Install
openclaw skills install @cargo-ai/linkedin-contentEvery Monday three LinkedIn post drafts for one author land in the GTM repo as one pull request, built only from what context/ and the cadence log already say, each with its hook and the files it draws on; nothing is ever published. Triggers: "draft our founder's LinkedIn posts every week", "weekly LinkedIn drafts from our proof points", "turn our wins and insights into LinkedIn posts", "keep a LinkedIn content pipeline", "ghostwrite LinkedIn posts from our context", "content calendar for the CEO on LinkedIn". Cargo CDK, defineAgent, harness claudeCode, GitHub, context/, cadence/content. Skip when: you want the company website and news read into context/, which is web-capture; or you want one post written now, in this chat, with nothing deployed.
openclaw skills install @cargo-ai/linkedin-contentState: to-be-approved. Deploy-verified against a live workspace: not yet. Treat Done when
below as the acceptance test and review cargo-ai cdk plan before deploying. Make no outcome claim
for this skill until it is approved.
The proof points, customer stories and lessons the team already wrote down stop sitting in a repo
nobody outside GTM reads. Every Monday one agent reads context/ (positioning, proof, clients,
insights, objections, alternatives) and the last two weeks of cadence/log/, and drafts three
LinkedIn posts for one named author:
proof/ file.Each draft opens on a hook line, stays under LinkedIn's fold-friendly length, and ends with the files it draws on. A claim with no file behind it is cut. A customer without reference permission is described, never named.
The drafts land as cadence/content/<week>.md in one pull request, [linkedin-content] <week>. A
re-run that week finds that pull request by its title, links it and stops; it never opens a second one. To redraft, close the pull request and run it again.
The agent has no LinkedIn action at all: publishing is the author's act, done by hand, after review.
Every Monday, draft three LinkedIn posts for our CEO, Dana Ruiz, from what's in context/.
Illustrative output, fictional records:
## 1. Proof point: routing fixed in a week
**Hook:** A 240-person freight-audit company stopped losing one inbound lead in six.
Their routing broke every time someone renamed a CRM field. Nobody noticed
until a quarter's pipeline review. We moved the rules into code with a test
on every field they read, and the leak closed in the first week...
**Sources:** context/proof/fabrikam-routing-leak.md, context/client/fabrikam.md
## 2. Objection: "we already have a CRM admin"
**Hook:** Your CRM admin is not the problem. The spreadsheet next to them is.
...
**Sources:** context/objection/already-have-admin.md, context/insight/2026-10-01-win-loss.md
Three drafts and six cited files landed in the "[linkedin-content] 2026-W41" pull request; nothing was posted anywhere.
This folder is a worked example: real CDK resources written for some other company. The job is
to end up with the code your company would have written, in your project, and an agent does the
adapting. If the cargo-cdk skill is in your session it carries the long form of this; if not, this
is enough.
cargo-ai cdk add cookbook/linkedin-content writes this example to infra/linkedin-content/ and
this procedure to .claude/skills/linkedin-content/. No project yet?
cargo-ai cdk init <dir> --cookbook linkedin-content && cd <dir> && npm install does both. If
you are reading this from the project's .claude/skills/, the install already happened — start
at step 2.CONTENT_AUTHOR in infra/agents/content-writer.ts to the person the
posts are written as. The prompt refuses to run while it reads PLACEHOLDER.
references/post.md (installed beside this file) is the draft shape.## Decisions section in your copy of this file.node --import tsx evals/contract.mjs from this skill's folder, then
npm run check && cargo-ai cdk plan from the project root. Show the diff, and deploy only on an
explicit yes: cargo-ai cdk deploy. Never cdk init --force into a non-empty directory.cargo-ai ai message create), and walk
Done when line by line. Then send it again: it must update the same pull request.Derive before you ask. Only the inputs marked asked genuinely live in the operator's head.
