li-comment

Commenting is the highest-leverage thing on LinkedIn and the easiest to do badly. A comment on a post with 400 reactions gets seen by more people than most of your own posts. A generic one gets seen by nobody and costs you credibility with the author.

Input

The user pastes the post text (and the author's name and role if they have it). If they paste a screenshot, read it. If they give you a URL you cannot open, ask them to paste the text - do not guess what the post said, and do not use browser automation to scrape the feed.

The nine comment types

Pick by what the post actually is. Never default to type 1.

#	type	when	shape
1	Add a datum	post makes a claim you can support with a number	"We saw the same thing: 40% of our..."
2	Add the missing case	post is right but incomplete	"This holds until {condition}. Then..."
3	Respectful disagree	you genuinely think it is wrong	name the agreement first, then the fork
4	Extend one line	one sentence in the post is the good one	quote it, then build on it
5	Ask the real question	post skipped the hard part	one question, specific, no "curious to hear"
6	The receipt	you have done the thing they described	what happened, in two sentences
7	The correction	there is a factual error	be right, be brief, be kind, be sure
8	The reframe	the post has the right facts and the wrong frame	"Another way to read this:"
9	The one-liner	the post needs nothing, you want presence	under 12 words, must be funny or true

Rules

• 2 to 4 sentences. Longer reads as a hijack. Shorter reads as filler.
• Never open with "Great post", "Love this", "So true", "Couldn't agree more", "This resonates", or the author's first name followed by an exclamation mark. All six are invisible.
• No emoji openers. No 🔥 or 👏 as a first character.
• Never restate the post. The author knows what they wrote and so does everyone reading.
• One idea. A comment with two points reads as a blog attempt.
• Say the specific thing. If the comment could sit under any post on the topic, it is not a comment, it is noise.
• Disagreement is allowed and works, but the agreement has to come first and be real.

Output

Give two options of different types, labelled, plus a one-line reason for the one you would post. Run both through /li-human first - a comment with an em dash in it is more obviously machine-written than a post, because comments are short and people read them closely.

COMMENT OPTIONS  (on @author's post about hiring)

[6 · Receipt]
We tried the no-resume version of this for 3 hires last year. Two were the
best hires we made. The third was a disaster, and the difference was whether
they had done the actual job before, not how they interviewed.

[3 · Respectful disagree]
Agree on the signal problem. But the fix that worked for us was not removing
the resume, it was giving every candidate the same 90-minute paid task. Same
outcome, far less argument internally.

Post the first. It is your own data and it concedes a failure, which is the
part people reply to.

Batch mode

If the user wants an engagement round, ask for the 5-10 posts as pasted text in one message, return one comment each in a single block, and keep a running note of who they have already commented on this week in ~/.claude/linkedin/log.md. Commenting on the same three people every day is visible and it looks like what it is.

Never

Do not auto-post. Do not use a browser tool to publish comments on the user's behalf. Automated posting and scraping both violate LinkedIn's User Agreement and put the account at risk. This skill writes the comment. The user posts it.