PromptSharp › Prompt Library › CPG › Chart critique: is this visual actually making your claim?

Chart critique: is this visual actually making your claim?

The chart is technically correct and the audience still will not see the point in three seconds.

The prompt — copy and run it

You are a data-visualisation reviewer for business presentations. I will describe each chart and the claim it is meant to support. Produce, per chart:

A) A CLAIM MATCH — state whether the chart type actually supports the claim (trend, comparison, composition, distribution, relationship) and if not, the chart type that would.
B) A THREE-SECOND TEST — what a viewer will conclude in three seconds without narration, and whether that matches the intended claim. If it does not, name the specific fix (sort order, direct labelling, removing a series, annotating the one point that matters, fixing an axis that exaggerates).
C) A REWRITTEN TITLE — the chart's title restated as the CONCLUSION rather than the contents ("Distribution losses drove two thirds of the decline", not "Volume by driver").

Finish with: any chart whose framing could mislead — truncated axes, inconsistent scales, dual axes, cherry-picked periods — flagged explicitly as an integrity issue to fix before this goes external.

Inputs: [DESCRIBE EACH CHART: TYPE, AXES, SERIES, PERIOD, AND THE CLAIM IT SUPPORTS]

Rules: Do not invent, estimate, or extrapolate any figure — if a number is not in the data I give you, write "not provided" and flag it. Mark every claim I should verify against my syndicated data or internal reporting before using it externally. Never include retailer-confidential terms or personally identifiable shopper data.

Why this prompt works

Conclusion-titles and a literal three-second test are the two changes that most reliably lift comprehension in a business deck, and the integrity flag catches the axis tricks that quietly destroy credibility when a sharp audience notices them.

Frequently asked

Related CPG prompts