Playbook: LinkedIn Engagement skill

Turn the people who like and comment on a source account's LinkedIn posts (a competitor, or one of the client's own customers) into ICP-filtered prospect rows, with an optional copy-ready personalization line when the campaign asks for one.

by growthenginenowoslawski·MIT license·★ 730 Stars on the repo·GitHub ↗

Use now

Files of Playbook: LinkedIn Engagement

growthenginenowoslawski/main1 file shown
SKILL.md
Show the full text109 lines

Playbook: LinkedIn Engagement

All rules here are best practice, not law. Override any of them when the campaign calls for it; note the best practice once and move on.

Use when an account's audience is the client's audience — a competitor or the client's own customer.

Do not use for more companies in a market, similar companies (playbook-lookalikes), or job changers (playbook-new-in-role). The chain is the same for both lanes; only the target URL changes.

Output: one row per engager — who, employer, post, evidence URL. engagement_line is opt-in.

The number that governs planning

⚠️ Roughly 1 in 10 raw engagers survives. Harvest 10 to 15x what you need.

Cost follows from that: about $4.45 per 1,000 raw engagers, which is about $45 per 1,000 usable prospects at the measured survival rate. That is squarely in expensive territory, so shortlist posts by engagement count before you scrape.

The source-company rule (both halves, always automatic)

This is the rule that separates a usable engagement list from an embarrassing one, and it has two halves that people implement only one of.

(a) Drop every engager employed by ANY source company — not just the author of the post they engaged with. Match each current employer on resolved domain first, then profile URL, then squashed name, and also on resolved email domain.

(b) Push every source company onto that client's do-not-contact list. Row drops fix only this run; the block list runs at send time, which is what stops the same people arriving through a different lane next month.

It bites hardest on the customer lane, where the source companies are people the client already works with.

⛔ Never block the client's own domain. If it appears in the source set, the list is wrong — stop.

Before any paid call

  1. The operator confirms the source list. Say it out loud: "these companies and everyone who works at them go on this client's DNC list."
  2. Resolve every source account to a bare domain first. An unresolved source silently disables both halves of the rule above. Unresolved means stop, not continue. (playbook-social-link-finding does this conversion in both directions.)
  3. If the client's ICP is unknown, ask. Never infer a headcount band, a country list, or a title set.

Run it

0   Confirm source URLs, client ICP, and whether the brief wants a line (default: no).
0b  Resolve every source account to a bare domain -> source-companies.json (EXACT match only).
    Unresolved => STOP.
1   Company posts, windowed to the last month, shortlisted by engagement count.
2   Post reactions + post comments for the shortlisted posts.
3   ICP enrichment (headcount, company) on the engagers.
4   Deterministic pre-gate: source-company drop, ICP filter, dedupe.
5   Suppression pass: client DNC, existing TAM, live campaigns.
6   DNC push (once per harvest).
7   Email finding, valid only.

Rows are the deliverable; lines are opt-in. Never run a line writer unless the brief asks. When it does, an empty-line row leaves that campaign for the normal one rather than shipping a gap.

Verification

PASS 17/18 correct outcomes on the source-and-gate test — and note what that counts: a correct exclusion is scored as a usable outcome. Raw signal yield was 1 usable prospect in 17 unique people.

Both numbers are true and they measure different things. The gate works; the yield is thin. Plan from the yield.

⚠️ The end-to-end harvest has never been run in one pass. Do a one-post run and read the output before scaling.

Clay implementation

  • clay-table.md — where the gate lives in a table.
  • clay-workflow.md — the CLI-buildable version.

