本文へ移動
cccskills
無料GitHub で公開

agent-decision-receipts

Mint a tamper-evident, post-quantum-signed receipt for a consequential agent action (deploy, delete, pay, grant-access, model decision) so it can be verified later from the certificate alone. Use when an autonomous agent takes a side-effecting action that may need to be proven later, or when satisfying EU AI Act Article 12 record-keeping. Three decisions: whether an action needs a receipt, minting it, verifying it. Signing is delegated to the open-source OpenAgentOntology package. Not after-the-fact log analysis; not a hosted notary; not a legal opinion.

インストール方法を見る

含まれるファイル(3)

  • SKILL.md7.8 KB
  • references/receipt-fields.md4.5 KB
  • scripts/build_action_manifest.py4.1 KB

SKILL.md(原文)

インストールする前に、エージェントに与えられる指示の中身を確認できます。

Agent Decision Receipts

Overview

A log says an action happened. A receipt is tamper-evident: it records who, what, and under which policy, and it is signed, so any later edit breaks the signature. This skill mints one for a consequential agent action and verifies it later from the certificate alone: no database, no network, no trusting the issuer.

The crypto is not in this skill. It is the open-source OpenAgentOntology receipt primitive (Apache-2.0), which signs every receipt with Ed25519 and the post-quantum legs ML-DSA-65 (FIPS 204) + SLH-DSA (FIPS 205) when the post-quantum backend is installed. This skill is the decision layer: when to mint, what to put in, how to verify. One install, no per-skill crypto.

Three decisions, nothing else:

  1. Does this action need a receipt? — side-effecting + consequential + later-provable = yes.
  2. Mint the receipt — build the action manifest, sign it with the OAO primitive.
  3. Verify it — recompute the hash, check each signature leg, from the cert alone.

This skill is NOT log analysis. Logs describe what happened and can be silently edited. A receipt is minted before/at execution and breaks if edited. Use logs for debugging; use receipts for evidence.

This skill is NOT a hosted notary. It mints a LOCAL, self-signed receipt anyone can verify offline. Cross-organization verification (one org proving to another) is a separate hosted service, out of scope here.

This skill is NOT a legal opinion. It produces evidence shaped to support FRE 902(13)/(14)-style certification and EU AI Act Article 12 record-keeping. Whether a given receipt is admitted is a question for counsel.

Quick Start

# Install the open-source receipt primitive (Apache-2.0). Add [pq] for the post-quantum legs.
pip install "openagentontology[pq]"

# 1. Build + validate an action manifest (stdlib only, no crypto, no network)
python scripts/build_action_manifest.py --agent my-deploy-agent --operation deploy \
    --target prod/api --policy "EU AI Act Art 12" --out action.json

# 2. Mint the receipt over it (Ed25519 + post-quantum legs)
python -c "import json,openagentontology.receipt as r; \
  print(json.dumps(r.mint_receipt(json.load(open('action.json')), decision='ACTION_GOVERNED')))" > receipt.json

# 3. Verify from the cert alone (no DB, no network)
python -c "import json,openagentontology.receipt as r; \
  print(r.verify_receipt(json.load(open('receipt.json'))))"
# -> {'ok': True, 'sig_ok': True, ... 'reason': 'verified from the cert alone via: ed25519, ml_dsa, slh_dsa'}

Dependency note. This skill delegates the signing to openagentontology (Apache-2.0, opt-in pip install). The script shipped here is stdlib-only and adds no repo dependency; the package is installed by the operator (BYO-library pattern). If it is not installed, the build step still works — only minting/verifying require it.

Core Workflow

The three decisions below are the skill: decide whether to receipt, mint, then verify.

Decision 1: Does this action need a receipt?

Mint a receipt when the action is all three of:

TestMint if...
Side-effectingit writes, sends, deploys, deletes, pays, grants access, or changes external state
Consequentiala wrong call costs money, breaks compliance, or harms a person
Later-provablesomeone (auditor, insurer, regulator, court, counterparty) may ask "what did the agent do and why?"

Read-only, reversible, trivial actions do not need a receipt. Receipt everything and the signal drowns; receipt nothing and the one call that mattered cannot be proven.

High-signal triggers (mint by default): deploy, delete, pay/wire/refund, grant_access, export/egress, approve/deny a claim, any model decision that affects a person under a high-risk AI system.

Decision 2: Mint the receipt

The action manifest is any ASCII-safe dict describing what the agent did. Four keys are required — build_action_manifest.py rejects the manifest (exit 2) if any is missing. Two more are added automatically:

KeyRequired?What it carries
agent_idrequiredthe acting agent
operationrequiredthe verb (deploy / delete / pay / decide / ...)
targetrequiredwhat it acted on
policyrequiredthe rule that governs it (e.g. "EU AI Act Art 12", "internal change-control")
inputs_hashauto-addeda hash of --inputs, so the full payload need not be stored in the clear (defaults to the hash of empty when --inputs is omitted)
decision_labelauto-addedthe receipt decision label (defaults to ACTION_GOVERNED)

mint_receipt(manifest, decision=...) hashes the full manifest into the receipt evidence, signs the canonical body, and returns a receipt that carries: evidence_hash, signature_b64 (Ed25519), and — when [pq] is installed — ml_dsa_signature_b64 + slh_dsa_signature_b64. Each leg signs the same bytes; any one verifying proves authenticity.

