AI critiques
Storymakers reviews of every deck.
Each deck reviewed by an AI editor through the Storymakers lens — narrative arc, opening hook, closing call-to-action, and action-title quality. With a one-line verdict, top strengths and weaknesses, and three concrete fixes per deck.
1086 reviewed decks
· mean 43.8
· click a bar to filter
Search by prescribed fix
most common opening verb across 3405 suggestionsFiltered reviewed decks
14 matching
82
closing
The future of demand
“A well-structured thought-leadership deck with a clean SCQA arc and answer-first exec summary — strong Storymakers exemplar for opening/closing discipline, but the overlapping middle dividers make it a flawed template for teaching MECE pillar design.”
↓ Two middle dividers (p.6 and p.8) cover overlapping territory about customer-industry sustainability — breaks MECE
72
closing
Green by Default
“Well-structured Accenture thought-leadership report with clear MECE pillars and several sharp action titles — use the sectioning (p.15/20/25) and insight-title examples (p.4, p.5, p.10) as teaching exemplars, but flag the repeated generic recommendation titles and soft closing as common pitfalls to avoid.”
↓ Three identical generic titles 'Practical considerations to help your business make a start' on p.19, p.24, p.29 — insight-free and undifferentiated
70
closing
April Macro Brief: Special edition Tariff distress
“A strong analytical brief with insight-bearing titles and clean MECE spine, but the recommendation is compressed and generic - use the tariff analysis (p.12-19, p.22-25, p.36) as a Storymakers exemplar of action-title discipline, not the resolution arc.”
↓ Recommendation is compressed into p.38-40 and reads as bolt-on consulting boilerplate ('resiliency', 'scenario planning', 'productivity') rather than tariff-specific moves earned by the preceding 30 slides of analysis
70
closing
1100 Aircastle
“A competent investor-relations factbook with a thesis bookend and a few strong industry-trend titles, but a MECE-less middle and topic-label financials make it a cautionary Storymakers example rather than an exemplar — use pp.20-22 as a teaching moment on directional titles, not the overall structure.”
↓ No Complication: the deck never names the investor's worry (leverage? cyclicality? AAM disruption?) so the analytical build has nothing to resolve.
58
closing
Digital consumer spending India
“A structurally disciplined market-sizing + sector-diagnosis deck with a strong thesis-forward opening and clean MECE pillars, but it buries its recommendation in a duplicated intervention slide and fades into case studies — use the sector-diagnosis spine (p11-21) as a Storymakers exemplar, not the closing act.”
↓ p24 and p25 share the exact same title 'Key interventions for driving growth in digital transactions' — the central recommendation slide is duplicated instead of sharpened
55
closing
Port of LA Clean Truck Program
“A solid 2008 BCG business-case deck with a competent analytical spine and one exemplary action title at p.15, but the buried thesis and post-conclusion option dumps make it a teaching example for analytical rigor, not for Storymakers narrative structure.”
↓ Structural misplacement: 'Agenda' divider at p.17 after the 'Conclusion' at p.16 inverts deck logic — option deep-dives (p.18-20) should precede, not follow, the recommendation
50
closing
06 20230302 SDD Insights into Sustainable Finance Gov
“A competent two-pillar governance explainer with one sharp SCQA pivot (p.5→p.6) but a slow org-chart opening and a generic outlook/takeaways close — use the mid-deck pillar structure as a teaching example, not the bookends.”
↓ Opening spends three slides on org-chart context (p.2–3) before the tension appears on p.5 — buries the thesis
45
closing
Covid 19: Briefing Materials
“A high-quality McKinsey briefing document with strong analytical craftsmanship and action-title discipline, but structurally a report not a story — useful as a teaching example for slide-level writing and quantified callouts, not for Storymakers narrative architecture.”
↓ Recommendation is buried at p.41-42 and limited to 'operating-model speed' — too narrow relative to the humanitarian, economic, and operational problems framed earlier
45
closing
Deutsche Bank Q3 2023 Fixed Income Call
“A competent IR disclosure deck with above-average action titles in the first 14 slides, but it lacks SCQA tension, has no real closing ask, and is dominated by a topic-labelled appendix — useful as a reference for declarative titling, not as a Storymakers structural exemplar.”
↓ No complication/tension act — the deck never names what's hard (rates, CRE, TLTRO repayments), so analytical slides like p.25–27 read as disclosure, not narrative payoff
35
closing
Responding to Covid-19 (2021)
“A competent COVID-19 reference almanac with strong action titles and clear callouts, but it lacks an SCQA frame and ends in a marketing CTA — useful as a teaching example for action-title and callout craft, not for narrative architecture.”
↓ No SCQA setup in the opening: p.1-3 are cover/intro/TOC and p.6 is a generic 'summary facts' page rather than a thesis
35
closing
Transport & Logistics Barometer
“A competently-titled industry barometer with one excellent thematic mini-arc (China/SEA, p.20–24) but no SCQA resolution — use individual action titles like p.20 as teaching examples, not the overall structure.”
↓ Outlook (p.25–26) is a single content slide with a topic-label title — the natural 'answer' moment of the deck is empty
35
closing
NBI 2023 Press Release Supplemental Deck December 23
“A competent research-report deck with a strong mid-section of declarative KDA titles, but it buries its Japan headline behind four methodology slides and ends in appendix/boilerplate — use pp.21–22 as a title-craft exemplar, not the overall structure.”
↓ Thesis buried: it takes 9 pages to reach the Japan headline; a press-release deck should lead with it on slide 1 or 2
30
closing
A&M Valuation Insights November 2023
“A competent quarterly valuation update with strong slide-level action titles but no overarching story — useful as a teaching example for declarative titles and metric-anchored callouts, not for narrative arc or closing.”
↓ No executive summary or 'answer first' slide — the thesis of the report is never stated up front
22
closing
The CMO Survey The Highlights and Insights Report February 2022
“A well-titled, well-segmented industry survey report — useful as a teaching example for declarative action titles and callout discipline, but not as a Storymakers exemplar because it has no thesis, no MECE argument, and no recommendation.”
↓ No thesis or recommendation — the deck ends at p.93 on a cover page with zero 'so what' for the CMO reader