Best possible solution:

Merge after openclaw/clawhub#3024 is deployed and a redacted real install proves owner-qualified telemetry is accepted without affecting the local install flow.

Do we have a high-confidence way to reproduce the issue?

Yes. Source inspection of current main shows install telemetry is built from the legacy lockfile snapshot and omits ownerHandle, while the PR's E2E path exercises an owner-qualified install and inspects the posted body.

Is this the best way to solve the issue?

Yes for code direction. Sending one canonical install event from the existing parsed owner-qualified install path is narrower than reporting the whole lockfile, but the merge should wait for backend schema deployment and real behavior proof.

AGENTS.md: found and applied where relevant.

Codex review notes: model internal, reasoning high; reviewed against f77c2aafa095.

Label changes:

• add P2: This is a focused telemetry correctness fix for ClawHub skill installs with limited user-facing blast radius because install failures from telemetry remain best-effort.
• add merge-risk: 🚨 other: Merging can create a cross-repo deployment-order gap where the OpenClaw client emits a telemetry payload that the currently deployed ClawHub backend may not accept.
• add rating: 🦪 silver shellfish: Overall readiness is 🦪 silver shellfish; proof is 🦪 silver shellfish and patch quality is 🐚 platinum hermit.
• add status: 📣 needs proof: The PR needs real behavior proof before ClawSweeper can clear the contributor ask. Needs real behavior proof before merge: The PR body provides Vitest, lint, formatter, and autoreview commands, but no redacted live output, logs, recording, or artifact from a real ClawHub/OpenClaw install showing the new telemetry accepted; the contributor should add proof and redact private data before merge. After adding proof, update the PR body; ClawSweeper should re-review automatically. If it does not, the PR author or someone with repository write access can comment @clawsweeper re-review.

Label justifications:

• P2: This is a focused telemetry correctness fix for ClawHub skill installs with limited user-facing blast radius because install failures from telemetry remain best-effort.
• merge-risk: 🚨 other: Merging can create a cross-repo deployment-order gap where the OpenClaw client emits a telemetry payload that the currently deployed ClawHub backend may not accept.
• rating: 🦪 silver shellfish: Overall readiness is 🦪 silver shellfish; proof is 🦪 silver shellfish and patch quality is 🐚 platinum hermit.
• status: 📣 needs proof: The PR needs real behavior proof before ClawSweeper can clear the contributor ask. Needs real behavior proof before merge: The PR body provides Vitest, lint, formatter, and autoreview commands, but no redacted live output, logs, recording, or artifact from a real ClawHub/OpenClaw install showing the new telemetry accepted; the contributor should add proof and redact private data before merge. After adding proof, update the PR body; ClawSweeper should re-review automatically. If it does not, the PR author or someone with repository write access can comment @clawsweeper re-review.

PR surface:

Source -36, Tests -6. Total -42 across 4 files.

What I checked:

• Repository policy read: Root AGENTS.md was read fully; its read-beyond-diff, proof, protected-label, and merge-risk guidance affected this PR review. (AGENTS.md:1, f77c2aafa095)
• Current main telemetry payload: Current main reportClawHubSkillInstallTelemetry accepts root plus skills and posts a legacy roots payload to /api/cli/telemetry/install, with no ownerHandle field. (src/infra/clawhub.ts:1619, f77c2aafa095)
• Current main caller drops owner identity: Current main builds telemetry from the whole lockfile and passes root plus buildInstallTelemetrySkills(lock.skills), whose helper omits ownerHandle even when the lock entry has one. (src/skills/lifecycle/clawhub.ts:469, f77c2aafa095)
• PR telemetry payload: At the PR head, reportClawHubSkillInstallTelemetry trims a single slug and posts event, slug, optional ownerHandle, and version while retaining best-effort disable/token behavior. (src/infra/clawhub.ts:1615, ca74cea22301)
• PR caller passes parsed owner: At the PR head, performClawHubSkillInstall sends the parsed params.ownerHandle with the installed slug and resolved version after the lockfile write succeeds. (src/skills/lifecycle/clawhub.ts:1494, ca74cea22301)
• PR regression coverage: The PR updates the CLI E2E install test to install @demo-owner/aiq-deploy and assert the posted telemetry body contains event, slug, ownerHandle, and commit version. (src/cli/skills-cli.clawhub-install.e2e.test.ts:111, ca74cea22301)

Likely related people:

• quangtran88: git blame shows the current ClawHub install telemetry helper, whole-lock telemetry builder, and caller came from the landed current-main commit for fix(voice-call): preserve per-call agent routing #77763. (role: introduced current behavior; confidence: high; commits: 19f7b72a7473; files: src/infra/clawhub.ts, src/skills/lifecycle/clawhub.ts, src/skills/lifecycle/clawhub.test.ts)
• steipete: Live PR metadata for fix(voice-call): preserve per-call agent routing #77763 shows steipete merged the landed commit that introduced this ClawHub skill install surface, and local history shows recent ClawHub infra/lifecycle refactors by the same person. (role: merger and recent area contributor; confidence: medium; commits: 19f7b72a7473, 85ed1a89860d, 5696e24c3fba; files: src/infra/clawhub.ts, src/skills/lifecycle/clawhub.ts)

• 🦀 challenger crab: rare, exceptional readiness with strong proof, clean implementation, and convincing validation.
• 🦞 diamond lobster: very strong readiness with only minor maintainer review expected.
• 🐚 platinum hermit: good normal PR, likely mergeable with ordinary maintainer review.
• 🦐 gold shrimp: useful signal, but proof or patch confidence is still limited.
• 🦪 silver shellfish: thin signal; proof, validation, or implementation needs work.
• 🧂 unranked krab: not merge-ready because proof is missing/unusable or there are serious correctness or safety concerns.
• 🌊 off-meta tidepool: rating does not apply to this item.

Shiny media proof means a screenshot, video, or linked artifact directly shows the changed behavior. Runtime, network, CSP, and security claims still need visible diagnostics.

• ClawSweeper keeps one durable marker-backed review comment per issue or PR.
• Re-runs edit this comment so the latest verdict, findings, and automation markers stay together instead of adding duplicate bot comments.
• A fresh review can be triggered by eligible @clawsweeper re-review comments, exact-item GitHub events, scheduled/background review runs, or manual workflow dispatch.
• PR/issue authors and users with repository write access can comment @clawsweeper re-review or @clawsweeper re-run on an open PR or issue to request a fresh review only.
• Maintainers can also comment @clawsweeper review to request a fresh review only.
• Fresh-review commands do not start repair, autofix, rebase, CI repair, or automerge.
• Maintainer-only repair and merge flows require explicit commands such as @clawsweeper autofix, @clawsweeper automerge, @clawsweeper fix ci, or @clawsweeper address review.
• Maintainers can comment @clawsweeper explain to ask for more context, or @clawsweeper stop to stop active automation.