Detected promise
LinkedIn Post Writing Playbook (Claude-Ready): Prompts, Frameworks, and Templates
Reconstructed contract
Write LinkedIn posts
This is the “comment CLAUDE to get the playbook” playbook—without the comment gate. You’ll get a complete, self-contained system to write high-performing LinkedIn posts with Claude (or any LLM): (1) positioning + ICP clarity, (2) post ideas from real signals, (3) 7 proven post frameworks with fill-in templates, (4) prompt pack to draft, edit, and repurpose, (5) a quality rubric to self-score, and (6) copy-ready examples you can adapt today. No web research was used; this resource is generated from the pasted post context and common LinkedIn writing practices.
Resource without ritual
The promised resource, no comment required
1) The “One Chat” Setup (copy/paste into Claude as your system prompt)
Prompt:
“You are my LinkedIn writing partner. Your job: produce clear, specific, human posts that sound like me and are useful to my ICP. Always ask up to 5 clarifying questions only if truly needed; otherwise make reasonable assumptions and label them. Output options: (A) final post, (B) 3 hook options, (C) 10 comment replies, (D) carousel outline (text-only), (E) repurpose into a short newsletter. Constraints: no hype, no vague claims, no invented stats, no ‘game-changer’ language. Prefer concrete steps, examples, and honest tradeoffs. Always include: a strong hook, scannable formatting, one core insight, and a specific CTA (comment, save, share, or question).”
Add your “Voice Card” (fill once; reuse forever):
I write like: (direct / witty / calm / intense)
Sentence length: (short / mixed / long)
Swears: (none / light / ok)
Emojis: (none / minimal / ok)
Formatting: (short paragraphs / bullets / numbered steps)
Hot takes allowed? (yes/no)
Topics I avoid:
Proof I can reference (roles, outcomes, case studies):
Add your “Offer Card” (so posts align with your business):
What I sell:
For whom (ICP):
The moment they buy (trigger):
The 3 pains I solve:
The 3 outcomes I deliver:
My differentiators:
My “why now” angle:
2) ICP Snapshot Template (so Claude stops writing to “everyone”)
Fill this in (you can answer in fragments):
ICP title(s):
Company size / stage:
Industry / vertical:
Tools they already use:
Budget owner:
Buying triggers (events): (e.g., hiring SDRs, new pipeline target, churn spike)
“Red flags” to ignore:
Top 5 objections they raise:
Words they use (verbatim phrases):
What they already tried that failed:
Claude prompt:
“Turn my ICP snapshot into: (1) a 1-sentence positioning statement, (2) a ‘this is NOT for’ filter list, and (3) a vocabulary bank of 25 terms my ICP uses.”
3) Signal-to-Post Idea Engine (10-minute weekly routine)
Goal: posts anchored in real-world triggers, not random tips.
Signals to mine (choose 2–3):
1) Pain posts: “We’re struggling with…”, “Anyone else dealing with…?”
2) Recommendation requests: “Looking for a tool/agency/freelancer…”
3) Competitor engagement: posts your competitors comment on repeatedly
4) Hiring signals: “We’re hiring X” (implies priorities and gaps)
5) Product/launch signals: new features, pricing changes, integrations
6) Opinion conflicts: debates your ICP cares about
Manual capture template (paste into a notes doc):
Link (optional):
Signal type:
What happened (1 line):
Hidden cause (your hypothesis):
What most people will do (default):
What to do instead (your angle):
Proof / story you can share:
CTA question you can ask:
Claude prompt:
“Here are 8 signals I observed this week (list). For each one, generate: (a) 3 post angles, (b) best framework from the list below, (c) a hook that doesn’t sound like clickbait, and (d) a CTA question that invites real replies.”
4) The 7 Post Frameworks (with fill-in templates)
Framework 1: Observation → Reframe → How-to
Template:
Hook: “I noticed [specific observation].”
Reframe: “Most people think it’s [common belief]. It’s actually [reframe].”
How-to: 3–5 steps
Pitfall: “Avoid [mistake].”
CTA: “What’s your experience with [topic]?”
Framework 2: Mistake → Consequence → Fix
Template:
Hook: “The fastest way to [bad outcome] is [mistake].”
Consequence: “Here’s what it causes: …”
Fix: “Do this instead: …”
Example: mini scenario
CTA: “Want a checklist for [fix]?”
Framework 3: Story → Lesson → Principle
Template:
Hook: “Last [timeframe], I [did/learned].”
Turning point: “Then [surprising thing] happened.”
Lesson: “Here’s what I’d do again:”
Principle: 1 sentence
CTA: “If you’re in [situation], what’s your constraint right now?”
Framework 4: Contrarian take (soft)
Template:
Hook: “Unpopular opinion: [claim].”
Nuance: “Not always—specifically when [conditions].”
Reasoning: 3 bullets
Practical: “If you want [outcome], start here:”
CTA: “Agree/disagree? Why?”
Framework 5: Teardown (example-based)
Template:
Hook: “Let’s break down why [thing] worked/failed.”
Context: “Goal, audience, constraints”
3 reasons it worked:
2 improvements:
CTA: “Drop a link and I’ll give 1 suggestion.”
Framework 6: Checklist / SOP
Template:
Hook: “If I had to do [task] in 30 minutes, I’d do this:”
Steps: numbered list
Timebox per step
CTA: “Save this for later—what would you add?”
