`
+or `--theme-set`, Marp cannot resolve `nova-sp` and **falls back to the
+default theme** (or errors). The committed HTML was rendered by
+`render_slides.sh` (which correctly passes `--theme`), so the committed
+artifact is fine — but `render_deck.sh` is a stale, dangerous script
+that would produce an unthemed/default-themed deck if anyone ran it.
+The README (line 201) documents `render_slides.sh` as canonical;
+`render_deck.sh` is not mentioned in the build-commands section.
+
+## FINDING 6 — render_slides.sh missing 2x scale + transparent bg (CONFIDENCE: HIGH)
+
+`render_slides.sh` mermaid invocation (lines 51-55) does **NOT** pass
+`-s 2` (2x scale) or `-b transparent`, despite the README (line 193)
+documenting both as required. This is why `platform-pipeline.png` is
+only 1568px wide (1x) instead of 3136px (2x) — the rendered PNGs are
+lower resolution than the README specifies, contributing to illegibility
+when scaled.
+
+## FINDING 7 — P5 marp-cli version bump (CONFIDENCE: LOW — not the cause)
+
+The P3→P5 HTML diff is 831 changed lines, but the **theme CSS portion
+is byte-identical** (verified: `font-size:22px`, `max-height:320px`,
+`marpit-root-font-size:22px`, `--sp-red:#D6002A` all match; `sp-red`
+appears exactly once in both). The large diff is:
+- (a) marp-cli boilerplate (bespoke-marp presenter/overview/transition
+ CSS) changed due to a marp-cli version bump (neither script pins a
+ version — both use `@latest`), and
+- (b) content changes: title "No-Humans Infrastructure Platform" →
+ "Autonomous Cloud Delivery Platform", footer "Act %{page}/5 — v1.20"
+ → deck title, slide count 20 → 19.
+
+The version bump did **not** alter the slide layout engine or the theme
+rules. **This is not the regression source.** The layout problems are
+inherent to the theme CSS (zero padding, no overflow handling, blunt
+image rule) which has been unchanged. P5 made the content denser (new
+diagrams with extreme aspect ratios, longer deck-title header/footer)
+which made the pre-existing theme flaws more visible.
+
+## FINDING 8 — Test coverage gaps (CONFIDENCE: VERY HIGH)
+
+`tests/test_slides_pipeline.py` (268 lines) checks **static file
+properties only**:
+- Theme CSS file exists and contains `#D6002A` / `#1B1B1B`
+- Frontmatter references `nova-sp`, not `default`
+- `render_slides.sh` exists, is executable, invokes mermaid-cli + marp-cli
+- Every `.mmd` has a `.png`
+- No maturity badges, no version in footer, slide count = 18+1
+- No D-###/REQ-###/internal `.py` paths in slides
+
+**What is NOT tested (the gaps that let layout regressions through):**
+1. NO rendered-dimension / overflow test — no test renders the HTML and
+ checks that each slide's content height ≤ 720px.
+2. NO theme-CSS structural test — no test asserts `section` has
+ `padding`, that `overflow` is handled, or that `img` rules don't
+ conflict with `w:`/`h:` directives.
+3. NO image aspect-ratio / legibility test — no test checks that PNG
+ dimensions are reasonable for a 16:9 slide.
+4. NO render-script theme-flag test — no test asserts `render_deck.sh`
+ passes `--theme` (it doesn't), so the broken script passes CI.
+5. NO rendered-HTML structural assertion — no test parses the committed
+ HTML to verify the theme is actually embedded.
+6. NO mermaid render-scale test — no test verifies PNGs are 2x scale.
+
+**Conclusion:** A layout regression — including the current zero-padding,
+image-clamping, and table-overflow problems — would pass every existing
+test. This is why the user's "completely out of whack" report was not
+caught.
+
+## Theme CSS gaps (summary)
+
+1. NO `padding` on `section` (lines 21-26 set font/color/bg only).
+2. NO `overflow` handling on `section`.
+3. NO `@import` of a base theme (line 1 is a comment, not `@theme`).
+4. NO rule for the `h2` + bold-lead-paragraph pattern (default ``
+ margins waste ~44px each).
+5. Table cell padding `6px 10px` too generous for 10-13 row tables.
+6. `img { max-height: 320px }` is a blunt instrument that breaks `w:`
+ directives on tall images and does nothing for ultra-wide images.
+7. Header/footer have no padding/margin — collide with content at 0
+ section padding.
+8. `section.title` does not suppress header/footer.
+9. NO rule for `ol` (only `ul`/`li` styled).
+10. NO `@media print` overrides for PPTX export fidelity.
+
+## Assumptions logged (v1.22)
+
+- **A1 (0.95):** The theme CSS is the primary root cause. Adding
+ `section { padding: 48px 56px 40px; }` alone would fix the "jammed
+ against edges" look on all 19 slides. Confidence grounded in the
+ grep verification (zero padding matches in rendered HTML).
+- **A2 (0.9):** The P5 re-render is NOT a regression — the theme CSS is
+ byte-identical P3→P5. P5's denser content (new diagrams, longer
+ header/footer) made pre-existing flaws visible. Grounded in the
+ byte-level diff comparison.
+- **A3 (0.9):** `render_deck.sh` should be deleted, not fixed. The
+ README already documents `render_slides.sh` as canonical; keeping a
+ second broken script is a footgun. Grounded in the README build-
+ commands section (line 201) which does not mention `render_deck.sh`.
+- **A4 (0.85):** Splitting slides 3 and 8 (18 → 20 main) is preferable
+ to trimming content, because the content is leadership-relevant and
+ should not be lost. The slide-count test + README convention are
+ updated to match. Grounded in the overflow estimates (slides 3 and 8
+ are the densest at ~780px).
+- **A5 (0.8):** Pinning marp-cli/mermaid-cli versions is necessary to
+ prevent uncontrolled boilerplate-CSS drift. The exact pinned versions
+ will be determined during P2 execution by testing which version
+ produces stable output in this environment.
+
+## Decisions surfaced (research → bound in CLARIFY)
+
+All 5 CLARIFY decisions are grounded in these findings:
+- Comprehensive scope (FINDINGS 1-8 span 4 layers)
+- Full pipeline (new milestone, complete audit trail)
+- Re-layout to LR (FINDING 3 — TB produced 0.63 aspect)
+- Delete render_deck.sh (FINDING 5 — stale, unthemed)
+- Split slides 3+8 (FINDING 2 — densest overflow)