---

name: linkedin-post-writer description: > Drafts LinkedIn posts from a brief: picks an angle and opening pattern the author's real material supports, structures the body, and gates the draft before it is pasted. Use when writing a post, choosing a hook, or checking a draft before publishing. license: MIT + Commons Clause metadata: version: 1.0.0 author: borghei category: tools domain: linkedin updated: 2026-10-07 tags: [linkedin, copywriting, hooks, content-drafting, pre-publish]

LinkedIn Post Writer

Most weak posts are decided before the first word is written. The author starts from a topic ("something about onboarding") instead of from material (a number, a date, a thing a customer said), so the draft has to be built from generalities, and generalities all sound alike. The opening is then chosen for how it sounds, a format is borrowed from a post that did well for someone else, and the result is a confident paragraph about nothing in particular with a question bolted to the end.

This skill reverses the order. It starts with an inventory of what the author really has, lets that inventory decide which of fourteen opening patterns are available, builds the body from beats that each need a fact, and runs a mechanical gate before the text leaves the editor. Patterns the author lacks the material for are not offered; instead the skill says which single question would unlock them.

Scope boundary. This skill drafts a single feed post and checks it. It does not run the full machine-tell audit, score emoji, or build a voice fingerprint; hand the draft to linkedin-humanizer for that. It does not study other people's posts to extract their openings; that is linkedin-hook-analyzer. Drawing a story out of an author who "has nothing to say" is linkedin-story-interviewer; turning an article, talk or thread into posts is linkedin-content-repurposer; deciding what to post this month is linkedin-content-planner. Comments and replies (linkedin-comment-writer, linkedin-reply-manager, linkedin-thread-tracker), profile copy (linkedin-profile-optimizer), team programmes (linkedin-employee-advocacy) and performance review (linkedin-engagement-analytics) are separate skills. Everything here is offline: the skill produces text for the user to paste into LinkedIn themselves. It does not post, schedule, fetch, or call any service.

When to use this skill

• Someone asks for a LinkedIn post and has a topic but no angle
• A draft exists and the opening is not working
• An author has one good fact (a result, a mistake, a quote) and wants the post built around it
• A ghostwriter needs a repeatable way to brief, draft and check posts for several authors
• A draft is finished and needs a last mechanical check before it is pasted
• The same author keeps producing the same shape of post and wants a different one

Inputs the skill expects

• A brief: topic, one goal, the audience in a sentence (assets/post_brief_template.md)
• The author's material: any of a figure, a dated event, a scene, a changed belief, an opposing view, a before-and-after, a quote, a rule, a sample count, a question they were asked, a person to credit, a term to explain, a prediction, a list of steps
• Constraints: what must be included, what must not be named, preferred length
• Optional: a voice profile or two past posts, so the draft is in the author's register

Clarify First

Before drafting, confirm these inputs. If any is unknown or vague, ASK — do not assume:

• The one goal (conversation, saves, reshares, or inbound interest) — it changes which pattern ranks first and what the last line asks for; a post that tries for all four gets none
• What the author actually has — at least one concrete item of material; without it every pattern is locked and the only honest output is a question back to the author
• Who it is for — the same fact is written differently for peers, buyers and candidates; "everyone" produces a post for no one
• What cannot be said — client names, unreleased figures, people who have not agreed to be named; these decide whether a quote or a number can be used at all

Stop rule: ask only the 2-3 that most change the output. If the user says "just draft it," use the material in the request as given, pick the top-ranked pattern, and list the assumed goal and audience at the top of the reply. If there is no material at all, ask the single unlock question for the pattern that best fits the topic; do not invent a figure to get started.

Workflows

Quick start: fill in the brief, run the picker, draft from the first option, run the gate.

