From 54983184e75116295a170999baf09b6c3ef2345a Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Latif Date: Wed, 25 Mar 2026 16:32:12 +0000 Subject: [PATCH] Add initial OpenClaw skill compatibility subtree --- openclaw/README.md | 20 +++++++++++++ openclaw/openclaw-port-notes.md | 16 +++++++++++ openclaw/references/tool-mapping.md | 16 +++++++++++ openclaw/skills/gstack-investigate/SKILL.md | 14 ++++++++++ openclaw/skills/gstack-office-hours/SKILL.md | 28 +++++++++++++++++++ .../skills/gstack-plan-ceo-review/SKILL.md | 20 +++++++++++++ .../skills/gstack-plan-eng-review/SKILL.md | 16 +++++++++++ openclaw/skills/gstack-review/SKILL.md | 15 ++++++++++ 8 files changed, 145 insertions(+) create mode 100644 openclaw/README.md create mode 100644 openclaw/openclaw-port-notes.md create mode 100644 openclaw/references/tool-mapping.md create mode 100644 openclaw/skills/gstack-investigate/SKILL.md create mode 100644 openclaw/skills/gstack-office-hours/SKILL.md create mode 100644 openclaw/skills/gstack-plan-ceo-review/SKILL.md create mode 100644 openclaw/skills/gstack-plan-eng-review/SKILL.md create mode 100644 openclaw/skills/gstack-review/SKILL.md diff --git a/openclaw/README.md b/openclaw/README.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..0205868b6 --- /dev/null +++ b/openclaw/README.md @@ -0,0 +1,20 @@ +# OpenClaw compatibility + +This subtree contains OpenClaw-native adaptations of selected gstack workflows. + +Goals: +- preserve the role/workflow value of gstack +- avoid Claude-specific tools and hooks +- map browser and orchestration guidance to OpenClaw primitives + +Non-goals: +- full Claude Code runtime parity +- automatic conversion of every generated skill/template +- preserving gstack telemetry or repo-mode shell wrappers + +Suggested mapping: +- Claude/Codex browser helpers -> OpenClaw `browser` +- sub-agent review flows -> OpenClaw `sessions_spawn` / `subagents` +- file operations -> OpenClaw `read`, `write`, `edit` +- shell commands -> OpenClaw `exec` +- user follow-ups -> normal chat replies or `message` diff --git a/openclaw/openclaw-port-notes.md b/openclaw/openclaw-port-notes.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..3ee81a97c --- /dev/null +++ b/openclaw/openclaw-port-notes.md @@ -0,0 +1,16 @@ +# OpenClaw port notes + +This is an initial compatibility layer, not full parity. + +What was ported: +- product idea diagnostic (`gstack-office-hours`) +- CEO review (`gstack-plan-ceo-review`) +- engineering review (`gstack-plan-eng-review`) +- structured review (`gstack-review`) +- investigation workflow (`gstack-investigate`) + +What remains future work: +- QA/browser-heavy skills tuned to OpenClaw browser snapshots/actions +- ship/deploy flows mapped to OpenClaw ACP sessions and GitHub flows +- safety skills adapted to OpenClaw approval semantics +- generator support to emit OpenClaw variants automatically diff --git a/openclaw/references/tool-mapping.md b/openclaw/references/tool-mapping.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..ac99ba569 --- /dev/null +++ b/openclaw/references/tool-mapping.md @@ -0,0 +1,16 @@ +# gstack -> OpenClaw tool mapping + +- `Read` -> `read` +- `Write` -> `write` +- `Edit` -> `edit` +- `Bash` -> `exec` +- `WebSearch` -> `web_search` +- browser helpers / `$B ...` -> `browser` +- `AskUserQuestion` -> ask directly in the chat reply +- agent handoffs -> `sessions_spawn` or `subagents` + +Porting rules: +1. Remove Claude-specific preambles, hooks, telemetry, and shell wrappers. +2. Keep the role, diagnostic posture, and workflow sequence. +3. Prefer first-class OpenClaw tools over custom scripts. +4. When a skill depends on multi-agent review, instruct the agent to spawn subagents only when the task is materially complex. diff --git a/openclaw/skills/gstack-investigate/SKILL.md b/openclaw/skills/gstack-investigate/SKILL.