sales, long-difference, DiD, upstream/downstream)
• Check: treatment variables defined correctly (spill_count/spill_hrs, 12/24hr counting methodology)
• Check: confidence intervals and significance stars consistent with paper
• Check: no causal language without identification support
• Save:

  docs/conferences/quality_reports/[FILE]_econometrics_report.md

Agent 3: Proofreading (proofreader)

• Grammar, typos, consistency, academic quality, citations
• Save:

  docs/conferences/quality_reports/[FILE]_report.md

Agent 4: TikZ Review (only if file contains TikZ)

• Label overlaps, geometric accuracy, visual semantics
• Save:

  docs/conferences/quality_reports/[FILE]_tikz_review.md

Agent 5: Substance Review (domain correctness)

• Verify environmental economics claims are accurate
• Check EDM/water company institutional context is correct
• Verify spatial econometrics descriptions match methodology
• Check hedonic pricing theory correctly invoked
• Verify England housing market characterisation
• Save:

  docs/conferences/quality_reports/[FILE]_substance_review.md

3. Synthesize Combined Summary

# Slide Excellence Review: [Filename]

## Overall Quality Score: [EXCELLENT / GOOD / NEEDS WORK / POOR]

| Dimension | Critical | Medium | Low |
|-----------|----------|--------|-----|
| Visual/Layout | | | |
| Econometric Fidelity | | | |
| Proofreading | | | |
| Substance | | | |

### Critical Issues (Immediate Action Required)
### Medium Issues (Next Revision)
### Recommended Next Steps

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