Install any skill in seconds. Free to start, no credit card required.
Get Started Free →McKinsey-style storyline framework for building presentation decks. Use when users need to structure presentations, pitch decks, or strategic communications. Creates logical flow where each storyline becomes a slide title, progressing from problem to solution.
.claude/skills/nicepkg-storyline-builder/SKILL.md| Test case | Without → With | Effect | Δ tokens | Δ turns |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| case-04 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | 116% | 0% |
| case-18 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | 89% | 0% |
| case-15 | ✓→✓ | = Same ✓ | 98% | 0% |
| case-02 | ✓→✓ | = Same ✓ | 95% | 0% |
| case-03 | ✓→✓ | = Same ✓ | 79% | 0% |
A structured approach to building presentation storylines where each line becomes one slide title, creating a logical narrative flow.
A storyline is the backbone of a presentation - a sequence of messages that tells a complete story. Each line in the storyline becomes one slide title in the final deck.
Key characteristics:
Action Titles
Logical Progression
Story Flow
Flow: Market opportunity → Competitive position → Product strategy → Go-forward plan
Storyline:
1. [Market name] represents $XXB opportunity growing at XX% CAGR
2. We operate in [specific segment] worth $XXB with XX% growth
3. Top 3 competitors generate $XXM-XXB revenue growing XX-XX% annually
4. Our revenue of $XXM positions us as [rank/position] with XX% growth
5. [Product name] addresses [use case] for [target customer segment]
6. Top 10 customers span [industries/sectors], XX% enterprise vs XX% SMB split
7. Pricing structured as [model type] with $XX average contract value
8. Product differentiation built on [technology/approach] vs competitors
9. Key competitive advantages: [advantage 1], [advantage 2], [advantage 3]
10. Three growth opportunities identified: [opp 1], [opp 2], [opp 3]
11. Focus on [priority opportunity] based on market size and competitive position
12. 18-month roadmap prioritizes [capability 1], [capability 2], [capability 3]Flow: Problem framing → Root cause analysis → Solution options → Prioritization → Next steps
Storyline:
1. [Problem statement] - current state at XX vs target of XX
2. Problem driven by three factors: [factor 1], [factor 2], [factor 3]
3. [Factor 1] contributes $XXM impact (XX% of total problem)
4. [Factor 2] contributes $XXM impact (XX% of total problem)
5. [Factor 3] contributes $XXM impact (XX% of total problem)
6. Root cause analysis reveals [key insight from data]
7. Three solution approaches identified to address root causes
8. Solution 1: [approach] - XX% impact, $XXM investment, XX weeks
9. Solution 2: [approach] - XX% impact, $XXM investment, XX weeks
10. Solution 3: [approach] - XX% impact, $XXM investment, XX weeks
11. Prioritize [solution X] based on impact/effort analysis
12. Implementation roadmap: [Phase 1 by date], [Phase 2 by date], [Phase 3 by date]
13. Success metrics: [metric 1], [metric 2], [metric 3] tracked [frequency]Flow: Approach → Phases → Activities → Timeline → Success criteria
Storyline:
1. Project objective: [goal statement with measurable outcome]
2. Four-phase approach over XX weeks: Discovery → Design → Build → Launch
3. Project roadmap spans XX weeks with clear owners and milestones:
- Phase 1 (Weeks 1-X): User research - XX interviews across [segments] | Owner: [role]
- Phase 2 (Weeks X-X): Solution design - Define stories, sprint planning | Owner: [role]
- Phase 3 (Weeks X-X): MVP build - [features] across XX sprints | Owner: [role]
- Phase 4 (Weeks X-X): Launch - Onboard XX customers | Owner: [role]
4. Core team of XX across [# domains]: PM, Design, Engineering, [other] - Gap: Need [X more roles] and $XXK investment
5. Success criteria: [metric 1] = XX, [metric 2] = XX by [date]
6. ROI measurement: Track [business metric] over XX monthsStep 1: Identify the situation type
Step 2: Customize the flow
Step 3: Write action titles
Step 4: Verify flow
Step 5: Build slides
Problem-to-Solution Arc
Problem statement → Problem sizing → Root causes →
Solution options → Recommendation → Implementation planMarket-to-Strategy Arc
Market opportunity → Competitive landscape → Our position →
Product strategy → Roadmap → Expected outcomesAnalysis-to-Action Arc
Key question → Hypotheses → Data analysis →
Insights → Recommendations → Next stepsWhen creating storyline:
When reviewing storyline:
Start with structure
Consider executive summary upfront
Use parallel structure
Include signposts
Build to the punchline
Iterate
| Case | Status | Duration (ms) | Turns | Tokens | Tool calls | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Without | With | Δ | Without | With | Δ | Without | With | Δ | Without | With | Δ | ||
case-04 | fail→pass | 24,886 | 9,199 | -63% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,538 | 3,327 | +116% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-15 | pass→pass | 12,905 | 13,314 | +3% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,938 | 3,834 | +98% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-01 | fail→fail | 17,513 | 15,373 | -12% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,731 | 4,293 | +57% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-02 | pass→pass | 11,161 | 11,857 | +6% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,059 | 4,024 | +95% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-03 | pass→pass | 15,062 | 15,400 | +2% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,193 | 3,934 | +79% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-05 | pass→pass | 9,362 | 7,768 | -17% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,300 | 2,932 | +126% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-06 | fail→fail | 14,347 | 13,010 | -9% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,038 | 3,621 | +78% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-07 | pass→pass | 12,682 | 10,546 | -17% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,830 | 3,400 | +86% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-08 | pass→pass | 14,738 | 11,627 | -21% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,479 | 3,699 | +49% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-09 | pass→pass | 11,365 | 9,295 | -18% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,657 | 3,286 | +98% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-10 | fail→fail | 10,597 | 12,075 | +14% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,646 | 3,622 | +120% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-11 | pass→pass | 9,539 | 9,897 | +4% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,571 | 3,602 | +129% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-12 | pass→pass | 14,357 | 8,997 | -37% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,186 | 3,331 | +52% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-13 | pass→pass | 12,039 | 6,731 | -44% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,716 | 2,833 | +65% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-14 | pass→pass | 9,549 | 5,798 | -39% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,726 | 2,752 | +59% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-16 | pass→pass | 9,791 | 7,204 | -26% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,412 | 2,938 | +108% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-17 | pass→pass | 14,046 | 15,401 | +10% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,072 | 4,108 | +98% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-18 | fail→pass | 12,881 | 11,826 | -8% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,906 | 3,600 | +89% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-19 | pass→pass | 12,520 | 9,824 | -22% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,063 | 3,445 | +67% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-20 | pass→pass | 11,169 | 9,030 | -19% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,578 | 3,163 | +100% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-21 | pass→pass | 9,196 | 9,299 | +1% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,415 | 3,224 | +128% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-22 | pass→pass | 9,643 | 7,146 | -26% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,472 | 3,023 | +105% | 0 | 0 | — |
DecimalAI ran this skill against gemini-3.6-flash twice over the same eval suite — once with the skill loaded and once without — and compared the two runs case by case. 22 cases were attempted. The headline lift of +9 percentage points is the difference between those two pass rates over the 22 comparable cases.
Without the skill loaded, the model failed this case. With it loaded, the same prompt on the same model passed. This is one improved case from the latest verified run; every case, including any that regressed, is in the table above.
Other measured skills in the registry, with their headline benchmark lift.