Slide titles that make a point
After this, you'll be able to create claim headers for every slide and use it to move a deck from rough material toward a presentable file.
Before you start
Complete Turn rough notes into an outline first.
The idea
A claim header says what the audience should take from the slide. It is different from a topic label. This lesson asks you to make claim headers for every slide, not a prettier version of scattered notes. The output should be specific enough that someone could open the deck file and see what changed.

Here is the before and after: Before, slide titles say Market, Product, Team, or Budget. After, titles make the point: demand is already visible, the product removes a manual step, or the budget protects delivery. For example, if you are preparing a sales presentation, the artifact should name the audience, slide job, proof, speaker note, or export check where that detail matters. A reviewer should be able to tell whether the deck is closer to being presented, sent, or handed off.
Now try it: Ask Claude to rewrite every slide title as a claim, then test whether the claims alone tell the deck story. Make one choice before asking Claude to write: which audience, which decision, which proof, which slide job, or which delivery mode matters most right now. That choice keeps the deck from becoming a generic presentation outline.
| Before | After | |
|---|---|---|
| Input | Scattered | Named |
| Output | Guessing | claim headers for every slide |
| Check | Hidden | Visible |
| Next step | Unclear | Ready |
The lesson turns a loose pitch deck idea into an artifact you can inspect.
The lesson is done when the artifact moves the deck toward a real room, reader, or file handoff.
Try it (14 min)
Watch out for
Paste this into Claude
Rewrite these slide titles as claim headers. For each, include Original Title, Claim Header, Proof Needed, and Risk If Unsupported. Slide list: [paste]. Argument: [paste]. If any input is missing, ask me up to three questions before producing the artifact. Then return five sections: Finished Artifact, Realistic Deck Example, Assumptions To Check, What I Should Use In The Next Lesson, and One Risk If I Present Or Send This Without Fixing It. Keep the answer practical enough that I can paste it into my deck working doc.
What a good response looks like
Finished Artifact: - claim headers for every slide - Why it matters: it gives the deck a concrete thing to inspect instead of a vague intention. - Use it next: paste this artifact into the next lesson before asking Claude to write, build, import, publish, or review anything. Reality Check: - The artifact names the user, input, decision, owner, or proof it depends on. - The weakest assumption is visible. - The next step can be completed in one sitting.
What good looks like
Go deeper (8 min)
Paste this into Claude
Without rereading the lesson, explain why claim headers for every slide matters in three bullets. Then apply it to a second deck example: [describe a different audience, room, or topic]. Return What Changed, What Stayed The Same, What To Check Before Presenting Or Sending, and the exact next action.
What a good response looks like
Transfer Check: - What changed: the second example has a different audience, input, or delivery context. - What stayed the same: claim headers for every slide still needs a source, a review check, and a next step. - Before trusting it: inspect the delivery check that would catch a wrong assumption. - Next action: run the check once, then carry the revised artifact into the next lesson.
What good looks like
When this breaks
AI can help with this
Paste the exercise prompt into Claude with your real deck context. Ask Claude to interview you one question at a time, produce claim headers for every slide, challenge the weakest assumption, and rewrite the artifact once so it is ready for the next deck step.

You can now
You can explain claim headers for every slide in one sentence.
Key takeaways
Claim headers let a busy audience follow the deck even when they skim.