aos-constitutional-governance
Create, sign (Ed25519), verify, and audit an AOS-style immutable constitution for OpenClaw. Use when implementing constitutional governance beneath SOUL.md, designing deny/confirm/allow policy evaluation, generating constitution.yaml + constitution.sig, validating GitTruth attestations, building tamper-evident tool-call logs, or preparing a reference implementation skill/plugin for OpenClaw.
SKILL.md
| Name | aos-constitutional-governance |
| Description | Create, sign (Ed25519), verify, and audit an AOS-style immutable constitution for OpenClaw. Use when implementing constitutional governance beneath SOUL.md, designing deny/confirm/allow policy evaluation, generating constitution.yaml + constitution.sig, validating GitTruth attestations, building tamper-evident tool-call logs, or preparing a reference implementation skill/plugin for OpenClaw. |
name: aos-constitutional-governance description: Create, sign (Ed25519), verify, and audit an AOS-style immutable constitution for OpenClaw. Use when implementing constitutional governance beneath SOUL.md, designing deny/confirm/allow policy evaluation, generating constitution.yaml + constitution.sig, validating GitTruth attestations, building tamper-evident tool-call logs, or preparing a reference implementation skill/plugin for OpenClaw.
AOS Constitutional Governance (OpenClaw)
Implement AOS-style two-layer governance for tool-using assistants:
- Immutable Constitution (locked): signed + GitTruth-attested policy enforced at runtime.
- Mutable Identity (flexible): persona/workflow guidance (e.g.,
SOUL.md). - User Task Intent (ephemeral): per-request justification, confirmations, and overrides.
This Skill focuses on Phase 1 deliverables (spec + signing + verification + audit artifacts) and provides the evaluation algorithm needed for Phase 2 (Gateway enforcement).
Clarification: This repository demonstrates a reference integration between agent frameworks and constitutional governance concepts. It does not grant patent rights or disclose enforcement mechanisms beyond illustrative examples.
Files produced
constitution.yaml— human-readable policyconstitution.c14n.json— canonical JSON used for hashing/signingconstitution.sig.json— detached Ed25519 signature metadataconstitution.attestation.json— GitTruth attestation metadata (pointer)
Canonicalization + signing
- Convert
constitution.yaml→ canonical JSON (sorted keys, normalized scalars). - Compute
doc_hash = sha256(c14n_json_bytes). - Sign
doc_hashwith Ed25519 →signature. - Commit
constitution.yaml+constitution.sig.jsonto git. - GitTruth attests the commit.
- Gateway verifies (a) Ed25519 signature over
doc_hash, and (b) GitTruth attestation for the commit.
Use scripts:
scripts/c14n.py— canonicalize YAML→JSONscripts/sign.py— Ed25519 signscripts/verify.py— verify Ed25519 + (optionally) GitTruth attestation
Policy evaluation (deny / confirm / allow)
Decision model
The policy engine returns one of:
- DENY: tool call is blocked (constitutional).
- CONFIRM: tool call is paused pending explicit user approval (scoped override token).
- ALLOW: tool call may execute.
If multiple rules match, select the most restrictive decision:
DENY > CONFIRM > ALLOW
and merge obligations (logging, disclosure, reflection) from all matched rules.
Inputs to evaluation
tool: string (e.g.,message.send,read,exec)args: structured args (paths, urls, message text)session: { kind, label, channel }intent: user task intent object (may be empty)risk: derived risk classification (see below)classifications: derived tags (e.g.,impersonation,fraud) from deterministic matchers
Output
decision: ALLOW|CONFIRM|DENYreason_code: stable stringobligations: e.g., disclosure text to append, reflection fields, log requirementsoverride: if CONFIRM, a scope hash to approve exactly this call
Risk classification (deterministic)
Risk should be rules-based and reproducible, not LLM-judgment.
Use scripts/risk.py as a reference implementation.
Risk is computed as:
risk = max(tool_base_risk(tool), arg_risk(tool,args), data_risk(args), egress_risk(args), user_scope_risk(session,intent))
with levels: low < medium < high < critical.
Next steps
Phase 2 (Gateway): move the evaluator into the tool router so it is non-bypassable.