analyze-performance
Use when user has been posting on LinkedIn at least 4 weeks and wants to know what is landing, run a quarterly content review, or diagnose dropping engagement.…
Use when user wants to think strategically about LinkedIn content rather than post-by-post: starting a LinkedIn presence from scratch, posting feels scattered or unfocused, or before committing to a consistent posting routine. Trigger phrases include "help me plan my LinkedIn
$ npx -y skills add warpirate/linkedin-maxxing --skill plan-content --agent claude-codeHow it fires
How this skill gets triggered: by you, by Claude, or both.
/plan-contentContext preview
The summary Claude sees to decide when to auto-load this skill.
Use when user wants to think strategically about LinkedIn content rather than post-by-post: starting a LinkedIn presence from scratch, posting feels scattered or unfocused, or before committing to a consistent posting routine. Trigger phrases include "help me plan my LinkedIn
name: plan-content description: | Use when user wants to think strategically about LinkedIn content rather than post-by-post: starting a LinkedIn presence from scratch, posting feels scattered or unfocused, or before committing to a consistent posting routine. Trigger phrases include "help me plan my LinkedIn content," "what should I be posting about regularly," "define my content pillars," "build a content calendar," "I post randomly and it's not working." license: MIT
A LinkedIn presence with no plan tends to drift. The user posts whatever they thought of that day, the topics vary widely, the audience does not learn what to expect from them, and the algorithm does not learn what to surface them for. A content plan is not about scheduling tweets; it is about deciding what the user wants to be known for and then producing content that reinforces that consistently.
LinkedIn's 2026 algorithm and audience both reward consistency in topic and angle. The algorithm builds an interest-graph profile of what the user posts about and surfaces it to people interested in those topics; the audience builds an expectation of what to come to the user for. Random posting forfeits both.
But "consistency" is also where most content strategy advice goes off the rails into rigid editorial calendars that the user abandons in two weeks. This skill is meant to produce something light enough to actually use: a few content pillars, a clear audience, and a sustainable cadence.
Trigger when:
Do NOT trigger when:
A short conversation, not a survey. Aim for 4-6 questions, batched at most two at a time.
1. **Who are you trying to reach on LinkedIn?** Not "professionals" or "decision-makers." Specific. ("Engineering managers at Series A-C startups, hiring backend engineers" / "Founders of bootstrapped SaaS companies under 50 employees" / "Engineering leaders in regulated industries.")
2. **What do you want to be known for?** One sentence. The thing the user wants to come to mind when their name does.
3. **What are you actually doing that is content-worthy?** Their day job, their side project, their reading and thinking, their experiments. Content pillars come from work, not from imagination.
4. **What are you willing to commit to?** Per week, how many pieces of content can they realistically produce. Honest numbers.
5. **What are the no-go zones?** Anything they cannot post about: NDAs, employer restrictions, topics they refuse to touch.
If voice-profile.md and rewrite-profile output exist, read them. Both inform the plan.
A pillar is a recurring topic-and-angle pair. Not just a topic.
Bad pillar: "Engineering management" Good pillar: "What I am changing about how I run engineering at this company size"
Bad pillar: "Product strategy" Good pillar: "The decisions I am making this quarter that I am unsure about"
The structure of a strong pillar:
[topic the user knows about] + [angle the user can own]
The angle is what differentiates the user from every other person posting about the topic. It should:
3-5 pillars is the sweet spot. Fewer than 3, and the audience gets bored. More than 5, and the user is not focused enough for the algorithm or the audience.
Cadence depends on the user's actual capacity, not on aspirational numbers. The right cadence is the one the user will sustain.
Rough framework:
The mix matters too. Within a week:
But none of this is prescriptive. The plan should match what the user will actually do.
Save to `content-plan.md` in the workspace.
# Content plan for [user's name or role] Generated [date]. Revisit every 3 months. ## Audience [2-3 sentences on the specific audience] ## What I want to be known for [one sentence] ## Content pillars ### Pillar 1: [name] Topic: [what the topic is] Angle: [the unique angle the user owns] Why this works for me: [the user's specific access to material here] Example post ideas: [3 concrete ideas, not topics] ### Pillar 2: [name] [same structure] ### Pillar 3: [name] [same structure] [3-5 pillars total] ## Cadence - [N] posts per week, in this mix: [breakdown by format] - Commenting: [N] comments per day/week on others' posts - Long-form: [cadence for articles or newsletter] ## What I will NOT post about [the no-go zones] ## Review checkpoints - After 4 weeks: review which pillars are getting traction - After 12 weeks: r
17 Claude Code skills + slash commands for substance-first LinkedIn growth. Profile audit, content drafting (posts, carousels, longform, video, DMs, comments), performance analysis, and a Wikipedia-based humanizer. Anti-template, anti-slop, open source, MIT.
Use when user has been posting on LinkedIn at least 4 weeks and wants to know what is landing, run a quarterly content review, or diagnose dropping engagement.…
Use when user wants to diagnose their current LinkedIn profile before rewriting it: they have not touched it in a while, get few profile views or recruiter…
Use when user has an idea with multiple discrete steps, a framework, a comparison, a before/after, a list of items worth a slide each, or anything where…
Use when user wants to post on LinkedIn but has no concrete idea, has a vague topic that needs a sharper angle, or uploads a work artifact (PR description,…
Use when editing or reviewing text that reads as AI-generated: symptoms include em dashes, "it's not X, it's Y" constructions, AI vocabulary (leverage, delve,…
Use when user has one piece of existing content (podcast or video transcript, blog post, internal doc, talk, older LinkedIn post that performed, long email)…