Gemini CLI - PPT Slide Reviewer

scripts/invoke-gemini-ppt.ts

Script Entry

npx tsx scripts/invoke-gemini-ppt.ts \
  --role "<role>" \
  --prompt "<prompt>" \
  [--image "<path>"] \
  [--model "<model>"] \
  [--output "<path>"]

Resource Usage

• Role prompts:

  references/roles/{role}.md

• Execution script:

  scripts/invoke-gemini-ppt.ts

Roles

--role reviewer

Workflow

Step 1: Read the SVG source and style tokens

Step 2: Build the review prompt

• The full SVG source code (or relevant excerpts for very large files)
• The style token values (colors, fonts, border-radius, gap)
• The slide context (index, topic, presentation style name)

Step 3: Call Gemini

npx tsx scripts/invoke-gemini-ppt.ts \
  --role reviewer \
  --prompt "$REVIEW_PROMPT" \
  --output "${RUN_DIR}/reviews/gemini-raw-${SLIDE_INDEX}.md"

Step 4: Handle the result

• Exit code 0: Gemini responded. Read the output file and extract the structured review.
• Exit code 2: All Gemini models unavailable. Fall back to Claude self-review using the same quality standards from

  references/roles/reviewer.md

  . This is the expected degradation path — the review must still happen, just without the cross-model perspective.
• Exit code 1: Script error (bad args, missing file). Fix and retry.

Step 5: Write the final review

${run_dir}/reviews/review-{nn}.md

references/roles/reviewer.md

Prompt Templates

Role: reviewer — SVG Quality Review

npx tsx scripts/invoke-gemini-ppt.ts \
  --role reviewer \
  --output "${RUN_DIR}/reviews/gemini-raw-${N}.md" \
  --prompt "
## Task
Review the SVG presentation slide for design quality.

## Slide Content
${SVG_CONTENT}

## Style Reference
${STYLE_NAME} style with tokens: ${STYLE_TOKENS}

## Review Criteria
1. Layout Balance: card arrangement, visual weight distribution, whitespace usage
2. Color Harmony: palette consistency, contrast ratios, accent usage
3. Typography: hierarchy clarity, font size appropriateness, line spacing
4. Readability: text legibility at presentation resolution, information flow
5. Information Density: content-to-whitespace ratio, cognitive load

## Output Format
Structured review with:
- overall_score: 1-10
- pass: true/false (pass if >= 7)
- per-criterion scores and notes
- issues: list of specific problems with severity (critical/major/minor)
- fixes: actionable suggestions for each issue with specific values
"

Fallback Strategy

1. Read

   references/roles/reviewer.md

   for quality standards and methodology.
2. Apply the same structured review process: 5 criteria, numeric scores, pass/fail gate, issue severity, actionable fixes.
3. Mark the review as "Claude self-review" in the output header so downstream consumers know it was not cross-model validated.

Constraints

Collaboration

1. review-core agent invokes

   reviewer

   role for SVG quality assessment
2. Review output feeds back to slide-core for fix iterations