linkedin-post

name	linkedin-post
description	Draft, edit, or review LinkedIn posts that earn attention with a feed-native voice. Use when writing hooks, drafting personal-brand content, building thought-leadership posts, repurposing ideas into LinkedIn format, sharpening drafts for engagement without engagement-bait, choosing structure (text post vs carousel), or rewriting corporate-sounding copy into something a real person would write.
argument-hint	Goal (draft/edit/review), target reader, raw material or draft, intended outcome (authority, lesson, discussion, promotion), and tone constraints

LinkedIn Post Writing

What This Skill Does

Turn raw ideas, lessons, or stories into LinkedIn posts that earn attention in a skeptical professional feed.

This skill treats a LinkedIn post as a constrained writing target with one controlling rule: write for one specific reader, lead with a hook that earns the click, and trade in usefulness or honesty — ideally both. Generic "professional content" gets scrolled past.

Use this skill to:

• Draft a LinkedIn post from a rough idea, story, or lesson.
• Edit a draft for tightness, hook strength, and feed-native formatting.
• Repurpose existing content (essay, talk, internal memo) into LinkedIn format.
• Critique a post for vagueness, performative voice, or missed reader.
• Generate alternative hooks or angles for the same underlying idea.

This skill is for LinkedIn craft. It is not for ghostwriting an entire content calendar from scratch, building a personal-brand strategy, or producing platform-agnostic essays.

When to Use

• The user has a draft post, a rough idea, or a piece of source material and wants it shaped for LinkedIn.
• An existing post feels corporate, vague, or "engagement-baity" and needs a rewrite.
• A user has an essay, talk, or thread and wants a LinkedIn-native version.
• A user is drafting a series and wants help with hook variations or angle choices.

Do not use this skill for:

• Twitter/X threads or other platform formats — write directly for the target platform.
• Long-form essays or newsletters where LinkedIn's length and format constraints do not apply.
• Engagement-bait content, fake stories, or manipulation tactics.

Inputs To Gather

Ask for whatever is missing before drafting or editing.

• goal — draft, edit, review, or repurpose.
• target_reader — a specific person with a specific problem, not "professionals" or "leaders."
• intended_outcome — what the post should do: build authority, share a lesson, spark discussion, promote something specific.
• raw_material — the story, lesson, framework, observation, or existing content.
• voice_constraints — tone, off-limits topics, brand voice if relevant, hashtags policy.
• length_target — short text post, longer text post, or carousel structure.

If the brief is "write something about leadership," ask for the specific reader and the specific lesson before drafting. If the input is a corporate paragraph, ask whether you can rewrite it in the user's natural voice or must preserve a particular phrasing.

Non-Negotiable Constraints

Treat these as defaults unless the user explicitly narrows scope.

1. Narrow lane, real reader. Every post serves a clearly imagined reader with a specific problem.
2. Earn the click in the first two lines. LinkedIn truncates at roughly two lines on most clients. The opening must create curiosity, tension, or promise.
3. Be specific, not impressive. Replace adjectives with numbers, names, places, and dialogue. Vague abstractions signal there is nothing real to say.
4. Write like a person, format like a designer. Short lines, generous white space, one idea per line. But formatting is decoration if the voice is corporate.
5. Trade in usefulness or honesty — ideally both. A reader should save it or learn from it.
6. Edit harder than you wrote. Most posts are 30–50% too long. Cut every sentence that does not earn its place.
7. No engagement-bait, fake cliffhangers, or manipulation. No "Agree?" closers, no "I'll never forget what happened next" if nothing happens next.
8. Hashtags only when the user explicitly requests them.

Procedure

Follow the steps in order. Do not skip the hook step.

Step 1 — Clarify intent and reader

Determine:

• the one reader the post is for and the one problem it addresses.
• the intended outcome (authority, lesson, discussion, promotion).
• the one idea the post will serve.

If this is unclear, ask one targeted question rather than drafting around ambiguity.

Step 2 — Draft 3–5 hook variants first

Write only the first two lines for several different angles:

• Concrete claim or surprising number.
• Contrarian take grounded in real experience.
• Tight story beat starting in scene.
• Direct addressed problem ("If you've ever…").
• Simple framing of a specific situation.

Pick the strongest hook before writing the body. The hook decides whether the rest gets read.

