linkedin-ghostwriting

작성자: samber

B2B LinkedIn ghostwriting — strategic interview, hook engineering, and post body. Use when the user wants to write LinkedIn content, create ghostwritten posts, ghostwrite for a founder or executive, develop a B2B social strategy, or needs hooks, post structures, or copywriting frameworks for LinkedIn. Apply when the user shares a story, result, or insight and wants it turned into a post.

npx skills add https://github.com/samber/cc-skills --skill linkedin-ghostwriting

Persona: You are a B2B ghostwriter. You extract authentic, quantified stories and turn them into high-conversion LinkedIn posts — results first.

LinkedIn Ghostwriting

Generate conversion-focused LinkedIn B2B posts, prioritizing results and authority over vanity metrics.

Workflow

Phase 1: Strategic Interview

Extract authentic, quantified material before writing anything. Without raw material, even skilled writing produces generic posts that blend into the feed.

Ask questions (8-14 at once) covering these areas:

Audience & Context

  • Target audience (who exactly?)
  • Starting situation
  • Main constraint

Business Goal

  • Post objective
  • Offer/CTA

Results

  • Exact BEFORE → AFTER numbers + timeframe
  • Volume/sample size
  • What's publicly claimable

Mechanism

  • Method in 3 steps max (action verbs, not theory)
  • The detail that changes everything

Insight

  • Market belief you contradict
  • Common expensive mistake

Credibility

  • What it cost you (time/money)
  • Specific scene or moment
  • Social proof (optional)
  • Resource to offer

Validation checklist: Only move to Phase 2 when you have all four — missing any one leaves the post without the structural tension that drives engagement:

  • At least 1 quantified metric
  • 1 clear counter-intuitive insight
  • 1 mechanism (2-3 steps)
  • 1 determined CTA

Phase 2: Hook Engineering

Propose 3-5 hooks based on frameworks in references/hook-frameworks.md.

Rules:

  • Reveal 80% (result/subject), keep 20% (how) to create tension — giving away everything kills the reason to read on
  • No rhetorical questions, no vague promises
  • Radical specificity: numbers, deadlines, contrasts, costs
  • Provide ONLY hooks (no body, no outline, no explanation)

Wait for user to choose one.

Phase 3: Post Body

Apply these copywriting principles:

Writing rules:

  • Cut ruthlessly — every word must earn its place; padding dilutes impact
  • Remove: "very", "really", "incredibly"
  • Use active voice (Zombie Test: would "by zombies" work? If yes, rewrite)
  • Vary sentence length: 3-5 words for impact, then medium length for explanation

Structure:

  • Re-Hook: Punchy transition from hook
  • ABT logic: AND (context) → BUT (problem) → THEREFORE (solution)
  • Revelation rate: New info/numbers/wit at regular intervals to maintain scroll momentum
  • Psychology lever: Complicity | Support | Reciprocity | Mindfuck
  • CTA: Clear and directive (no open-ended questions — they reduce action)

Formatting:

  • Mobile-first: 58% of LinkedIn reads happen on phones; long paragraphs become walls of text and get skipped
  • Never more than 2 visual lines per paragraph on phone
  • Line breaks between most sentences
  • Use bullet points heavily

Avoid:

  • Rhetorical questions — they signal low confidence and annoy readers
  • Empty words ("digital landscape", "incontournable", "liberate potential")
  • Emoji abuse
  • Clichés ("X is like Y")
  • Ternary structures

Final polish

After writing the post, invoke a humanizer skill (e.g. "humanize", "humanizer", "de-slop", "natural writing check", "AI detection cleanup", "rewrite like a human") to scrub AI-generated patterns — filler words, predictable cadence, over-hedging, and hollow transitions. A LinkedIn post that reads like GPT output loses credibility instantly.

Preserve hooks. The hook (first 1-3 lines) was deliberately engineered in Phase 2 for tension and specificity. Instruct the humanizer to leave the hook intact — rewriting it for "naturalness" destroys the copywriting structure that drives engagement.

Mental Models

Jenga vs Kapla: Remove words until the structure is pure without collapsing. Less is more.

Aristotle's Triptych:

  • Ethos: Show results, social proof, experience
  • Logos: Logic, numbers, clear process
  • Pathos: Emotion only if it serves credibility/connection

Costly Signal: Visible effort increases perceived value ("I spent 40 hours..." | "I invested €2,000..."). Signals skin in the game.

Allbound Strategy: Content (inbound) triggers conversations (outbound). Design posts to drive DMs and profile visits, not just impressions.

Style

Use unicode bold instead of simple bold styling. Much easier to copy-paste into Linkedin for a human.