| Input | Kind | How it is answered | Why it matters |
|---|---|---|---|
CONTENT_AUTHOR (infra/agents/content-writer.ts) | asked | the person the posts are written as, the way they sign their name | Every draft is in the first person. A team name produces posts nobody can publish as themselves. |
| repository binding | value | derived: leave repository without repository/defaultBranch/connector; plan fills them from the checkout's git origin. cargo-ai cdk check prints the binding. | The drafts are read from and written to this repository. A hand-written owner/name opens the pull request against the wrong one. |
| what context/ holds | value | derived: ls context/*/ before the first run. A repository with no proof/ or insight/ files gets drafts that say so. | The agent can only draft what is written down. An empty proof/ is a reason to install call-capture or win-loss-review first, not to invent. |
| GitHub and Anthropic connectors | value | derived: cargo-ai connection connector list; cargo-ai cdk add connector/github if missing. languageModel is a placeholder to set. | GitHub is the agent's only write path. Anthropic is what every Monday is billed against. |
Checked before moving on, not after the deploy:
cargo-ai cdk check prints agent:linkedin_content_writer bound to <your repo>#<branch> with no
trailing infra/context/ has at least one file under global/ and one under proof/ or insight/node --import tsx evals/contract.mjs passes| Variation | When it is right | How | What it costs |
|---|---|---|---|
more-or-fewer | The author posts daily, or once every two weeks | Change POSTS_PER_WEEK in infra/agents/content-writer.prompt.ts | Past three or four a week the drafts start repeating proof points; the eight-week look-back in §2 only partly holds that off. |
two-authors | A founder and a head of sales both post | A second agent with its own slug, CONTENT_AUTHOR and pull request title prefix | Two writers read the same context and can draft the same proof point the same week. Give each a different first kind in §3. |
performance-report | The author wants to know which posts landed before drafting the next | Add LinkedIn's extractProfilePostActivity to uses with the author's profile URL locked in config, and a §2 step that reads last week's posts and writes their reactions into the file | It is a paid action, billed per run (read its live price first), and it needs a LinkedIn connector. It is read-only; never add a write action to get it. Not the default because most teams want drafts before they want analytics. |
slack-heads-up | The author lives in Slack, not in pull requests | Add slack.actions.postMessage with a locked channelId and a closing step that posts the hooks and the pull request link | One more connector and one post a week. The drafts still land only in the pull request. |
another-day | The team reviews on Fridays | Change cron in infra/agents/content-writer.ts | A run before web-capture's Monday run drafts from last week's web findings. |
infra/agents/content-writer.ts) No LinkedIn action of any kind:
no like, comment, connect, follow or message. An agent that can act on LinkedIn
can speak as a person in public, and one bad draft becomes a post with the author's name on it.
The contract fails if any of those lands on uses.infra/agents/content-writer.prompt.ts §3) A number with no source
is the fastest way to have a customer correct the author in the comments. Cut it rather than
soften it.client/ file's
reference_permission is what the team agreed to. Naming a customer who did not agree is a
relationship problem, not a content one.context capability, and no writes under context/. (infra/agents/content-writer.ts)
The drafts read the knowledge layer; they do not change it. A capability would be a write path
that skips the review every other pipeline goes through.node --import tsx evals/contract.mjs passescargo-ai cdk plan reports the agent, the two connectors and the folder[linkedin-content] <week>, containing only
cadence/content/<week>.md in the references/post.md shapeclient/ file lacks reference permission is namedNo connector action runs: the agent reads files in its checkout and opens a pull request through
GitHub. The recurring cost is the harness run itself, once a week, billed as LLM tokens through the
Anthropic connector, and it scales with how much of context/ and cadence/ there is to read.
The performance-report variation adds one paid LinkedIn action per run. Before adding it, read its
live price: cargo-ai orchestration action list extractProfilePostActivity --kind connector --integration-slug linkedin, and say it out loud.
call-capture, win-loss-review and web-capture (they write the proof, insights and objections
the drafts are built from), and standup (whose log entries are this week's material).