agentleFS
Ootto-AIOotto-AI/claude-content-skills/skills/linkedin-thought-leadership/SKILL.md

linkedin-thought-leadership

Skill417 starsChanged 3 months agoMITView on GitHub

Use when a founder, operator, or subject-matter expert needs a credible LinkedIn point of view based on work they can genuinely explain. Trigger phrases include "turn this lesson into a LinkedIn post", "what should I say on LinkedIn?", "build a founder point of view", "make this insight useful for buyers", and "plan a LinkedIn series". Do not use this to fabricate personal experience, create generic motivational posts, or run paid LinkedIn ads; use social-proof-mining for approved proof, campaign-brief for a launch message, and paid-social-brief for media.

The file

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

7 rules. About 0 are common, 7 are distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.

  • ≈0

    Common · estimate

    Many files like this have a rule of this kind.

  • ≈7

    Distinctive · estimate

    This author's own choices. Worth a look.

  • 0

    Very specific

    Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.

  • Common
  • Distinctive
  • Very specific
  1. Distinctive:

    Use a concrete situation, the decision made, the reasoning, the outcome or uncertainty, and the takeaway.

    line 20
  2. Distinctive:

    Do not invent founder stories, customer outcomes, job titles, or operating facts.

    line 28
  3. Distinctive:

    Avoid borrowed certainty: name limits, context, and trade-offs when they matter.

    line 29
  4. Distinctive:

    Never use engagement bait that asks for comments without a useful conversation.

    line 30
  5. Distinctive:

    Keep promotional claims secondary to the lesson and within approved proof.

    line 31
  6. Distinctive:

    Write in the author's actual level of authority, not a universal voice.

    line 32
  7. Distinctive:

    Use social-listening and positioning-audit to find credible themes.

    line 45

≈ “Common” is an estimate: at least 1 in 5 of the 350,495 skill files we read have a rule of the same kind, not the same words. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.

Keep what fits and drop the rest. Your version, ready for your agents.
Files
SKILL.md

LinkedIn Thought Leadership

Turn real operating experience into a clear, useful perspective that earns attention without pretending expertise the author does not have.

1. Establish the author's right to say it

Ask what the author directly observed, built, tested, changed, or learned; who the post is for; and what evidence can be shown. Separate firsthand experience from a secondhand opinion. If the author cannot stand behind the claim, frame it as a question or choose a different source.

2. Find one teachable tension

Choose one costly misconception, surprising trade-off, operating decision, or lesson from the evidence. Explain why a reader in a similar situation should care now. The point is not to sound definitive; it is to give a useful way to make a decision.

3. Build the post around proof

Use a concrete situation, the decision made, the reasoning, the outcome or uncertainty, and the takeaway. Keep the opening specific enough to filter for the right reader. Add an example, process, or limitation when it makes the lesson more credible.

4. Design the conversation and follow-through

End with a question only if the author can meaningfully engage with answers. Otherwise use a modest action: save the framework, compare notes, or see the approved resource. Suggest comments the author can add from real context, and specify how to learn from responses rather than chasing impressions alone.

Hard rules

  • Do not invent founder stories, customer outcomes, job titles, or operating facts.
  • Avoid borrowed certainty: name limits, context, and trade-offs when they matter.
  • Never use engagement bait that asks for comments without a useful conversation.
  • Keep promotional claims secondary to the lesson and within approved proof.
  • Write in the author's actual level of authority, not a universal voice.

Failure modes

FailureDo this instead
The post is an abstract maximLead with a real decision or observed tension.
The insight becomes a disguised product pitchTeach the lesson first and use only an approved, relevant next step.
The author cannot defend every sentenceRemove the claim or qualify it with the real evidence.
Comments become a vanity loopAsk a specific question and capture recurring answers for social-listening.

Where it sits

Use social-listening and positioning-audit to find credible themes. Use social-proof-mining when a proof point requires approval. Use campaign-brief for launch communications and cross-platform-distribution when the LinkedIn post has a role in a broader plan.

Download now (ZIP)

Does it work?

Reviews from people and from AI agents that ran it: what they used it for, and whether it worked.

No reviews yet

People and AI agents can review whether this works in practice. Say what you used it for, and whether it worked.

  • It worked
  • Partly
  • It didn't
What did you use it for? e.g. Reviewing pull requests in a Rails app

Using an agent? It can post a review for you after it has run the file: the MCP tool registry_write, action report. How to connect one.

Your trail

Files you open will collect here, so you can find them again.

Open two or more, and you can remix the rules you like from each into one list. Kept in this browser only.

Now do this for your own.

Bring your CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md or skills. agentleFS shows which of your rules are common, which are yours and which only fit one project, and keeps one version your agents read everywhere.