Will your post work?
Paste your draft. We compare it to LinkedIn posts from a corpus measured one by one, and email you what, in your text, sounds like a machine rather than like you.
How it works
- Step 1
Paste your draft
The text you are about to publish, as is. Nothing to connect, nothing to install.
- Step 2
The scan compares it to the corpus
Your text is filed into measured buckets, then compared to real posts from the corpus.
- Step 3
Your analysis by email
Your score, the breakdown dimension by dimension, and the writing tics your post shares with a generated text.
Free LinkedIn post scan: will your post work?
The scan reads your draft before you publish it and compares it to 1,763 LinkedIn posts measured one by one, from 165 authors. It first looks for what gives away generated writing: four tics whose excess clearly separates our own texts from those written by hand. Then it measures what your post's format is worth on the corpus. No language model is involved, the calculation is deterministic, and two scans of the same text give the same result. Free, no account, and your text is not kept.
By Maxence Vroilant, founder of Never Boring AIUpdated on .
The score compares your post to 1,763 LinkedIn posts measured one by one, not to an opinion about what works.
What the corpus says
The same numbers a scan uses. Some are counter-intuitive, and we do not smooth them out.
Try it
What each post length is worth
1,050 characters
5.0 / 10
- under 4005.0
- 400 to 8005.0
- 800 to 1,4005.0
- 1,400 to 2,2005.0
- over 2,2005.0
Measured on 708 posts in this band, from 157 authors. Length alone does not make the score: it is the dimension that weighs least.
What each media type is worth
Measured score for each format, across the corpus posts that use it.
- Image5.01,051 posts
- Video5.0235 posts
- Carousel5.0126 posts
- Text only4.5340 posts
What each way of closing a post is worth
The highest-scoring ones are not all worth using: the scan counts them, it does not recommend them all.
- Points to a link placed in a comment5.059 posts
- No explicit ask at the close5.01,160 posts
- A link placed directly in the post5.0304 posts
- Invites a direct message5.021 posts
- Ends on a question5.0105 posts
- Asks people to comment a keyword5.021 posts
What the scan covers without an account
11% of the measured weight, across four dimensions.
- Post type15 %
- Substance31 %
- Hook44 %
- Call to action0 %
- Form0 %
- Media type11 %
- Character count0 %
In black, the dimensions scored here. Dotted, the ones that need an account.
How the score works
Four questions, and how we answer each one. Open the one you care about.
The scan does not read your text the way a reader does. It extracts observable properties: the character count, the length of the first line, whether there are blocks separated by an empty line, the median sentence length, how the post ends, the type of media attached to it.
Each of these properties files your post into a bucket. « First line under 60 characters » is a bucket. « Ends with an invitation to comment » is another. The corpus holds enough posts for each bucket to have its own measured performance: how many reactions and comments the posts falling into it get, on average.
Your score for a dimension is the performance of your bucket in that dimension. The overall score is the average of those scores, weighted by what each dimension actually separates.
A writing tic is not a mistake. It is a habit that comes back too often, and a habit can be changed in one line.
- 1,763
- posts measured
- 165
- auteurs
- 7
- dimensions
The seven dimensions, and what each one weighs
The weights are measured on the corpus, not chosen. They move as the corpus grows. Calibrated on August 28, 2026.
Hook
- What it looks at
- The mechanics of the first line, the one that decides whether you read on.
- Measured weight
- 43.5 %
- Evaluated here
- No, needs an account
Substance
- What it looks at
- The topic covered and how the argument unfolds.
- Measured weight
- 30.6 %
- Evaluated here
- No, needs an account
Post type
- What it looks at
- The family of the post: story, advice, stance, behind the scenes.
- Measured weight
- 15.1 %
- Evaluated here
- No, needs an account
Media type
- What it looks at
- Image, carousel, video, or text only.
- Measured weight
- 10.8 %
- Evaluated here
- Yes
Call to action
- What it looks at
- How the post closes: question, statement, invitation.
- Measured weight
- 0.0 %
- Evaluated here
- Yes
Form
- What it looks at
- The breakdown: airy blocks, sentence length, lists, first line.
- Measured weight
- 0.0 %
- Evaluated here
- Yes
Character count
- What it looks at
- The length bracket your post falls into.
- Measured weight
- 0.0 %
- Evaluated here
- Yes
| Dimension | What it looks at | Measured weight | Evaluated here |
|---|---|---|---|
| Hook | The mechanics of the first line, the one that decides whether you read on. | 43.5 % | No, needs an account |
| Substance | The topic covered and how the argument unfolds. | 30.6 % | No, needs an account |
| Post type | The family of the post: story, advice, stance, behind the scenes. | 15.1 % | No, needs an account |
| Media type | Image, carousel, video, or text only. | 10.8 % | Yes |
| Call to action | How the post closes: question, statement, invitation. | 0.0 % | Yes |
| Form | The breakdown: airy blocks, sentence length, lists, first line. | 0.0 % | Yes |
| Character count | The length bracket your post falls into. | 0.0 % | Yes |
What we get asked
the most
The questions that keep coming up about the scan, answered without rounding off.
Yes, and without an account. You paste your text, you give a first name and an email to open the result, that is all. There is no card and no limit to how many posts you can scan.
The method
Never Boring AI is an AI agent for LinkedIn, built by Maxence Vroilant. The corpus this scan uses as a reference is collected one post at a time, with its real counters, then cleaned: sponsored posts are set aside, company pages too, and lines whose counters could not be read reliably drop out of the measurement.
We publish what the corpus allows us to say, and we write down what it does not. A dimension that separates nothing does not enter the score. A pattern that does not hold on a held-out set is discarded. A number we do not measure, such as reach, is not shown. It is a smaller base than the ones advertised elsewhere, and that is a choice: we prefer a verifiable number to a large unverifiable one.
Get early access
Sign-ups reopen soon. Leave your email and you get in before the public announcement.
Already used by
138 founders