Framework 7: Myth → Truth → Test
Template:
Hook: “Myth: [common belief].”
Truth: “Reality: [truth].”
Test: “Run this 10-minute test:”
Interpret results
CTA: “If you run it, tell me what you found.”
5) Claude Prompt Pack (drafting, editing, and repurposing)
A) Draft generator (choose a framework)
Prompt:
“Write a LinkedIn post using Framework [#]. Topic: [topic]. ICP: [ICP]. My stance: [stance]. Proof available: [proof]. Tone: [tone]. Constraints: 120–220 words, no emojis, 1–2 short examples, end with a question CTA.”
B) Hook sprint (non-cringe)
Prompt:
“Generate 15 hooks for this post. Rules: no ‘here’s why’, no ‘stop doing’, no vague numbers, no ‘nobody talks about’. Hooks must be specific and believable. Provide 5 curiosity hooks, 5 authority hooks (without flexing), 5 empathy hooks.”
C) Specificity booster
Prompt:
“Make this post 30% more specific without changing meaning. Add: (1) one concrete scenario, (2) one boundary (‘this doesn’t apply when…’), (3) one metric placeholder like [X%] that I can replace later. Do NOT invent real stats.”
D) Anti-fluff editor
Prompt:
“Edit this to remove fluff and generic advice. Replace abstractions with actions. Shorten sentences. Keep my voice. Provide: (1) final post, (2) list of changes you made.”
E) Comment magnet (ethical)
Prompt:
“Create 3 CTA options that invite thoughtful comments (not ‘comment YES’). Make them: (1) diagnostic question, (2) opinion split, (3) ‘what would you do’ scenario.”
F) Repurpose into 5 micro-posts
Prompt:
“Turn this post into 5 standalone micro-posts (60–120 words each). Each must have a unique hook and a different angle (mistake, checklist, story, teardown, myth).”
G) Create a 10-comment reply bank
Prompt:
“Generate 10 human comment replies I can use under other people’s posts on this topic. Each reply should: add value, reference their point, include 1 useful detail, and end with a question. Avoid sounding salesy.”
6) Copy-Ready Post Templates (fill-in-the-blanks)
Template 1 (Checklist):
“If your [process] feels messy, you probably don’t need more tools.
You need a tighter sequence.
Here’s the 5-step SOP I use for [outcome]:
1) [step]
2) [step]
3) [step]
4) [step]
5) [step]
Common mistake: [mistake].
If you’re doing [context], what’s the step you skip most often?”
Template 2 (Myth/Truth/Test):
“Myth: you need [thing] to get [outcome].
Truth: you need [principle].
Quick test (10 minutes):
Take [input]
Remove [noise]
Identify [signal]
Write [one sentence]
If the sentence isn’t specific, your problem isn’t effort.
It’s clarity.
What are you trying to make clearer right now?”
Template 3 (Soft contrarian):
“Hot take (with love): [common advice] is overrated.
It works when [condition].
It fails when [condition].
If you want [outcome], do this instead:
[action]
[action]
[action]
Where do you think the internet oversimplifies this?”
7) Quality Rubric (score your post before publishing)
Score each 0–2. Total /14.
1) ICP fit: Would my ICP say “this is about me”?
2) Specificity: examples, steps, constraints (no generic tips)
3) Novelty: a reframe, tradeoff, or uncommon angle
4) Credibility: clear basis (experience, logic, observed pattern)
5) Skimmability: short lines, clean structure
6) Emotional resonance: names a real frustration or desire
7) CTA quality: invites real discussion (not engagement farming)
Interpretation:
12–14: publish
9–11: tighten hook + add example
≤8: rewrite around one clearer signal or story
8) Mini Library: 12 Post Ideas you can generate from one ICP (examples)
Use these as prompts (swap bracketed parts):
1) “The hidden reason [ICP] fails at [process] isn’t [common reason]. It’s [real reason].”
2) “3 signs your [strategy] is ‘busy’ not ‘effective’.”
3) “A simple way to diagnose [problem] in 10 minutes.”
4) “The best [tool/tactic] is the one you can actually [maintain/measure].”
5) “What I’d do if I had to get [outcome] with zero [resource].”
6) “The question I ask before I [do thing] (and it changes everything).”
7) “Why copying ‘best practices’ backfires for [ICP].”
8) “A teardown of [public example] through the lens of [principle].”
9) “The common objection to [approach]—and the honest answer.”
10) “The playbook I’d give a new hire on day 1 for [task].”
11) “My 3 rules for [activity] (and when to break them).”
12) “What most people miss about [trend] for [ICP].”},{
9) Optional: Visual Flow (generate a diagram prompt for an image tool)
If you want a single image you can post, use this prompt in an image generator:
“Create a clean, minimal, LinkedIn-friendly workflow diagram on a white background. Title: ‘Signal → Insight → Post’. Five connected boxes left-to-right with arrows: 1) ‘Signals (pain posts, requests, debates)’ 2) ‘Hypothesis (what’s really going on?)’ 3) ‘Angle (reframe + value)’ 4) ‘Draft (hook, steps, example)’ 5) ‘Publish + Learn (comments → next signals)’. Use simple icons, black/gray text, one accent color (blue). High resolution, 1:1.”