li-comment
Skill0 starsChanged 40 days agoMITView on GitHub
Write comments on other people's LinkedIn posts that read as a person with an opinion, not a bot. Use when the user pastes a post and wants a comment, says "comment on this", "engage with this", "what do I say here", or wants a batch of comments for their engagement round.
8 other projects use a version of this, 3 of them edited.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- furkanbilalakyuz/linkedin-agent-skill-tredited, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- HemanthMChakravarthy/linkedin-agent-skillstheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- mkmlabs-ai/linkedin-agentedited, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- robbiehaynes/job-searchword for word, first seen Oct 20, 2026
- postzen-dev/linkedin-agent-skilledited, first seen Oct 15, 2026
- avi691/linkedin-agent-skillword for word, first seen Oct 8, 2026
Other versions8 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 4
- Jakeschincariol/linkedin-agent-skill★ 514100% same
- avi691/linkedin-agent-skill★ 5100% same
- nessalazne/linkedin-agent-skill★ 3100% same
- robbiehaynes/job-search★ 0100% same
Edited · 3
- mkmlabs-ai/linkedin-agent★ 483% same
- postzen-dev/linkedin-agent-skill★ 397% same
- furkanbilalakyuz/linkedin-agent-skill-tr★ 085% same
Wrote their own version · 1
- HemanthMChakravarthy/linkedin-agent-skills★ 2same name
How matches are found. Word for word: the exact same text. Edited: shares passages with this file (“99% same” means 99% of its five-word phrases also appear here; 10% or more counts). Their own version: similar meaning, or, weakest, the same name. We can’t tell which project had it first. Projects are counted among the 200 most-starred candidates, and mentions are links to the repository we found, up to 50 per site, so both counts are a floor.
In this repository10 other files it gives its agents.
- li-auditSkill
- li-carouselSkill
- li-dmSkill
- li-humanSkill
- li-inboxSkill
- li-planSkill
- li-postSkill
- li-profileSkill
- li-replySkill
- li-repurposeSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
3 rules. 1 is common, 1 is distinctive, and 1 is very specific to this project.
1
Common
Most of the 4 edited versions we read keep these.
1
Distinctive
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
1
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Common: line 50
Say the specific thing: If the comment could sit under any post on the topic, it is not a comment, it is noise.
- Very specific: line 81
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 …
- Distinctive: line 89
Do not auto-post. Do not use a browser tool to publish comments on the user's behalf.
“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 4 edited versions of this file we could read. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.
Files
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.
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.