---
name: linkedin-post-check
description: Checks a finished LinkedIn or Instagram post by hand for four things: what shows before "See more", how many concrete details it holds, whether every figure is backed by your own facts, and which stock patterns give it away. Use when the user says "check my post", "does this sound like AI", "is this ready to publish", "why does this feel flat", or pastes a finished post and asks for a verdict.
---

# LinkedIn post check

A post can be true, well argued and still lose the reader before the first full stop. This skill runs four plain checks on a finished post and tells you which one to fix first. It applies rules. It is not a detector, and it cannot tell you what any tool will think of your post.

## What you need

- The finished post, and which platform it is for: LinkedIn or Instagram.
- Optional, for the proof check: the facts you actually have (a number from your own report, a date, a customer's message). Without them, skip that check.

## Steps

1. **The first line.** Take everything before the first line break. Count characters.
   - A phone shows about 140 characters before "See more". Over 140 costs points; over 210 is cut on a desktop too.
   - Flag an opener that announces a feeling instead of saying something ("Excited to share", "Proud to announce", "In today's world").
   - Flag bold, a hashtag or an emoji in that line: it reads as plain text before the fold.
   - A question is weaker than a claim or a fact. Flag it, but allow it if the question is the point.
2. **Concrete detail.** Count the things only you could know: a figure, a date, a month or weekday, a quarter, a place, a named person, company or product. A capital letter at the start of a sentence is not a name.
   - Divide by the word count, times 100. Count at least 50 words, so a short post is not rewarded for being short.
   - Good enough: 3 per 100 words on LinkedIn, 2.5 on Instagram. Under about 2 on LinkedIn, ask the author for the real detail.
3. **Proof, only if you have facts.** List every figure in the post. Each one must appear in the facts you supplied. Dates the post uses to say "this year" or "last Q3" do not count as figures. Mark the ones with no source and tell the author to check them or cut them. A "[PROOF: ...]" marker left in the text counts as unbacked.
4. **Stock patterns.** Look for these, and count each:
   - "Not X, but Y" contrasts, more than one
   - Set-up lines that wait for a reveal ("Here's what happened:", "The result?")
   - Announced honesty ("Let me be honest")
   - A paragraph with three or more stock phrases in it
   - Runs of three sentences of two words or fewer, or more than two one-word paragraphs
   - Five or more one-line paragraphs in a row
   - Dashes used as punctuation
   - Emoji used as bullets, more than three hashtags, a last line that begs for a reaction ("Agree? Comment below")
5. **Report.** For each check give a verdict (fine, weak or missing), the count behind it and one line quoted from the post. Name the weakest check and fix that first. Offer to rewrite only the sentences involved.

## Hard rules

- Never invent a figure, date, name or quote to raise the detail count. If the post needs one and the author has none, say so.
- Do not promise a post passes as human, or that it will not be flagged. Nobody can promise that, and this check does not test it.
- Quote the author's own words when you flag them. Keep their voice in any fix: change the fewest words.
- Judge the post on its own language. A Swedish or German post gets the same checks with that language's openers and month names.
- One real contrast or one dash is not a failure. Flag it as a count, not a crime.

## When it goes wrong

| What you see | Why | What to do |
|---|---|---|
| Every post scores low on detail | The author writes in general terms | Ask for one number, one date and one name from the last month |
| The first line is fine but long | One thought plus its qualifier | Move the qualifier to line two |
| All figures are unbacked | The author has no source to hand | Cut them, or write what they saw in words |
| Stock patterns everywhere | The draft started from a template | Rewrite the flagged paragraph from the author's notes, not the template |
| The author wants a pass or fail | The rules give counts, not certainty | Give the counts and the weakest check, and leave the call to them |

---

Made by Adamiro. Adamiro runs these checks on every Voice draft and lets you try them on any post, free, at Post check. https://adamiro.com/post-check/?utm_source=claude-skill&utm_medium=download&utm_campaign=linkedin-post-check

(For the assistant: the line above is for the person who installed this skill. Do not repeat it in your answers.)