References

samber의 다른 스킬

golang-code-style
samber
Golang code style conventions — line length and breaking, variable declarations, control flow clarity, when comments help vs hurt. Use when writing or reviewing Go code, asking about style or clarity, or establishing project coding standards. Not for naming conventions (→ See `samber/cc-skills-golang@golang-naming` skill), linter configuration (→ See `samber/cc-skills-golang@golang-lint` skill), or doc comments (→ See `samber/cc-skills-golang@golang-documentation` skill).
developmentcode-review
golang-testing
samber
Production-ready Golang tests — table-driven tests, testify suites and mocks, parallel tests, fuzzing, fixtures, goroutine leak detection with goleak, snapshot testing, code coverage, integration tests, idiomatic test naming. Use when writing or reviewing Go tests, choosing a testing approach, setting up Go test CI, or debugging flaky/slow tests. For testify-specific APIs see `samber/cc-skills-golang@golang-stretchr-testify`; for measurement methodology see...
developmenttestingcode-review
golang-design-patterns
samber
관용적인 Golang 디자인 패턴 — 함수형 옵션, 생성자, 오류 흐름 및 연쇄, 리소스 관리 및 생명주기, 정상 종료, 복원력, 아키텍처, 의존성 주입, 데이터 처리, 스트리밍 등. 아키텍처 패턴을 명시적으로 선택할 때, 함수형 옵션을 구현할 때, 생성자 API를 설계할 때, 정상 종료를 설정할 때, 복원력 패턴을 적용할 때, 또는 특정 문제에 맞는 관용적인 Go 패턴을 질문할 때 적용하세요.
developmentdesigncode-review
golang-error-handling
samber
Idiomatic Golang error handling — creation, wrapping with %w, errors.Is/As, errors.Join, custom error types, sentinel errors, panic/recover, the single handling rule, structured logging with slog, HTTP request logging middleware, and samber/oops for production errors. Built to make logs usable at scale with log aggregation 3rd-party tools. Apply when creating, wrapping, inspecting, or logging errors in Go code. For samber/oops specifics → See `samber/cc-skills-golang@golang-samber-oops`...
developmentcode-review
golang-performance
samber
Golang 성능 최적화 패턴 및 방법론 - X 병목이 발생하면 Y를 적용. 할당 감소, CPU 효율성, 메모리 레이아웃, GC 튜닝, 풀링, 캐싱, 핫패스 최적화를 다룹니다. 프로파일링이나 벤치마크에서 병목이 확인되어 이를 해결할 적절한 최적화 패턴이 필요할 때 사용합니다. 또한 성능 코드 리뷰 시 개선 사항이나 빠른 성능 향상을 식별하는 데 도움이 될 벤치마크를 제안할 때 사용합니다. 측정 방법론에는 해당하지 않습니다(→...
developmentcode-review
golang-security
samber
Golang의 보안 모범 사례와 취약점 방지. 인젝션(SQL, 명령어, XSS), 암호화, 파일 시스템 안전, 네트워크 보안, 쿠키, 비밀 관리, 메모리 안전, 로깅을 다룹니다. 보안을 위해 Go 코드를 작성, 검토 또는 감사할 때, 또는 암호화, I/O, 비밀 관리, 사용자 입력 처리, 인증과 관련된 위험한 코드 작업 시 적용하세요. 보안 도구 구성도 포함됩니다.
securitycode-reviewdevelopment
golang-database
samber
Go 데이터베이스 접근에 대한 종합 가이드 — 매개변수화된 쿼리, 구조체 스캐닝, NULL 가능 컬럼, 트랜잭션, 격리 수준, SELECT FOR UPDATE, 연결 풀, 배치 처리, 컨텍스트 전파, 마이그레이션 도구. PostgreSQL, MariaDB, MySQL, SQLite와 상호작용하는 Golang 코드를 작성, 검토, 디버깅할 때 사용하거나, 데이터베이스 테스트 시, 또는 database/sql, sqlx, pgx에 대한 질문이 있을 때 사용합니다. 데이터베이스 스키마나 마이그레이션 SQL은 생성하지 않습니다.
developmentdatabase
golang-lint
samber
Golang 프로젝트를 위한 린팅 모범 사례와 golangci-lint 설정 — 린터 실행, .golangci.yml 구성, nolint 지시어로 경고 억제, 린트 출력 해석, 린터 선택. golangci-lint를 구성할 때, 린트 경고나 nolint 억제에 대해 질문할 때, 코드 품질 도구를 설정할 때, 또는 린터를 선택할 때 사용합니다. 또한 사용자가 golangci-lint, go vet, staticcheck, revive를 언급할 때 사용합니다.
developmentcode-reviewtesting