Research and draft your next LinkedIn post
The problem and the outcome
A company page needs posts that rest on something real: a published report, a release, a case. Finding that material, checking it against its original and turning it into a draft in the company's voice takes a morning nobody has. The outcome of this workflow is a sourced draft to review instead of a blank page. It does not promise daily posting, audience growth or engagement.
A concrete example: how we run it on our own page
- Find a relevant observationThe agent searches the last seven days of public research, reports and news for a finding that fits the editorial line.
- Check its original sourceEvery number and quote is checked against the primary source, never a second-hand article. A number it cannot check is left out.
- Choose an angle for the readerOne observation per post: what the source found, what it means in practice, and where Maplith fits, stated as the source states it.
- Prepare the draftA plain-text post in the company voice, with the source named, one link and at most three hashtags.
- Review and publish through the supported pathThe agent hands the draft to Maplith as a request. A person approves, edits or declines. Maplith publishes an approved text post.
Who does what
What Maplith supplies
The request the draft travels in, the approval a person gives, the publication of an approved text post on the connected page, and the record of what was published, with its address.
What the agent does
The research, the source check, the angle and the draft, in the assistant your team uses. It asks Maplith to publish; it never holds the page's access itself.
Where a person decides
Every post, before it goes out. A declined request does not go out. An edit by the reviewer becomes guidance for the next draft.
Routine action versus exception
| Situation | What happens | Who decides |
|---|---|---|
| A sourced text post, in the voice and within the limits | The agent requests publication; after approval Maplith publishes it at the named time. | A person, before publication. |
| A number the agent could not check against the original | The number is left out of the draft, and the draft says so. | The agent, by the rule. |
| A post with an image, a video or a carousel | The agent drafts it; the approved post is published by hand by the page admin. | A person, who also publishes. |
| Nothing worth saying this week | No draft and no request. The workflow posts nothing rather than something thin. | The agent, by the rule. |
Prerequisites
| You need | Why |
|---|---|
| An assistant that can search and read the web | The research and the source check happen there. |
| A list of sources you trust, and an editorial line | The agent chooses from your list and adds no source of its own. |
| A LinkedIn company page connected to Maplith | Maplith keeps the connection and publishes approved posts; see the guide for the LinkedIn-side requirements. |
| A person who reviews every post | The approval is the step that makes the rest safe. |
Questions people ask
Can anything post without me?
No. In this workflow each post requires approval before publication, and a declined request does not go out.
Does the agent get the keys to my company page?
No. The agent requests publication through Maplith. Maplith stores the page's connection and publishes approved posts with it.
Does the agent post every day?
Only when there is something worth saying. Scheduling lives in the assistant that runs the research, not in the prompt; see the guide.
See how we prepare LinkedIn posts
The guide shows one post from the research to the published text, with the approval, the manual steps and the sources.