Edge cases and failure modes

Symptom Cause Fix
The list contains the client's own employees The client's domain got into the source set Stop. The list is wrong
The list contains the competitor's own staff Only half (a) was implemented, matched on name alone Match on resolved domain first, then profile URL, then squashed name, then email domain
The same people reappear next month through another lane Half (b) was skipped The DNC push is what persists. Row drops do not
The source-company rule appears to do nothing An unresolved source URL produced an empty source set An empty set silently disables both halves. Unresolved means stop
Cost per usable prospect is 10x the estimate You costed raw engagers, not survivors ~1 in 10 survives. Harvest 10-15x
A person's employer is wrong Taking the first entry of an experience array rather than the current one Read the current experience explicitly
Rows silently vanish on a join Post and engager records key differently Confirm the join key on one post before scaling
The run stalls waiting on a scraper There is no fallback source by design The run waits. A different scraper is not a drop-in substitute here
Hard rules
  • Both halves of the source-company rule, every run, automatically.
  • The operator confirms the source list before any paid call.
  • Rows are the deliverable. Lines are opt-in.
  • If the ICP is unknown, ask.
1---
2name: playbook-linkedin-engagement
3description: Turn the people who like and comment on a source account's LinkedIn posts (a competitor, or one of the client's own customers) into ICP-filtered prospect rows, with an optional copy-ready personalization line when the campaign asks for one. Triggers on "who engages with our competitors", "likers and commenters", "LinkedIn engagement list", "people commenting on competitor posts", "who engages with our customers' posts", "warm LinkedIn audience", "competitor engagers". Outputs one clean prospect row per engager; engagement_line only on request.
4---
5 
6# Playbook: LinkedIn Engagement
7 
8> All rules here are best practice, not law. Override any of them when the campaign calls for it; note the best practice once and move on.
9 
10**Use when** an account's audience is the client's audience — a **competitor** or the **client's own
11customer**.
12 
13**Do not use for** more companies in a market, similar companies (`playbook-lookalikes`), or job
14changers (`playbook-new-in-role`). The chain is the same for both lanes; only the target URL changes.
15 
16**Output:** one row per engager — who, employer, post, evidence URL. `engagement_line` is **opt-in**.
17 
18## The number that governs planning
19 
20⚠️ **Roughly 1 in 10 raw engagers survives. Harvest 10 to 15x what you need.**
21 
22Cost follows from that: about **$4.45 per 1,000 raw engagers**, which is about **$45 per 1,000
23usable prospects** at the measured survival rate. That is squarely in expensive territory, so
24**shortlist posts by engagement count before you scrape.**
25 
26## The source-company rule (both halves, always automatic)
27 
28This is the rule that separates a usable engagement list from an embarrassing one, and **it has two
29halves that people implement only one of.**
30 
31**(a) Drop every engager employed by ANY source company** — not just the author of the post they
32engaged with. Match each current employer on **resolved domain first**, then profile URL, then
33squashed name, and also on **resolved email domain**.
34 
35**(b) Push every source company onto that client's do-not-contact list.** Row drops fix only this
36run; **the block list runs at send time**, which is what stops the same people arriving through a
37different lane next month.
38 
39**It bites hardest on the customer lane**, where the source companies are people the client already
40works with.
41 
42⛔ **Never block the client's own domain.** If it appears in the source set, **the list is wrong —
43stop.**
44 
45## Before any paid call
46 
471. **The operator confirms the source list.** Say it out loud: *"these companies and everyone who
48 works at them go on this client's DNC list."*
492. **Resolve every source account to a bare domain first.** An unresolved source silently disables
50 **both halves** of the rule above. **Unresolved means stop, not continue.**
51 (`playbook-social-link-finding` does this conversion in both directions.)
523. **If the client's ICP is unknown, ask.** Never infer a headcount band, a country list, or a title
53 set.
54 
55## Run it
56 
57```
580 Confirm source URLs, client ICP, and whether the brief wants a line (default: no).
590b Resolve every source account to a bare domain -> source-companies.json (EXACT match only).
60 Unresolved => STOP.
611 Company posts, windowed to the last month, shortlisted by engagement count.
622 Post reactions + post comments for the shortlisted posts.
633 ICP enrichment (headcount, company) on the engagers.
644 Deterministic pre-gate: source-company drop, ICP filter, dedupe.
655 Suppression pass: client DNC, existing TAM, live campaigns.
666 DNC push (once per harvest).
677 Email finding, valid only.
68```
69 
70**Rows are the deliverable; lines are opt-in.** Never run a line writer unless the brief asks. When
71it does, an empty-line row leaves *that* campaign for the normal one rather than shipping a gap.
72 
73## Verification
74 
75**PASS 17/18 correct outcomes** on the source-and-gate test — **and note what that counts:** a
76correct **exclusion** is scored as a usable outcome. **Raw signal yield was 1 usable prospect in 17
77unique people.**
78 
79Both numbers are true and they measure different things. The gate works; the yield is thin. **Plan
80from the yield.**
81 
82⚠️ The end-to-end harvest has never been run in one pass. **Do a one-post run and read the output
83before scaling.**
84 
85## Clay implementation
86 
87- **`clay-table.md`** — where the gate lives in a table.
88- **`clay-workflow.md`** — the CLI-buildable version.
89 
90## Edge cases and failure modes
91 
92| Symptom | Cause | Fix |
93|---|---|---|
94| The list contains the client's own employees | The client's domain got into the source set | **Stop. The list is wrong** |
95| The list contains the competitor's own staff | Only half (a) was implemented, matched on name alone | Match on **resolved domain first**, then profile URL, then squashed name, then email domain |
96| The same people reappear next month through another lane | Half (b) was skipped | The DNC push is what persists. Row drops do not |
97| The source-company rule appears to do nothing | An unresolved source URL produced an **empty** source set | **An empty set silently disables both halves.** Unresolved means stop |
98| Cost per usable prospect is 10x the estimate | You costed raw engagers, not survivors | ~1 in 10 survives. Harvest 10-15x |
99| A person's employer is wrong | Taking the **first** entry of an experience array rather than the current one | Read the current experience explicitly |
100| Rows silently vanish on a join | Post and engager records key differently | Confirm the join key on one post before scaling |
101| The run stalls waiting on a scraper | There is no fallback source by design | **The run waits.** A different scraper is not a drop-in substitute here |
102 
103### Hard rules
104 
105- **Both halves of the source-company rule, every run, automatically.**
106- **The operator confirms the source list before any paid call.**
107- **Rows are the deliverable. Lines are opt-in.**
108- **If the ICP is unknown, ask.**
109 

