ClawHub

Worldcoin

Filter human-critical workflows using proof-of-human logic. Designed for identity-sensitive commercial decisions, anti-bot gating, and “real human required” checkpoints across proposals, leads, and approvals.

Audits

Pending
ClawScanPass

Agentic behavior and permission review.

Static analysisPass

Pattern checks against bundled files.

VirusTotalPending

Multi-engine malware detections and file reputation.

Install

openclaw skills install worldcoin

Worldcoin

In an AI-saturated world, not every click deserves your trust.

Worldcoin is a human-verification decision skill for workflows where “real human required” matters.

This skill is inspired by proof-of-humanity logic: not every action should be treated as equally trustworthy, and not every response should be assumed to come from a real, decision-capable person.

Use this skill when you need to:

  • decide whether a workflow step should require stronger human verification
  • separate bot-risk from human-trust actions
  • add “human checkpoint” logic to lead, proposal, approval, or access flows
  • determine which actions should only happen after stronger identity confidence
  • reduce spam, fake engagement, or synthetic participation in sensitive workflows

This skill does NOT:

  • perform biometric verification
  • connect to World ID, Orb, World App, or any external identity API
  • replace legal identity checks, KYC, AML, or compliance review
  • certify that a person is verified on any external network

What This Skill Does

Worldcoin helps:

  • identify where proof-of-human logic is useful
  • classify workflow steps by human-trust sensitivity
  • determine where anonymous access is acceptable vs where stronger verification is needed
  • reduce approval, lead, or offer workflows being distorted by bots or fake actors
  • design “human required” checkpoints for digital systems

Best Use Cases

  • filtering fake or low-trust inbound lead submissions
  • deciding which proposal approvals should require stronger human confirmation
  • gating voting, claiming, or reward flows
  • anti-bot logic for creator or platform campaigns
  • deciding where proof-of-human is commercially worth the friction
  • designing trust layers for identity-sensitive products

What to Provide

Useful input includes:

  • the workflow being protected
  • what action the user wants to secure
  • what the main abuse risk is
  • whether the risk is bots, duplicate identities, fake leads, or low-trust engagement
  • what level of friction is acceptable
  • what commercial or operational downside exists if fake actors get through

Standard Output Format

WORLDCOIN ASSESSMENT ━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━ Workflow: [What is being protected] Main Risk: [Bot / fake human / duplicate / low-trust action]

HUMAN-TRUST SENSITIVITY ━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━ Level: [Low / Medium / High / Critical]

WHY IT MATTERS ━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━

  • [Why stronger human verification may matter here]
  • [What happens if fake actors get through]
  • [What business or trust damage follows]

VERIFICATION THRESHOLD ━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━ Recommended level:

  • [Open access]
  • [Soft human check]
  • [Strong human-required gate]
  • [Escalate to formal identity / compliance process]

TRADEOFFS ━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━ ⚠️ [Added friction] ⚠️ [Drop in conversion] ⚠️ [False negatives / accessibility concern] ⚠️ [Operational complexity]

RECOMMENDED NEXT STEP ━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━

  • [What checkpoint or policy to add next]

Human Verification Principles

  • not every workflow needs maximum identity friction
  • stronger proof should be used where fake participation meaningfully distorts outcomes
  • friction should match risk
  • proof-of-human logic is different from legal identity logic
  • commercial trust decisions should separate low-stakes participation from high-stakes approval
  • never claim certainty where only probability exists

Human Proxy Lens

Think of this skill as a human proxy filter.

Its job is not to verify people directly.
Its job is to answer:

  • Where does this workflow break if non-human or duplicate actors get through?
  • Where is “good enough” trust sufficient?
  • Where is stronger proof of humanness worth the friction?

Execution Protocol (for AI agents)

When user asks about verification or human-trust workflow design, follow this sequence:

Step 1: Parse the workflow

Extract:

  • what the user is trying to protect
  • who is interacting
  • what action is being taken
  • what abuse or fraud risk exists
  • what trust level the workflow really needs

Step 2: Classify risk

Classify the primary concern:

  • bot volume
  • duplicate participation
  • fake lead quality
  • false approvals
  • reward abuse
  • synthetic engagement distortion

Step 3: Assess sensitivity

Determine whether the workflow is:

  • low stakes
  • medium stakes
  • high stakes
  • critical trust

Step 4: Recommend trust layer

Choose the lightest acceptable level:

  • open access
  • soft gating
  • stronger human verification gate
  • escalate to formal identity / compliance process

Step 5: Show tradeoffs

Explain:

  • user friction
  • conversion impact
  • operational burden
  • trust benefit

Step 6: Guardrails

If the user needs regulated identity, financial compliance, or formal verification:

  • say so clearly
  • do not pretend proof-of-human equals legal identity
  • recommend specialist or regulated review

Activation Rules (for AI agents)

Use this skill when the user asks about:

  • proof of human
  • anti-bot workflow design
  • fake lead filtering
  • identity-sensitive approvals
  • real-human gating
  • trust layers for digital actions
  • duplicate participation risk
  • synthetic engagement prevention

Do NOT use this skill when:

  • user needs actual biometric verification
  • user needs direct World ID integration steps
  • user needs KYC / AML / legal identity review
  • user wants technical API implementation details that are not provided

If context is ambiguous

Ask: "Do you want help designing a human-verification decision layer, or do you need actual product/API integration?"

Works Well With

  • @dpetcr/proposal when approvals should only count after stronger human trust
  • @AGIstack/lead when fake or low-trust inbound leads need filtering
  • @ethagent/xmoney when rewards or monetization flows are vulnerable to fake participation

Boundaries

This skill supports decision design for proof-of-human-style workflow logic.

It does not replace:

  • biometric verification
  • legal identity verification
  • KYC / AML checks
  • privacy review
  • regulated compliance decisions

Use outputs as workflow design guidance, not as formal identity certification.