See references/receipt-fields.md for the full receipt schema and the post-quantum rationale.

Decision 3: Verify it

verify_receipt(receipt) recomputes sha256(canonical(evidence)), compares it to evidence_hash, then checks every signature leg it has a backend for. It returns {ok, hash_ok, sig_ok, legs, reason}. A single edited byte anywhere in the action breaks hash_ok; a forged signature breaks the leg. Verification needs only the receipt — no call back to the issuer.

This is the property that makes it evidence: a reviewer who distrusts the issuer can still confirm the receipt is intact and authentic, entirely offline.

Anti-Patterns

  • Receipt the log, not the decision. Minting a receipt over a log line written after the fact proves nothing. Mint at the point of action, over the action.
  • Storing the signing key next to the receipts. If the key is compromised, signatures mean nothing. Treat the key like any signing secret; never commit it.
  • Ed25519-only when the post-quantum legs are available. A receipt is long-lived evidence. Sign it once with the post-quantum legs (ML-DSA-65 + SLH-DSA) so it stays verifiable if a future quantum computer could break Ed25519. Install [pq].
  • Putting raw secrets or PII in the manifest. The manifest is hashed into evidence and is recoverable from the receipt. Carry hashes (inputs_hash), not the cleartext.
  • Calling it "admissible." It is evidence shaped to support FRE 902(13)/(14)-style certification. Admissibility is a court's decision, not the tool's claim.
  • Faking a signature when crypto is missing. The primitive emits an explicit unsigned flag instead. Never present an unsigned receipt as signed.

Cross-References

  • ra-qm-team/skills/eu-ai-act-specialist/ — decide the AI system's risk tier and Article 12 obligations; this skill mints the per-action record those obligations require.
  • ra-qm-team/skills/iso42001-specialist/ — the AI management-system controls; receipts are the per-decision evidence those controls call for.
  • OpenAgentOntology (Apache-2.0): the open receipt primitive this skill drives — pip install "openagentontology[pq]".

レビュー

まだレビューはありません。使ってみた感想をお寄せください。

同じリポジトリのスキル

概要と使いどころ

Accessibility audit skill for scanning, fixing, and verifying WCAG 2.2 Level A and AA compliance across React, Next.js, Vue, Angular, Svelte, and plain HTML codebases. Use when auditing accessibility, fixing a11y violations, checking color contrast, generating compliance reports, or integrating accessibility checks into CI/CD pipelines.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

alirezarezvani/claude-skills2.8万2026年8月30日 更新

When the user wants to plan, design, or implement an A/B test or experiment. Also use when the user mentions "A/B test," "split test," "experiment," "test this change," "variant copy," "multivariate test," "hypothesis," "conversion experiment," "statistical significance," or "test this." For tracking implementation, see analytics-tracking.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

alirezarezvani/claude-skills2.8万2026年8月30日 更新

When the user needs to generate, iterate, or scale ad creative for paid advertising. Use when they say 'write ad copy,' 'generate headlines,' 'create ad variations,' 'bulk creative,' 'iterate on ads,' 'ad copy validation,' 'RSA headlines,' 'Meta ad copy,' 'LinkedIn ad,' or 'creative testing.' This is pure creative production — distinct from paid-ads (campaign strategy). Use ad-creative when you need the copy, not the campaign plan.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

alirezarezvani/claude-skills2.8万2026年8月30日 更新

Adversarial code review that breaks the self-review monoculture. Use when you want a genuinely critical review of recent changes, before merging a PR, or when you suspect Claude is being too agreeable about code quality. Forces perspective shifts through hostile reviewer personas that catch blind spots the author's mental model shares with the reviewer.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

alirezarezvani/claude-skills2.8万2026年8月30日 更新

aeo

無料

Answer Engine Optimization (AEO) skill — optimize content to be cited by AI language models (ChatGPT, Perplexity, Claude, Gemini, Mistral) as authoritative sources. Distinct from SEO — AEO optimizes for citation in LLM-generated responses, not search rankings. Use when planning content for AI-first search audiences, auditing existing content for E-E-A-T signals, tracking which pages get cited by which LLMs, or building a citation-friendly content strategy. Triggers — 'AEO audit', 'optimize for ChatGPT', 'get cited by Perplexity', 'LLM citation strategy', 'answer engine optimization', 'content for AI search', 'E-E-A-T audit'. Output is a markdown audit report (default) or JSON for pipeline integration. Stdlib-only Python tools.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

alirezarezvani/claude-skills2.8万2026年8月30日 更新

Use when the user asks to design a multi-agent system, pick an orchestration pattern (supervisor/swarm/pipeline), generate tool schemas for agents, or evaluate agent execution logs for cost, latency, and failure bottlenecks. Examples: 'design an agent architecture for research automation', 'generate Anthropic tool schemas from these tool descriptions', 'analyze these agent run logs for bottlenecks'. NOT for Claude Code workflow files (use workflow-builder) or single-agent prompt design (use agent-workflow-designer).

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

alirezarezvani/claude-skills2.8万2026年8月30日 更新

alirezarezvani のスキルをすべて見る

このスキルの問題を報告する