LinkedIn

Verified against Claude · 2026-08-08

Draft posts for your team to personalize, not a script everyone posts word-for-word

Produce a small set of genuinely different starting drafts for an employee-advocacy moment, each written from a different role's actual vantage point, built to be personalized rather than posted as-is — so five teammates writing about the same news don't visibly post the same paragraph with a different name at the top.

ClaudeChatGPTGemini5 fillable variables

The prompt

Ready to copy — highlighted parts are example details you can swap.

THE COMPANY MOMENT EVERYONE'S POSTING ABOUT
We just launched a self-serve tier after 3 years of being enterprise-only

WHO'S BEING ASKED TO POST
The engineer who built the self-serve billing flow, a sales rep, and a customer success lead

THE ONE FACT THAT MUST STAY ACCURATE ACROSS EVERY VERSION
Self-serve pricing starts at $49/month, no sales call required

HOW MANY DISTINCT DRAFT STARTING POINTS YOU NEED
3

ANYTHING EMPLOYEES SHOULD NOT SAY
Do not mention the enterprise-tier customer we lost partly because of the missing self-serve option

WHY VISIBLE COORDINATION IS THE ACTUAL FAILURE MODE, NOT LOW VOLUME
The failure mode of employee-advocacy content is not that nobody posts — it's that everyone posts the same company-provided paragraph with only the byline changed, which is instantly recognizable to anyone who follows more than one person at the company and reads as coordinated messaging rather than genuine enthusiasm, which actually costs more credibility than if nobody had posted about it at all.

TASK
Produce 3 distinct starting drafts, each written from a genuinely different vantage point implied by The engineer who built the self-serve billing flow, a sales rep, and a customer success lead — not the same paragraph in a different tone, but a structurally different post because the actual experience of We just launched a self-serve tier after 3 years of being enterprise-only was different for each role. For example: someone who built the thing has a different true thing to say than someone who will now sell it, who has a different true thing to say than someone who just watched it happen from an adjacent team.

FOR EACH DRAFT
1. Open from that role's actual vantage point on We just launched a self-serve tier after 3 years of being enterprise-only — what they specifically saw, did, or noticed, not the company's official framing restated in first person.
2. Include Self-serve pricing starts at $49/month, no sales call required exactly as given, since this is the one thing that cannot drift between versions even as everything else does — state it plainly, don't paraphrase it into something looser that might not match the other versions or the company's public statement.
3. End with an explicit note-to-poster: "this is a starting draft — change [specific thing] to make it actually yours before posting," naming one concrete thing about that specific draft that should be personalized (a real memory, a specific number they'd know from their own vantage point, their own voice on the close) rather than a generic "feel free to edit."

STRUCTURAL AND TOPIC CONSTRAINTS
No two drafts may share an opening sentence structure, a specific phrase, or the same closing line — if two roles would naturally produce very similar posts, deliberately diverge the structure (one leads with a number, another with a question, another with a short scene) so that even minimally-edited versions don't read as obviously related to each other in the feed. Respect Do not mention the enterprise-tier customer we lost partly because of the missing self-serve option in every version without exception — flag if satisfying a specific draft's honest vantage point would require going anywhere near a restricted topic, rather than quietly working around it in a way that changes the point.

OUTPUT
The requested number of drafts, each labeled by role, each ending with its specific personalization note, plus one line confirming Self-serve pricing starts at $49/month, no sales call required appears identically (not paraphrased differently) across every version.

Customize

Optional — swap in your own details for the highlighted parts above.

Why this works

The actual signal that damages employee-advocacy content isn't low volume, it's visible coordination — a viewer who sees three employees post near-identical paragraphs about the same launch on the same day updates toward "this was assigned," not "these people are genuinely excited," which is a worse outcome for the company's credibility than if the moment had gone unposted by anyone at all. Starting from genuinely different role-based vantage points is what produces posts that are actually different, not just differently worded. Locking {{must_stay_accurate}} to appear identically, unparaphrased, across every draft while deliberately letting everything else vary addresses a specific tension in this exact task: the whole point is variation, but a launch or milestone post usually has one or two facts (a date, a number, a claim) that legal, PR, or plain accuracy require to stay fixed regardless of who's posting. Treating "vary everything" and "keep this one thing exact" as two different, explicitly separated instructions is what prevents an enthusiastic personalization from accidentally drifting a stated number or claim between five different employees' versions. The explicit no-shared-structure constraint — same opening shape, same closing line — targets what actually gives coordinated posting away even after individual edits. People often personalize the details of a provided draft (a name, a specific memory) while keeping its skeleton, tone, and phrase choices intact, and skeletal similarity across posts is exactly what a reader following multiple employees at once notices, even when every individual detail has technically been changed. Requiring each draft to end with a specific, named personalization instruction rather than a generic "edit as needed" matters because a generic invitation to personalize gets skipped under time pressure far more often than a specific one — an employee handed "change the number in the second line to something from your own experience" has a concrete, low-effort task, while one handed "make this your own" is more likely to post the draft close to verbatim, which recreates the exact coordination problem this whole exercise exists to avoid.

Verified against

Claude Sonnet 5 · 2026-08-08

ChatGPT GPT-5.1 · 2026-08-09

Changelog

  • 2026-08-09 Initial publish for the rewritten linkedin category, verified against Claude (Sonnet 5) and ChatGPT (GPT-5.1).

Need this built into your business?

If a prompt isn't enough — Google Ads management, built and maintained for you — that's Scult's day job.

EXPLORE GOOGLE ADS MANAGEMENT
Write a first line that survives LinkedIn's "see more" cutoffGenerate six hook-line options for a LinkedIn post, each built on a different mechanism and tested against the actual character count where LinkedIn truncates a post, so every option reads as a complete thought before the cutoff rather than a fragment that only resolves after the tap.ChatGPTClaude2026-07-20Turn a work memory into a story-driven LinkedIn post with a real lessonStructure a raw, unpolished work anecdote into a hook-setup-turn-lesson post using LinkedIn's actual short-line, high-white-space format, while explicitly protecting the unflattering or uncertain detail that makes the story read as lived rather than as a templated failure-to-growth arc.ClaudeChatGPT2026-07-22Outline a swipeable LinkedIn carousel from a single ideaTurn one idea into a slide-by-slide outline for LinkedIn's native document-upload carousel format, built around exactly one point per slide and a design note per slide, so it reads as a designed sequence instead of a wall of bullet points split across pages.ClaudeChatGPT2026-07-23Rewrite your LinkedIn About section so it reads as a person, not a resumeTurn disjointed notes or a resume-voice draft into a first-person About section that opens strong before LinkedIn's preview cutoff and reads like it was written by the person, not extracted from a CV, with keywords worked into real sentences instead of bolted onto the end.ClaudeChatGPT2026-07-24
All LinkedIn prompts

Check your AI visibility

One URL in, a 0–100 score and the exact fixes out.

RUN THE CHECK

Browse all the tools

15 tools across six categories
13 of them never send your data anywhere

Free · No signup · No trial clock

SEE THE DIRECTORY