linkedin-cold-reviver
Skill9 starsChanged 4 months agoMITView on GitHub
Detect a going-cold lead and fire one completely new angle that lands value whether or not they reply. Use when a thread has gone quiet and a re-ask would only nag.
In this repository28 other files it gives its agents.
- linkedin-booking-closerSkill
- linkedin-carousel-writerSkill
- linkedin-comment-engineSkill
- linkedin-comment-warmerSkill
- linkedin-connection-noteSkill
- linkedin-content-calendarSkill
- linkedin-engage-planSkill
- linkedin-engager-analyticsSkill
- linkedin-first-dmSkill
- linkedin-followup-adapterSkill
- linkedin-hook-labSkill
- linkedin-humanizerSkill
- linkedin-icp-definerSkill
- linkedin-objection-handlerSkill
- linkedin-onboardSkill
- linkedin-outreachSkill
- linkedin-post-autopsySkill
- linkedin-post-writerSkill
- linkedin-profile-auditorSkill
- linkedin-reply-triagerSkill
- linkedin-repurposerSkill
- linkedin-sell-by-chatSkill
- linkedin-signal-stackSkill
- linkedin-story-minerSkill
- linkedin-strategistSkill
- linkedin-voice-profilerSkill
- linkedin-warm-list-builderSkill
- linkedin-warm-trackerSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
4 rules. About 0 are common, 4 are distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.
≈0
Common · estimate
Many files like this have a rule of this kind.
≈4
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
- Distinctive: line 19
Write the standalone CTA. It must work with zero memory of the prior thread.
- Distinctive: line 24
If they bite, hand the reply to /linkedin-reply-triager.
- Distinctive: line 27
Never just re-ask the old question.
- Distinctive: line 31
No em-dashes. No guaranteed-result promises.
≈ “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
LinkedIn Cold Reviver
A dying thread does not get revived by chasing. It gets revived by a new gift. This skill spots the cooling, then writes one revival message that is itself a value bomb.
Inputs
- The thread that has gone quiet (paste the full back-and-forth, with rough dates if you have them): $ARGUMENTS
- The brief (persona pains, offer, voice) loads automatically, so do not re-ask for context it already holds.
Do this
- Confirm it is actually cooling. Read the thread. Name the signal: a reply that trailed off, a "let me think", days of silence after warmth. If it is not cold yet, say so and stop.
- Find a brand-new angle. Do not reopen the old question. Pick a different pain, a different proof, or a different artefact tied to their world. One angle, not three.
- Build the value bomb. Write the message so the useful thing lands even if they never reply: a teardown, a specific number, a one-page resource, a stolen-with-pride tactic. They keep the value either way.
- Write the standalone CTA. It must work with zero memory of the prior thread. It names the artefact, states the one-word reply cost ("Reply 'send' and it's yours"), and names the outcome they get from it.
Output
- The revival message (the value bomb plus the standalone CTA), ready to read.
- A one-line note: why this angle is different from the one that went quiet.
- If they bite, hand the reply to /linkedin-reply-triager. Run /linkedin-humanizer on the draft before it ever sends.
Rules
- Never just re-ask the old question. A nag is not a revival.
- The value must land even if they bin you. If the message only works on a reply, rewrite it.
- One new angle, not a pile of follow-ups. No "just bumping this", no "did you see my last message".
- Draft only. Claude drafts, you approve, nothing sends without you. Sending happens only through the opt-in CLI/MCP layer wired to your own LinkedIn session or provider key, hard-capped at 20 actions/day for new accounts.
- No em-dashes. No guaranteed-result promises.
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.