Workflow 1 — From brief to angle

1. Fill in assets/post_brief_template.md with the author, or convert their notes into the JSON shape in assets/sample_brief.json. Leave a material field empty if the author does not have it.
2. Run the picker. It ranks only the patterns the material supports and lists the rest as locked, each with the question that would unlock it.
3. Read any caution lines. A counter-position or a prediction with no evidence behind it is an opinion; get the evidence or choose another pattern.
4. Offer the author the top two or three options in one line each. Let them choose; they know which one they are comfortable publishing.

python3 tools/linkedin/linkedin-post-writer/scripts/angle_picker.py \
  --input tools/linkedin/linkedin-post-writer/assets/sample_brief.json --top 3

Workflow 2 — Draft the post

1. Write the opening from the chosen pattern in references/opening-patterns.md. The agent writes it from the author's material and nothing else; the point of the line must land inside the first clause.
2. Write the second line so it works if the first is all the reader sees before expanding: add the stake, do not restate.
3. Build the body from the pattern's beats (references/post-structures.md). One beat per paragraph, each anchored to a fact. Cut any beat the author has no fact for.
4. Include the part that did not work. A post with no cost, exception or open question reads as an advertisement.
5. Close according to the goal: a question only a practitioner could answer, the last fact, or nothing. Never a stock ask.
6. Draft two alternative openings from the second-ranked pattern so the author has a real choice.

python3 tools/linkedin/linkedin-post-writer/scripts/angle_picker.py \
  --input tools/linkedin/linkedin-post-writer/assets/sample_brief.json \
  --top 5 --format json

Workflow 3 — Gate the draft before it is pasted

1. Save the draft as plain text with the line breaks it will have in the feed.
2. Run the gate. Blockers fail it outright; more than three warnings fail it.
3. Fix blockers first: a leftover placeholder or a stock closing line is never acceptable. Then work the warnings in the order shown.
4. Verify that every figure, name and quote in the draft appears in the brief, using the manual checklist in references/pre-publish-gate.md §4. The tool cannot do this part.
5. Re-run until the exit code is 0, then hand over the text with its character count. For a full style audit, pass the result to linkedin-humanizer.

python3 tools/linkedin/linkedin-post-writer/scripts/post_gate.py \
  --input tools/linkedin/linkedin-post-writer/assets/sample_draft.txt

python3 tools/linkedin/linkedin-post-writer/scripts/post_gate.py \
  --input tools/linkedin/linkedin-post-writer/assets/sample_draft_revised.txt

The first sample fails with two blockers and three warnings. The revised version of the same post passes clean.

Decision frameworks

Pattern by material

The pattern is chosen by what the author has, then ranked by goal. Goal-fit scores are editorial heuristics, not measurements.

The author has…	Pattern	Strongest for
One precise figure	Receipt line	Saves, inbound
A date and something that went wrong	Dated mistake	Conversation
A moment they were present for	Cold scene	Conversation, reshares
A belief they dropped	Changed mind	Conversation
A disagreement with common practice, plus evidence	Counter-position	Conversation, reshares
A before and an after	Measured gap	Saves, inbound
Someone's exact words	Borrowed line	Conversation
A rule they keep	House rule	Saves
A count of things examined	Field count	Saves, reshares, inbound
A question they keep being asked	Reported question	Conversation
A person who did a specific thing	Named credit	Reshares
A term their audience misuses	Plain definition	Saves
An expectation with a date on it	Dated bet	Conversation, reshares
Three or more real steps	Counted list	Saves

Choices that come up in every draft

Decision	Recommendation	Why
Start from topic or from material	[PROVEN] Material. If there is none, ask for it before drafting	A post is as specific as its least specific input
Opening: statement or question	[RECOMMENDED] Statement. Put a real question at the close	A question in line one asks for attention before giving a reason
Where the key fact goes	[PROVEN] In the first clause of the first line	The feed truncates the opening; anything after the cut is seen only by people already interested
How many ideas	[PROVEN] One. Park the second in a note for the next post	Two ideas halve the space for evidence on each
Length	[RECOMMENDED] As long as the facts last: usually 600 to 1,400 characters	Past the facts, length is restatement
Include what failed	[RECOMMENDED] Yes, with the same precision as what worked	It is what separates a report from a promotion
Hashtags	[RECOMMENDED] None to three, on the last line	They are labels, not content
A link in the body	[EXPERIMENTAL] Put it in the first comment unless the link is the point	Widely practised, effect unverified; the gate warns and --allow-links overrides
Mentioning the author's product	[RECOMMENDED] Once, where the story reaches it	Earlier, the post becomes an advert

Platform mechanics the gate assumes

Setting	Default	Status
Post character limit	3,000	Current as of writing; verify in the product
Characters visible before truncation	140	Conservative mobile estimate as of writing; desktop shows more. Override with --fold-chars
Markdown rendering	None	As of writing, asterisks and pound signs display literally

These change without notice. Treat them as configuration, not knowledge.

