Li comment skill

Write comments on other people's LinkedIn posts that read as a person with an opinion, not a bot.

by Jakeschincariol·MIT license·★ 1,856 Stars on the repo·GitHub ↗

Use now

Inside this skill

SKILL.md · the author's own words
# li-comment

Commenting is the highest-leverage thing on LinkedIn and the easiest to do
badly. A comment on a post with 400 reactions gets seen by more people than
most of your own posts. A generic one gets seen by nobody and costs you
credibility with the author.

## Input

The user pastes the post text (and the author's name and role if they have
it). If they paste a screenshot, read it. If they give you a URL you cannot
open, ask them to paste the text - do not guess what the post said, and do not
use browser automation to scrape the feed.

## The nine comment types

Word-for-word excerpt, not a result. Read the full SKILL.md ↓

Files of Li comment

Jakeschincariol/main1 file shown
SKILL.md
Show the full text92 lines
li-comment/SKILL.md92 lines · 4.1 KB

li-comment

Commenting is the highest-leverage thing on LinkedIn and the easiest to do badly. A comment on a post with 400 reactions gets seen by more people than most of your own posts. A generic one gets seen by nobody and costs you credibility with the author.

Input

The user pastes the post text (and the author's name and role if they have it). If they paste a screenshot, read it. If they give you a URL you cannot open, ask them to paste the text - do not guess what the post said, and do not use browser automation to scrape the feed.

The nine comment types

Pick by what the post actually is. Never default to type 1.

# type when shape
1 Add a datum post makes a claim you can support with a number "We saw the same thing: 40% of our..."
2 Add the missing case post is right but incomplete "This holds until {condition}. Then..."
3 Respectful disagree you genuinely think it is wrong name the agreement first, then the fork
4 Extend one line one sentence in the post is the good one quote it, then build on it
5 Ask the real question post skipped the hard part one question, specific, no "curious to hear"
6 The receipt you have done the thing they described what happened, in two sentences
7 The correction there is a factual error be right, be brief, be kind, be sure
8 The reframe the post has the right facts and the wrong frame "Another way to read this:"
9 The one-liner the post needs nothing, you want presence under 12 words, must be funny or true

Rules

  • 2 to 4 sentences. Longer reads as a hijack. Shorter reads as filler.
  • Never open with "Great post", "Love this", "So true", "Couldn't agree more", "This resonates", or the author's first name followed by an exclamation mark. All six are invisible.
  • No emoji openers. No 🔥 or 👏 as a first character.
  • Never restate the post. The author knows what they wrote and so does everyone reading.
  • One idea. A comment with two points reads as a blog attempt.
  • Say the specific thing. If the comment could sit under any post on the topic, it is not a comment, it is noise.
  • Disagreement is allowed and works, but the agreement has to come first and be real.

Output

Give two options of different types, labelled, plus a one-line reason for the one you would post. Run both through /li-human first - a comment with an em dash in it is more obviously machine-written than a post, because comments are short and people read them closely.

COMMENT OPTIONS  (on @author's post about hiring)

[6 · Receipt]
We tried the no-resume version of this for 3 hires last year. Two were the
best hires we made. The third was a disaster, and the difference was whether
they had done the actual job before, not how they interviewed.

[3 · Respectful disagree]
Agree on the signal problem. But the fix that worked for us was not removing
the resume, it was giving every candidate the same 90-minute paid task. Same
outcome, far less argument internally.

Post the first. It is your own data and it concedes a failure, which is the
part people reply to.

Batch mode

If the user wants an engagement round, ask for the 5-10 posts as pasted text in one message, return one comment each in a single block, and keep a running note of who they have already commented on this week in ~/.claude/linkedin/log.md. Commenting on the same three people every day is visible and it looks like what it is.

Never

Do not auto-post. Do not use a browser tool to publish comments on the user's behalf. Automated posting and scraping both violate LinkedIn's User Agreement and put the account at risk. This skill writes the comment. The user posts it.

