The tool
What the ChatGPT LinkedIn rewriter does
Paste a LinkedIn post, add an optional instruction if you want to steer it, and press Rewrite. The post comes back rewritten, with nothing around it: no preamble, no commentary, no quotation marks, no markdown fence. Copy it straight out.
It is free, it allows five runs per rolling 24 hours, and it accepts between 1 and 12,000 characters. A LinkedIn post sits nowhere near that ceiling, so in practice the length limit will not be what stops you. Your text is sent to our AI server to run the rewrite.
The problem
Why a LinkedIn post reads as generic
The complaint people bring here is not that their post is badly written. It is that it sounds like the last two hundred posts in the feed. That is a specific failure with specific causes, and it is worth naming them rather than calling it robotic and moving on.
Published analyses of LinkedIn's 2026 ranking changes make the same point in stronger terms. They report that the platform does not remove posts or penalise accounts for using AI, it simply distributes content that reads as generic less widely, mostly inside your own network. The trigger they describe is not the tool that produced the words. It is the absence of anything first-hand in them.
Which is useful, because it tells you what a rewrite is actually for. Stripping the stock construction so that whatever is specific in your post has room to be seen. If nothing specific is in there, no rewrite is going to invent it.
Procedure
How to rewrite a LinkedIn post in three steps
Three steps, and the second one is the one most people skip.
- Step 1
- Paste the post into the box on this page. One post at a time, up to 12,000 characters, which a LinkedIn post will not come close to.
- Step 2
- Write an instruction in the field underneath. It takes up to 300 characters and it is the only steering this tool has, so use it: name the length, the register, whether hashtags stay, what the opening line should do.
- Step 3
- Read the result against the original before you post. Check every number, title, company name and date, because a rewrite that alters a fact is worse than the sentence it fixed.
Steering
The optional instruction, and what to put in it
The instruction field appends up to 300 characters to the request. There are no tone presets or templates behind it, and that is the whole point: you say what you want in your own words and it goes into the run. Some that do useful work:
- Length
- Keep it under 120 words. Useful because a rewrite that preserves every clause tends to grow, and length is the first thing a reader judges in a feed.
- Person and register
- First person, plain English, no exclamation marks. Blunt instructions land better than adjectives like professional, which every model interprets differently.
- Structure
- Open with the number, not with a question. Worth naming explicitly, because a generic opening is the single most recognisable pattern in this format.
- What to leave alone
- Do not change the job titles or the figures. The rewriter is told to preserve meaning and factual claims, and repeating it for the ones that matter costs you nothing.
- Hashtags
- No hashtags, or keep the three at the end. Published analyses of the platform suggest one to three chosen for relevance rather than a block of them.
What to cut
The phrases a LinkedIn rewrite should strip
One published analysis of LinkedIn posts put a number against specific templated constructions, reporting a measurable reach cost for each and noting that none of them showed an effect before 2026. Treat the figures as that analysis reports them rather than as settled fact, but the phrases themselves are worth recognising on sight.
- Stop X, start Y
- Reported at roughly minus 6.7 percent, the largest cost of the four. Also the most imitated opening in the format.
- Here's what, Here's how
- Around minus 4.3 percent. The reflexive way to introduce a list when you have not decided what the list is for.
- The result?
- Around minus 4.8 percent. A bridge sentence that promises a payoff and usually delivers a summary.
- It's not X, it's Y
- Around minus 4.9 percent. The contrast frame, which sounds like insight and is a formatting decision.
- What the same analysis says works
- Specifics from your own experience, a genuine closing question, and a willingness to say the awkward part. Those are things you supply, not things a rewrite adds.
Constraints
What the ChatGPT LinkedIn rewriter keeps
The instruction behind the tool tells it to accomplish the transformation while preserving the original meaning and factual claims. That is the design, and on LinkedIn it matters more than on most text, because these posts are full of numbers, job titles, company names, dates and outcomes that are easy to smooth into something almost right.
Design is not a guarantee. Read the result against the original and check those items specifically. It takes fifteen seconds and it is the only quality control in the loop.
The output arrives clean. No preamble, no explanation of what was changed, no quotation marks wrapping it, no code fence. Whatever comes back is meant to be posted as it stands, once you have checked it.
Straight answer
Does rewriting get a LinkedIn post past the AI check?
We make no claim about that and nobody credible should. LinkedIn's ranking system is not ours, we cannot test it, and predicting what a third-party classifier will conclude about a given post is not something this tool does.
What the published analyses describe is worth repeating, though, because it points somewhere more useful. They report that the penalty is distribution, not removal, and that it attaches to content lacking first-hand substance rather than to content written with help. On that account, the thing to fix is what the post says, and a rewrite only fixes how it says it.
So use this to tighten a post you have something to say in. If the draft has no specific, no number and no opinion in it, the honest advice is to close this tab and go and get one.
In practice
Who uses a ChatGPT LinkedIn rewriter, and when
People who wrote something true and long in a notes app and need it to work as a post. This is the best case for a rewriter, because the substance is already there and only the shape is wrong.
Founders and consultants turning an internal update into something public, where the facts are fixed and the register has to change without any of the facts moving with it.
Anyone who asked a chatbot for a post, got something that could have been about any company in any industry, and wants it sounding less like that. Add the specifics back yourself first, then rewrite. In that order.