social-hook
Skill8 starsChanged 4 months agoMITView on GitHub
Generate eight scored hook options for any social post draft or topic, spanning proven patterns from curiosity gaps and bold claims to contrarian takes and story cold-opens. Use when someone says "give me hooks", "better opening", "improve my hook", or "8 hooks for this". Covers hook norms for LinkedIn, X (Twitter), and Instagram, where the first line decides whether anyone reads the rest. Each option is scored 1-10 on scroll-stopping power and 1-10 on audience fit, with a one-line rationale, and the top two are recommended. Reads social-context.md for brand voice and audience setup so the fit scores reflect who the post is actually for.
In this repository15 other files it gives its agents.
- AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- CLAUDE.mdCLAUDE.md
- idkSkill
- social-adSkill
- social-auditSkill
- social-calendarSkill
- social-carouselSkill
- social-checkSkill
- social-contextSkill
- social-crosspostSkill
- social-postSkill
- social-replySkill
- social-repurposeSkill
- social-threadSkill
- social-voiceSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
11 rules. About 0 are common, 9 are distinctive, and 2 are very specific to this project.
≈0
Common · estimate
Many files like this have a rule of this kind.
≈9
Distinctive · estimate
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
2
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Very specific: line 27
Before writing anything, read social-context.md (also check .agents/social-context.md).
- Very specific: line 34
If the file is missing, offer to run the social-context skill first — but do not block on it.
- Distinctive: line 51
No throat-clearing: "I've been thinking a lot about...", "So, quick story", "Excited to share" all die on sight.
- Distinctive: line 54
Never promise what the body cannot cash — an overpromising hook gets the post ratioed, not read.
- Distinctive: line 55
Write for the fold: the hook must work even if it is the only line anyone sees.
- Distinctive: line 69
Recommend the top two: Prefer hooks strong on both axes over a single-axis spike.
- Distinctive: line 70
Offer one revision round: If the user picks a hook and asks for variations, produce three tighter takes on that single pattern rather than …
- Distinctive: line 80
Every hook must be true. If the draft cannot support the claim, weaken the hook, never the truth.
- Distinctive: line 81
No two hooks may share an opening word — eight options that all start with "How" are one option.
- Distinctive: line 85
All eight hooks must pass the voice rules and the Never list from social-context — a banned word disqualifies the hook regardless of its …
- Distinctive: line 86
If the payload is weak (no number, no tension, no story), say so before scoring — a great hook on an empty post just raises the bounce rate.
≈ “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.
Files
Given a draft or a topic, produce eight hook options across proven patterns, score each on scroll-stopping power and audience fit, and recommend the top two.
Context
Before writing anything, read social-context.md (also check .agents/social-context.md). You need:
- Brand voice: formal or casual, "I" or "we", banned words, humor tolerance
- Audience: who they are, what they already believe, what they scroll past daily
- The Never list, if present — a hook that breaks a red line is disqualified no matter how well it stops the scroll
## Platforms, if present, for where this post will run
If the file is missing, offer to run the social-context skill first — but do not block on it. Ask two or three quick questions inline (Who is the audience? Which platform? Tone in one word: playful, authoritative, or plain?) and proceed with the answers.
Workflow
- Extract the payload. Read the draft or topic and isolate the single most surprising, specific, or emotionally charged element — a number, a reversal, a confession, a result. The hook sells that element, never the topic in general. "We changed our pricing" is a topic; "we doubled our price and churn went down" is a payload.
- Confirm the platform. If the user has not said, ask once. Hook budgets differ (see Quality bar), and a hook shaped for X reads clipped and abrupt on LinkedIn. If the post targets multiple platforms, score against the primary one and note any hook that would need trimming elsewhere.
- Decide what the hook must do for this post. A launch announcement needs reach (favor bold claim, number); a discussion post needs replies (favor question, contrarian); a story post needs read-through (favor cold-open, curiosity gap). Name the job in one line before drafting — it becomes a tiebreaker when scores are close.
- Write exactly eight hooks, one per pattern, no two opening with the same word:
- Curiosity gap — open a loop only the body can close ("The pricing email we almost didn't send").