1---
2name: li-comment
3description: >-
4 Write comments on other people's LinkedIn posts that read as a person with an
5 opinion, not a bot. Use when the user pastes a post and wants a comment, says
6 "comment on this", "engage with this", "what do I say here", or wants a batch
7 of comments for their engagement round.
8---
9 
10# li-comment
11 
12Commenting is the highest-leverage thing on LinkedIn and the easiest to do
13badly. A comment on a post with 400 reactions gets seen by more people than
14most of your own posts. A generic one gets seen by nobody and costs you
15credibility with the author.
16 
17## Input
18 
19The user pastes the post text (and the author's name and role if they have
20it). If they paste a screenshot, read it. If they give you a URL you cannot
21open, ask them to paste the text - do not guess what the post said, and do not
22use browser automation to scrape the feed.
23 
24## The nine comment types
25 
26Pick by what the post actually is. Never default to type 1.
27 
28| # | type | when | shape |
29| --- | --- | --- | --- |
30| 1 | **Add a datum** | post makes a claim you can support with a number | "We saw the same thing: 40% of our..." |
31| 2 | **Add the missing case** | post is right but incomplete | "This holds until {condition}. Then..." |
32| 3 | **Respectful disagree** | you genuinely think it is wrong | name the agreement first, then the fork |
33| 4 | **Extend one line** | one sentence in the post is the good one | quote it, then build on it |
34| 5 | **Ask the real question** | post skipped the hard part | one question, specific, no "curious to hear" |
35| 6 | **The receipt** | you have done the thing they described | what happened, in two sentences |
36| 7 | **The correction** | there is a factual error | be right, be brief, be kind, be sure |
37| 8 | **The reframe** | the post has the right facts and the wrong frame | "Another way to read this:" |
38| 9 | **The one-liner** | the post needs nothing, you want presence | under 12 words, must be funny or true |
39 
40## Rules
41 
42- **2 to 4 sentences.** Longer reads as a hijack. Shorter reads as filler.
43- **Never open with "Great post"**, "Love this", "So true", "Couldn't agree
44 more", "This resonates", or the author's first name followed by an
45 exclamation mark. All six are invisible.
46- **No emoji openers.** No 🔥 or 👏 as a first character.
47- **Never restate the post.** The author knows what they wrote and so does
48 everyone reading.
49- **One idea.** A comment with two points reads as a blog attempt.
50- **Say the specific thing.** If the comment could sit under any post on the
51 topic, it is not a comment, it is noise.
52- **Disagreement is allowed and works**, but the agreement has to come first
53 and be real.
54 
55## Output
56 
57Give **two options of different types**, labelled, plus a one-line reason for
58the one you would post. Run both through `/li-human` first - a comment with an
59em dash in it is more obviously machine-written than a post, because comments
60are short and people read them closely.
61 
62```
63COMMENT OPTIONS (on @author's post about hiring)
64 
65[6 · Receipt]
66We tried the no-resume version of this for 3 hires last year. Two were the
67best hires we made. The third was a disaster, and the difference was whether
68they had done the actual job before, not how they interviewed.
69 
70[3 · Respectful disagree]
71Agree on the signal problem. But the fix that worked for us was not removing
72the resume, it was giving every candidate the same 90-minute paid task. Same
73outcome, far less argument internally.
74 
75Post the first. It is your own data and it concedes a failure, which is the
76part people reply to.
77```
78 
79## Batch mode
80 
81If the user wants an engagement round, ask for the 5-10 posts as pasted text
82in one message, return one comment each in a single block, and keep a running
83note of who they have already commented on this week in
84`~/.claude/linkedin/log.md`. Commenting on the same three people every day is
85visible and it looks like what it is.
86 
87## Never
88 
89Do not auto-post. Do not use a browser tool to publish comments on the user's
90behalf. Automated posting and scraping both violate LinkedIn's User Agreement
91and put the account at risk. This skill writes the comment. The user posts it.
92 

Discussion