Every LinkedIn tool in this category sells automated connection requests. We do not, and this page explains why rather than quietly leaving a gap in the feature list. If you came here looking for a tool that mass-connects for you, we are about to talk you out of it.
Used by leaders from
LinkedIn does not publish exact numbers, and anyone quoting a precise weekly cap as fact is guessing. These are the ranges the platform’s own help pages and years of consistent user reports point to.
The widely observed ceiling on invitations for a normal account. It is enforced softly and varies with account age, completeness and history.
Unanswered invitations pile up and count against you. Withdrawing old ones periodically is the single most overlooked bit of hygiene here.
A low acceptance rate, and especially “I don’t know this person” responses, is a stronger restriction signal than raw volume. Sending fewer, better invitations is safer than sending many.
Ninety invitations at a steady rate across a week looks human. Ninety in twenty minutes, at 3am, from an IP that is not yours, does not.
We publish for other people’s accounts. That changes the maths on this completely.
LinkedIn’s official API does not offer connection requests. Every tool that automates them does it by driving a real browser session or an extension logged in as the account holder, which is precisely the behaviour that gets profiles restricted — and which their terms prohibit.
We publish and we measure, through the official integration. If a client’s profile were restricted because of something we did, that is their livelihood and our reputation. No feature is worth that, so the honest answer is that we will not build it.
To be fair to the other side: plenty of people run automated connection tools for years without incident, and the restriction risk is real but not certain. Our objection is not that it always goes wrong. It is that when it does, the cost lands on someone who did not choose the tool.
All of them slower, all of them safe, and all of them things the automation is a poor substitute for.
Inbound requests from people who read something of yours accept themselves and start with context. This is slower for a month and better forever, which is the whole argument for publishing consistently.
A useful reply on someone’s post two days before the invitation changes the acceptance rate dramatically, because you are no longer a stranger. Ten of these beat a hundred cold invitations.
Clear invitations older than a few weeks. It lifts your visible acceptance rate, frees headroom against the weekly limit, and takes about two minutes a month.
Publish consistently, comment where it matters, and let the requests come inbound. That is the part we can actually help with.
From $19 a month for one account. No extension, no shared logins.