When to use this prompt
Whenever you publish a blog post and want a LinkedIn version that pulls its weight. The most common mistake in repurposing is summarizing: lifting the abstract into a LinkedIn post and slapping a link on it. That post performs poorly because LinkedIn rewards posts that work on their own, not posts that demand a click before they make sense.
This prompt produces a LinkedIn post that delivers value standalone, then pulls readers to the article for more. Same insight, different distribution shape.
The prompt
<role>Editor specializing in LinkedIn posts that earn engagement without summarizing the source article away.</role>
<task>Turn the blog post below into a single LinkedIn post that stands on its own and pulls readers to the article for the full version.</task>
<inputs>
<blog_url>[FULL URL OF THE BLOG POST]</blog_url>
<blog_post>
[PASTE FULL BLOG POST TEXT]
</blog_post>
<author_voice>[OPTIONAL: 1-2 sentences describing how the author writes, e.g., "direct, opinionated, no marketing fluff"]</author_voice>
</inputs>
<instructions>
1. Open with a single-sentence hook that names a specific pain or counterintuitive observation. The hook must work without context. Do not open with "I just published a new post."
2. Body: 3 to 6 short paragraphs, each one or two sentences. Each paragraph delivers one specific claim with supporting evidence pulled from the article. Use line breaks between paragraphs (LinkedIn rewards whitespace).
3. End with a one-line invitation to read the article. Phrase it as a payoff, not a plea (e.g., "Full breakdown with the four steps in the post" — not "Check out my new article").
4. Include the article URL on its own line at the very end.
5. Total length: 800 to 1300 characters including spaces. LinkedIn truncates posts past ~1300 chars; staying under that keeps the full post visible.
6. Do not use hashtags inside the body. List 3 to 5 relevant hashtags on the line below the URL.
7. Do not introduce facts that are not in the blog post. The LinkedIn post is a distillation, not an expansion.
8. Do not use emojis unless the source article uses them. Match the article's voice.
</instructions>
<output_format>
The full LinkedIn post, ready to paste, formatted with the line breaks LinkedIn needs.
Below the post, output exactly:
---
Character count: XXX
Hook strength (1-5): N. [One-sentence justification.]
Standalone test: Does the post deliver value without the article? [Pass / Fail]. [If Fail, name the missing piece.]
</output_format>How it works
The “stands on its own” constraint is the entire game. LinkedIn’s algorithm penalizes posts where the body is a tease for the link. Posts that deliver real value in the body, then optionally invite the reader to the article, get rewarded. Most repurposing prompts miss this.
The hook quality check at the end (1-5 with justification) is a forcing function. Frontier models will produce a generic hook on the first pass; the rating prompt forces a self-evaluation that often produces a better second draft.
The character count cap matters because LinkedIn truncates posts at roughly 1300 characters with a “see more” link, and posts that get truncated at the wrong sentence underperform. Constraining the length forces tighter writing and ensures the close stays visible.
Example output
The biggest reason your blog content underperforms on LinkedIn isn’t the post. It’s the framing.
Most teams treat LinkedIn as a distribution surface for the article. So they post a one-line teaser plus a link.
LinkedIn punishes that pattern. The platform rewards posts that work standalone.
The fix is repurposing, not summarizing. Lift the strongest claim from the article. State it plainly. Add the supporting evidence in two or three short paragraphs. Then invite the reader to the article for the full version, framed as a payoff, not a plea.
Same insight. Different distribution shape.
Full breakdown with the four common mistakes and how to fix each one in the post.
https://arthurdosik.com/blog/…
Character count: 678 Hook strength: 4/5. The hook names a specific pain (underperformance) and offers a counterintuitive cause (framing, not content). Standalone test: Pass. The post makes its argument without requiring the article.
Variations
- Carousel version: Add an instruction to break the body into 5 to 8 carousel slides instead of one post. Useful for longer articles where the points benefit from sequential reveal.
- Newsletter cross-post: Adapt the same prompt to produce a Substack/Beehiiv-friendly post that pulls toward the article without competing with it.
- Counter-take version: Run the prompt with the constraint “Frame the post as a contrarian take on the article’s central claim.” Useful for refreshing an old post for a second LinkedIn release months after publish.