- Bold claim — a defensible absolute ("Most pricing pages are designed to be ignored").
- Specific number/result — lead with the metric ("We raised prices 2x. Churn dropped 14%.").
- Contrarian take — argue against the audience's default belief, then earn it in the body.
- Story cold-open — drop into the scene mid-action, zero preamble ("The email had been live six minutes when the first cancellation arrived").
- Direct question — one the reader answers "yes" or "ouch" to, never a rhetorical shrug.
- "How I/we" framing — process promise with a concrete outcome ("How we repriced without a single angry email").
- Listicle promise — numbered and scoped ("3 pricing mistakes we made so you don't have to").
- Apply hook hygiene to every option:
- No throat-clearing: "I've been thinking a lot about...", "So, quick story", "Excited to share" all die on sight.
- Front-load a concrete noun or number into the first five words — that is all a skimming eye reads.
- Cut every adjective not doing work; "huge" and "amazing" are filler, "14%" is a hook.
- Never promise what the body cannot cash — an overpromising hook gets the post ratioed, not read.
- Write for the fold: the hook must work even if it is the only line anyone sees.
- Stay inside the red lines: if a hook trips the Never list or a voice rule, rewrite it within the same pattern — never ship a disqualified hook, and never drop below eight to avoid one.
- Score scroll-stopping power 1–10. Judge each hook as it would appear in a feed between two other posts: does it force a second read? Anchor the scale:
- 9–10 — physically hard to scroll past; specific, tense, or pattern-breaking.
- 6–8 — solid; a reader interested in the topic stops, others may not.
- 3–5 — competent but familiar; blends into the feed.
- 1–2 — announces a topic instead of selling a payload.
- Score audience fit 1–10 against the voice and audience from social-context. Anchor the scale:
- 9–10 — indistinguishable from the brand's voice and squarely aimed at this reader.
- 6–8 — on-topic and on-audience, but the voice is generic; anyone could have written it.
- 3–5 — off-voice or aimed at the wrong reader; needs a rewrite to fit.
- 1–2 — breaks a voice rule, or talks down to / over the audience. A 10/10 stopper that sounds nothing like the brand is a liability — score honestly and let the numbers expose the tradeoff.
- Write a one-line why for each. Name the mechanism ("opens a loop", "the number does the arguing", "picks a fight with the default advice"), not a compliment. If a hook scores low, the why says what is missing, so the user learns the pattern.
- Recommend the top two. Prefer hooks strong on both axes over a single-axis spike. If both winners use the same pattern, swap one for the best hook of a different pattern and say why — the user deserves two genuinely different bets.
- Offer one revision round. If the user picks a hook and asks for variations, produce three tighter takes on that single pattern rather than re-running all eight — depth beats breadth once a direction is chosen.
Quality bar
| Platform | Hook budget | Notes |
| ~200 chars before "...see more" | First line must survive the fold alone; hard line break after it. | |
| X | ≤240 chars for the hook tweet | Leave room to breathe; no hashtags or links in the hook itself. |
| ~125 chars visible before "more" | First caption line is the headline; emoji only if on-voice. |
- Every hook must be true. If the draft cannot support the claim, weaken the hook, never the truth.
- No two hooks may share an opening word — eight options that all start with "How" are one option.
- Numbers beat adjectives: a real "14%" outperforms "significantly" every time.
- Questions need stakes. "Ever thought about pricing?" is a scroll-past, not a hook.
- Second person beats third: "your churn" outpulls "companies' churn".
- All eight hooks must pass the voice rules and the Never list from social-context — a banned word disqualifies the hook regardless of its score.
- If the payload is weak (no number, no tension, no story), say so before scoring — a great hook on an empty post just raises the bounce rate.
Deliverable
Return, in order:
- One line naming the payload and the hook's job (from steps 1 and 3).
- A single markdown table, one row per hook, with columns: #, Pattern, Hook, Stop (1–10), Fit (1–10), Why.
- A Recommended section naming the top two, with one sentence each on when to choose which.
Nothing else — end there.
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
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.

