LinkedIn Post Scorer

A LinkedIn post fails in predictable places, so scoring it in four parts tells you more than a single number would. Hook covers whether the first lines earn the tap on "see more". Structure covers rhythm and scannability. Value covers whether there is a real, specific insight underneath. CTA covers whether the ending gives the reader something to do.

The hook carries the most risk because it gates everything else. Readers only see two or three lines before the post collapses, so a weak opening means your best insight is never read. If you only have time to fix one dimension, fix the one at the top.

Anything in the 80s or above is ready to publish. The 70s usually means one dimension is dragging the rest down, and the scorecard will show you which. Below 70, the post normally has a structural problem rather than a wording problem, so rewriting the opening or cutting the middle beats polishing individual sentences.

Treat a low Value score as the most serious one. Hook, structure, and CTA are all fixable in minutes. A post with nothing specific to say cannot be rescued by better formatting, and no amount of rewriting will make a generic observation feel worth reading.

Most people learn what worked only after the post is live, when the reach is already decided. Scoring a draft moves that feedback in front of publishing, which is the only point where it can still change the outcome. It is the cheapest edit you will make.

The habit compounds faster than the individual fixes do. After a dozen scored drafts you start writing hooks that would have scored well anyway, because you have internalised what the rubric rewards. The tool becomes unnecessary, which is the goal.