Anti-Patterns

Writing the opening first and looking for a post to fit it

Mistake: The author has a line they like ("Nobody talks about the real cost of meetings") and builds four paragraphs to justify it. Why it happens: A good-sounding line arrives easily and feels like progress. The material that would support it takes effort to dig out. Instead: Fill in the brief first. angle_picker.py will show that the line is a teaser with nothing behind it, and that the author's real asset is, say, "62 person-hours every Monday", which opens the post on its own.

Borrowing a format without the material it needs

Mistake: A measured-gap post did well for someone else, so the author writes "We went from struggling to thriving in six months" with no figures. Why it happens: The format is visible and the measurements behind it are not. Instead: Treat every pattern's needs as a hard requirement. A gap needs two numbers measured the same way and a time span. If the author has one number, it is a receipt line; if none, the pattern is locked and the picker says what to ask.

Trying for every goal at once

Mistake: The post tells a story, lists seven tips, thanks the team, and ends by inviting people to book a call. Why it happens: Each addition seems free, and each stakeholder has a request. Instead: One goal per post, chosen in the brief. The goal sets the pattern ranking and the close. Everything else goes in a note for the next post; linkedin-content-planner is the place to schedule them.

Leaving out what went wrong

Mistake: Every paragraph reports success. The fortnight where two teams shipped conflicting changes is cut "to keep it positive". Why it happens: The author is writing under their employer's name and caution feels safe. Instead: Keep one cost, exception or unsolved part, stated as precisely as the wins. Compare the two sample drafts: the revised one opens on the mistake, and it is the more credible post.

Closing with a generic ask

Mistake: "What do you think?" or "Agree?" as the last line. Why it happens: The author has been told to end on a question and has no specific one. Instead: Ask something that can only be answered from experience ("what broke in the first two weeks?") or end on the last fact. post_gate.py blocks the stock wordings outright.

Passing the gate and skipping the read-through

Mistake: Exit code 0, so the draft is pasted. Why it happens: A green check feels like approval. Instead: The gate checks mechanics. It cannot tell whether the figure is right, whether Ines agreed to be quoted, or whether the post is interesting. Check every fact against the brief and have the author read the text aloud once.

Files

Tools overview and reference documentation for this skill:

File	Purpose
scripts/angle_picker.py	Ranks the fourteen opening patterns by the material in a brief and the stated goal; prints the opening skeleton, body beats and close for each, and the unlock question for every pattern the brief cannot support
scripts/post_gate.py	Pre-paste gate with fifteen checks: opening fit and phrasing, length, placeholders and markup, paragraph density, hashtags, links, specificity, habit spot-check, closing line; exits 1 on any blocker or excess warnings
references/opening-patterns.md	The fourteen patterns: what each needs, how to build it, an original example, the usual way it goes wrong, and four opening types to avoid
references/post-structures.md	Body beats per pattern, the second line, closes by goal, length bands, layout, and a full worked draft from the sample brief
references/pre-publish-gate.md	Every gate check with its level and rationale, platform mechanics and their caveats, the manual checks the tool cannot do, and how to tune thresholds
assets/sample_brief.json	A filled brief for a fictional COO writing about cancelling a weekly all-hands
assets/sample_draft.txt	First draft from that brief; fails the gate on a placeholder, a stock closer, a long opening, a dense paragraph and six hashtags
assets/sample_draft_revised.txt	The same post after revision; passes the gate
assets/post_brief_template.md	Fill-in brief covering goal, audience, material inventory, constraints and sign-off