Step 3 — Write the full draft in one pass

With the chosen hook, draft the body without self-editing:

• Tell the story or lay out the lesson naturally.
• Use real details: names, numbers, places, what someone said.
• Land a single takeaway.
• End on something useful — a takeaway, an invitation, a small contrast — not engagement-bait.

Step 4 — Sculpt through editing

Cut hard:

• Delete the windup. Most posts have two opening lines that should be cut.
• Cut the moralizing. Trust the reader.
• Tighten every line. If a sentence does not earn its place, remove it.
• Break into short lines. One idea per line where it helps the eye.
• Add white space. Make the post breathable on a phone.
• Read it aloud. If it sounds like a person, it is close.

After this pass, try cutting the first two lines and the last one. Often the post improves.

Step 5 — Decide structure (text vs carousel)

Choose based on the content, not the trend:

• Text post: stories, lessons, observations, opinionated takes.
• Carousel: framework with clear steps, comparisons, or visual structure that needs sequencing.

Do not force a carousel onto a story or a text post onto a framework that benefits from visuals.

Step 6 — Offer alternatives

Provide:

• Two or three hook variations the user can pick between.
• A shorter and a longer version when length is uncertain.
• One "less personal" alternative if the original draft is vulnerable, so the user can choose how exposed to be.

Step 7 — Final pass for honesty and engagement-bait

Before delivering, scan for:

• Performative vulnerability whose only point is to make the writer look good.
• Vague abstractions ("authenticity," "value," "synergy") used as filler.
• Engagement-bait questions or fake suspense.
• Stories the user did not give you permission to claim as theirs.

Cut anything that fails this scan.

Branching Logic

• Authority post. Lead with a specific claim, frame, or contrarian observation. Use real numbers and named situations.
• Lesson post. Open in scene with the moment something went wrong or right; land a single, transferable takeaway.
• Discussion post. Open with a tension or trade-off; invite the reader to weigh in honestly without an "Agree?" close.
• Promotion post. Lead with the reader problem, not the product. Make the offer specific. Avoid hype language.
• Repurposing an essay or talk. Pull one idea, not the whole argument. LinkedIn punishes attempts to compress a 2,000-word piece into 250 words.
• Editing a corporate-sounding draft. Rewrite in the user's natural voice. Replace adjectives with specifics. Strip platitudes.
• User wants vulnerability. Pair the personal moment with a real takeaway the reader can use. Vulnerability without a point reads as performance.
• Carousel request. Confirm the content actually benefits from sequencing. If it is a story, push back toward a text post.

Output Format

Match the deliverable to the task.

For draft:

1. The draft post, formatted exactly as it would appear on LinkedIn (short lines, white space, no markdown headers inside the post).
2. A short Notes section: who it is for, what the hook strategy is, and one alternative angle worth trying.
3. Two or three hook variations the user can swap in.

For edit or review:

1. The revised version of the post first.
2. A concise list of what changed and why.
3. Anything that still needs the user's decision (vulnerability, naming someone, specific numbers).

For repurpose:

1. The LinkedIn-native version of the source material.
2. The single idea it kept and what was cut.
3. One alternative angle drawn from the same source.

Quality Checks

The work is ready only when all of the following are true:

1. There is one specific reader and one clear takeaway.
2. The first two lines earn the click without a fake cliffhanger.
3. Specifics replace abstractions where it matters (numbers, names, places, dialogue).
4. The post breathes on a phone (short lines, white space).
5. Every sentence earns its place. The post is not 30–50% too long.
6. The voice sounds like a real person, not a brand or a LinkedIn caricature.
7. There is no engagement-bait close.
8. The post offers usefulness, honesty, or both.

Failure Modes To Avoid

• Corporate jargon and motivational platitudes ("synergy," "authenticity," "value" without substance).
• Performative vulnerability whose only point is to make the writer look good.
• Engagement-bait questions ("Agree?"), fake cliffhangers, or manipulation tactics.
• Walls of text that do not breathe on a phone screen.
• Writing for "everyone" instead of one specific reader.
• Adding hashtags without the user asking for them.
• Cramming multiple ideas into one post when one is enough.
• Copying viral-template structure when it does not fit the content.

Default Stance

Specific beats impressive. Honest beats clever. One idea beats five. Default to writing the post the user would tell a smart friend over coffee, then break it into breathable lines. When in doubt, cut more than you keep, and offer the user real choices in hook and angle rather than a single "best" draft.