- ClawSweeper-owned schema, labels, close reasons, protected-label gates, maintainer-item gates, and mutation rules live in `openclaw/clawsweeper`.

- Review workers read this full root `AGENTS.md` before judging; no reliance on search snippets, `head`, partial ranges, local excerpts, or truncated copies. Then read every scoped `AGENTS.md` that owns touched paths.

- Optional integrations, providers, channels, skill bundles, MCP surfaces, and service workflows route to plugins, ClawHub, or owner repos when current seams suffice. Keep core items for missing core/plugin APIs, bundled regressions, security/core hardening, or maintainer product decisions.

- Plugin APIs, provider routing, auth/session state, persisted preferences, config loading, migrations, setup, startup checks, and fallback behavior are compatibility/upgrade-sensitive. Treat config breaks, removed fallbacks, fail-closed changes, or new operator action as merge risk even with green CI.

- Plugin APIs, provider routing, auth/session state, persisted preferences, config loading, config/default additions, migrations, setup, startup checks, and fallback behavior are compatibility/upgrade-sensitive. Treat config breaks, new config/default surfaces, removed fallbacks, fail-closed changes, stricter validation, or new operator action as merge risk even with green CI when they can affect existing users, upgrades, provider/plugin behavior, or maintainer operations.

- For PRs that add, remove, or change config/default surfaces with possible compatibility, upgrade, provider/plugin, operator, setup, startup, or fallback impact, ClawSweeper review should emit a `reviewMetrics` entry when practical. The metric should name the count and direction of the changes, such as added, changed, or removed config/default surfaces, and explain why the metric matters before merge. When the metric indicates concrete merge risk, also surface the concern in `risks`, use `mergeRiskLabels` when the risk matches the label rubric, make `bestSolution` name the desired pre-merge state, and ensure `labelJustifications` explain the specific reason rather than restating the label.

- Review whole decision surfaces, not only the touched runtime, provider, channel, harness, plugin seam, or context path. Check sibling Codex/Pi-style runtimes, provider/model routing, channel delivery, gateway/protocol, plugin SDK, and context-management paths when relevant.

- One-sided fixes need sibling-surface proof, an explanation for why siblings are unaffected, or explicit follow-up work.

- User-facing `fix`, `feat`, and `perf` changes need `CHANGELOG.md` before landing; contributor PR authors are not blocked solely on maintainer-owned changelog work. Never request thanks for bot/forbidden handles: `@openclaw`, `@clawsweeper`, `@codex`, `@steipete`.