Discussion

Alternatives

AI Sales Team — Main OrchestratorYou are a comprehensive AI sales intelligence and outreach system for Claude Code. You help founders, sales teams, agency owners, and…Sales & ecommerce · MITAuto research publicAutonomous cold email campaign launcher. Takes one target company domain, scrapes their website, generates an ICP with Claude, pulls matching leads via Prospeo, enriches emails + company descriptions, personalizes each lead with parallel Claude Code Task sub-agents (A/B/C variants), and uploads as a live Smartlead campaign. Uses local JSON files for state (no database required). Use for automated daily campaign launches after you have an initial `client-profile.yaml` from /icp-onboarding. Triggers on "auto-research", "launch an automated campaign", "daily campaign", "run the research loop".Sales & ecommerce · MITCold email outreachRun end-to-end B2B cold-email outreach through the Hyper MCP — enrich prospects with Apollo, scrape per-prospect signals from company sites and LinkedIn, draft personalized emails using proven hook frameworks, send via Gmail with safe defaults, and route replies into labeled folders. Use when the user wants to write cold emails, run an outbound sequence, prospect a list, build a follow-up cadence, "reach out to leads," or asks why nobody is replying to their cold emails.Sales & ecommerce · MITBuild a system for handling sales leadsTell us how leads reach your team today and you get back a written playbook for scoring, routing, and following up on every lead fast.Business & ops · MIT