You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
This appears across all skills (gws-calendar, gws-gmail, gws-drive, etc.).
Why this is problematic
Vendor lock-in on an open format — Agent skills are just markdown files with YAML frontmatter. Introducing a third-party registry standard (openclaw) as metadata creates an unnecessary dependency on an external specification that doesn't govern how skills are consumed.
Skills should be tool-agnostic — The name, version, and description fields in the frontmatter are sufficient. Categorization and binary requirements can be expressed without adopting an external standard.
Confusion for contributors — Developers looking at these skills may assume openclaw is a required part of the skill format, when it has no effect on how Claude Code (or any other AI coding agent) processes the skill.
Suggestion
Remove the openclaw block from the frontmatter and keep the existing standard fields (name, version, description). If categorization or requirements metadata is needed, use flat keys that don't reference an external standard:
Update: I noticed the publish-skills.yml workflow uses clawhub sync to publish skills to the OpenClaw registry, which likely requires the metadata.openclaw block in the frontmatter.
Instead, I'd like to reframe this as a question:
Should these skills be coupled to a third-party registry (OpenClaw/ClawHub)?
If OpenClaw integration is intentional and staying, it would help to:
Document in the README why metadata.openclaw exists and what it's used for
Clarify whether the openclaw fields are required for skill authors contributing new skills
Reacted by Andrew Noblet, Nicholas McKenna, Shikhar Varshney and Ma Mana ma Manama
Activity
[-]Remove openclaw metadata from skill frontmatter[/-][+]Remove openclaw metadata from skills[/+]fix(skills): remove openclaw metadata from gws-calendar skill
gerfalcon commentedon Mar 6, 2026
Update: I noticed the
publish-skills.ymlworkflow usesclawhub syncto publish skills to the OpenClaw registry, which likely requires themetadata.openclawblock in the frontmatter.Instead, I'd like to reframe this as a question:
Should these skills be coupled to a third-party registry (OpenClaw/ClawHub)?
If OpenClaw integration is intentional and staying, it would help to:
metadata.openclawexists and what it's used foropenclawfields are required for skill authors contributing new skills