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..04a1f250d --- /dev/null +++ b/openclaw/skills/gstack-investigate/SKILL.md @@ -0,0 +1,14 @@ +--- +name: gstack-investigate +description: Root-cause investigation workflow for OpenClaw. Use when debugging incidents, confusing failures, flaky behavior, mismatched outputs, or unclear technical problems before attempting a fix. +--- + +Do not jump to fixes before understanding the failure. + +Workflow: +1. State the symptom clearly. +2. Reproduce or inspect evidence. +3. Form 2-3 plausible hypotheses. +4. Test the hypotheses with the smallest useful checks. +5. Identify the root cause or narrow the uncertainty. +6. Only then propose the fix. diff --git a/openclaw/skills/gstack-office-hours/SKILL.md b/openclaw/skills/gstack-office-hours/SKILL.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..c1e56c301 --- /dev/null +++ b/openclaw/skills/gstack-office-hours/SKILL.md @@ -0,0 +1,28 @@ +--- +name: gstack-office-hours +description: YC-style product and startup diagnostic for OpenClaw. Use when evaluating a new product idea, founder pitch, wedge, GTM, startup narrative, or whether something is worth building before implementation. +--- + +Use this skill to pressure-test ideas before code or product build-out. + +Principles: +- Force specificity. +- Distinguish interest from demand. +- Treat the status quo as the real competitor. +- Prefer a narrow wedge over a broad platform claim. +- End with one concrete next action. + +Workflow: +1. Summarize the idea and context in plain language. +2. Ask what the user's goal is with the idea. +3. For startups/intrapreneurship, use a YC-style diagnostic: + - strongest evidence of demand + - current workaround / status quo + - most desperate user + - narrowest wedge someone would pay for now + - direct observation or surprise from user behavior + - why the product becomes more essential over time +4. Push past vague answers. Ask follow-ups until specifics appear. +5. Produce a short memo or design note, not implementation. + +Do not implement code when using this skill unless the user explicitly changes scope. diff --git a/openclaw/skills/gstack-plan-ceo-review/SKILL.md b/openclaw/skills/gstack-plan-ceo-review/SKILL.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..5c0fb7f1b --- /dev/null +++ b/openclaw/skills/gstack-plan-ceo-review/SKILL.md @@ -0,0 +1,20 @@ +--- +name: gstack-plan-ceo-review +description: CEO-style product review for OpenClaw. Use when reviewing a product plan, roadmap, pitch, wedge, positioning, user value, or product strategy to find the strongest version of the idea. +--- + +Review the plan like a demanding CEO. + +Focus on: +- what users truly care about +- the sharpest wedge +- why this wins versus doing nothing +- whether the narrative is memorable +- whether the plan earns expansion into a larger platform + +Output: +- what is strong +- what is weak or blurry +- what to cut +- what to emphasize +- one recommended next version of the narrative or plan diff --git a/openclaw/skills/gstack-plan-eng-review/SKILL.md b/openclaw/skills/gstack-plan-eng-review/SKILL.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..2bd293f52 --- /dev/null +++ b/openclaw/skills/gstack-plan-eng-review/SKILL.md @@ -0,0 +1,16 @@ +--- +name: gstack-plan-eng-review +description: Engineering plan review for OpenClaw. Use when evaluating architecture, implementation plans, sequencing, dependencies, testing, data flow, failure modes, or technical scope before coding. +--- + +Review for execution realism. + +Check: +- architecture and sequencing +- hidden dependencies +- edge cases and failure modes +- testing strategy +- observability and rollback +- whether the plan is too broad for the current stage + +Output a concise engineering assessment with recommended sequencing. diff --git a/openclaw/skills/gstack-review/SKILL.md b/openclaw/skills/gstack-review/SKILL.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..5d0be1ca1 --- /dev/null +++ b/openclaw/skills/gstack-review/SKILL.md @@ -0,0 +1,15 @@ +--- +name: gstack-review +description: Structured pre-ship review for OpenClaw. Use when reviewing code, plans, docs, or changes for bugs, regressions, poor assumptions, missing tests, or production risks before shipping. +--- + +Review with skepticism. + +Look for: +- breakage that happy-path checks miss +- missing tests +- unsafe assumptions +- UX or product regressions +- operational risks + +If the change is large, consider recommending a subagent review pass.