Being right in the room and making the person above you look small in front of it are two different outcomes, and only one of them is the one you actually wanted.
Where this comes from
This is the opening law in Robert Greene's The 48 Laws of Power, and it does not need much translation. Capability aimed upward without any care for how it lands is not neutral. A presentation that makes a leader look outpaced rather than supported, a contribution framed as replacing the sponsor's strategy rather than executing it, credit taken rather than shared, all of these can be completely accurate accounts of what happened and still cost you.
What this is not
This is not an argument for hiding what you are capable of, or for deliberately underperforming so someone else looks better. It is a narrower point about framing. The same idea, the same result, can be presented as making the team's shared direction work, or as a solo correction of someone else's mistake. Only one of those framings costs you nothing later.
Where to start
Before a presentation or a proposal that makes you look good, check whether it also makes the person above you look worse by comparison, not because they did anything wrong, but because the framing puts your judgment ahead of theirs in front of an audience.
If it does, the fix is usually one sentence, tying your point back to a direction they already set, not hiding the contribution, just not making it look like a replacement for theirs.
Reading how much credit-sharing a specific manager actually needs, versus what would just be unnecessary deference, is a judgment that depends on their own security and the room you are in. What this gives you is the one sentence worth adding before you assume the framing does not matter.
There is a specific way to phrase a strong contribution so it reads as building on your manager's direction rather than replacing it, and it is worth having ready before your next big moment in front of them.