Token导航 LogoToken导航

Agent Skill · 研究检索

hitl-protocol(命中协议)

hitl-protocol 用于查找、检索和筛选相关信息,适合在 OpenClaw 中需要根据关键词、任务场景或来源线索快速定位候选结果时使用。可结合来源仓库、安装命令和原始 README 继续核验具体用法。安装前建议确认权限范围、维护状态,以及是否会触发联网、命令执行或文件读写。

hitl-protocol 是研究检索类 Agent Skill,可用宿主为 OpenClaw,通过ClawHub获取,权限为接触敏感数据;许可证为 MIT-0,第三方扫描已通过,按安装量在研究检索类的 73,675 个 Skill 里排第 7,796。

总安装 18,021周安装 722GitHub Stars 2下载 5,834核验 2026-05-01

安装说明

本站只整理中文说明,不托管安装包,也不代用户安装。
GitHub
许可证
MIT-0
版本
0.7.2

安装方式

通过对话安装

复制提示词发给支持本地命令或 Skills 的 AI 助手,先确认命令和权限,再让它执行。

请帮我安装这个 Agent Skill:hitl-protocol(命中协议)
来源仓库:https://github.com/rotorstar/hitl-protocol
安装命令:
openclaw skills install hitl-protocol
安装前请先检查当前环境是否支持对应 CLI,并向我确认将要执行的命令、安装目录、联网范围和文件读写权限;确认后再执行。

命令行安装

复制命令到本机终端执行。该命令会通过 OpenClaw 从第三方来源获取 Skill;本站只展示命令,不托管安装包,也不自动执行。

ClawHubOpenClaw
openclaw skills install hitl-protocol

这个 Skill 是做什么的

研究检索类 Skill 主要解决「找资料、核对事实、把来源整理清楚」的问题,通常会让助手先检索再总结。

定义人机协作工作流程的标准接口,返回 HTTP 202 等待人工输入。适用于需要人类判断的关键决策节点自动化流程。支持版本控制与修订追踪,提升协作透明度。实现细节依具体系统而定,建议测试兼容性后再集成。涉及敏感操作时应强制跳转人工审核环节。

hitl-protocol 属于研究检索类 Skill,可作为该场景下的辅助能力补充。

上手步骤

4 步
  1. 1

    确认自己的宿主工具

    公开资料标注支持 OpenClaw;先确认自己用的是其中之一,再按对应工具的 Skills 目录放置。

  2. 2

    拿到安装命令

    可以直接复制的命令是 openclaw skills install hitl-protocol;命令里的占位符换成自己的路径或密钥再执行。

  3. 3

    安装后重启宿主

    命令执行完要完全退出宿主工具再打开,让新装的 Skill 被重新扫描到,否则列表里可能看不到。

  4. 4

    按最小权限试用

    它需要接触敏感数据,先在测试目录或测试账号里跑,确认没问题再放到正式项目。

常见问题

6 条

hitl-protocol 怎么安装?

在终端执行 openclaw skills install hitl-protocol。装完完全退出宿主工具再打开,让它重新扫描本地 Skill。

hitl-protocol 支持哪些 AI 工具?

公开资料标注支持 OpenClaw。其他工具只要能读取本地 Skill 目录,一般也能手动放进去,但要自己确认触发方式是否一致。

hitl-protocol 需要什么权限?

权限级别是接触敏感数据。该 Skill 可能接触密钥、Token、环境变量或敏感配置,应进入高风险复核队列,默认不自动发布。

hitl-protocol 是免费的吗?

来源标注的许可证是 MIT-0。本站不代收任何费用,也不托管安装包;能否商用、要不要署名,以许可证原文为准。

hitl-protocol 用的人多吗?

公开数据是累计安装 18,021 次,近一周安装 722 次,下载 5,834 次,GitHub 2 星。这些数字来自第三方目录统计,只能当作热度参考,不代表质量或安全性。

hitl-protocol 安全吗?

第三方扫描结果为通过,但这只覆盖已知的静态检查项,不能替代自己读一遍源码和安装命令。

值得选的地方和要先想清楚的地方

值得选的地方

  • 专注 OpenClaw 一种宿主,触发方式和使用习惯不用来回切换。
  • 许可证明确为 MIT-0,商用和分发边界好判断。
  • 第三方扫描已通过,常见的高风险行为没有命中。

先想清楚的地方

  • 需要接触敏感数据,装到常用环境前要先评估影响面。
  • 第三方目录整理,版本更新和行为细节以来源仓库为准。

适不适合你

更适合

  • 已经在用 OpenClaw,想直接扩展它能力的人。
  • 需要处理研究检索类任务、又不想每次都手写提示词的人。
  • 需要许可证清楚、并且有第三方扫描结果的团队项目。

不太适合

  • 环境里有大量密钥、凭证,不方便给第三方 Skill 读取的人。
  • 需要厂商级技术支持和 SLA 的生产系统。

研究检索类 Skill 对比

6 个同类
Skill总安装GitHub 星权限许可证扫描
find-skills

寻找技能 · Codex、Claude

31,199,81316,486操作浏览器MIT有提醒
self-improving-agent

自我改进 Agent · OpenClaw

16,464,0023,396接触敏感数据MIT-0通过
soultrace

灵魂追踪 · Codex、Claude

7,588,94412需要联网未明确有提醒
self-improving

自我完善 · OpenClaw

6,829,2841,046需要联网MIT-0通过
microsoft-foundry

微软代工厂 · Codex、Claude

6,614,144764调用外部服务未明确有提醒
hitl-protocol

命中协议 · 本页

18,0212接触敏感数据MIT-0通过

按安装量取同分类前几名;数字来自第三方目录统计,只作热度参考,不代表质量结论。

SKILL.md 原文

name
hitl-protocol
description
HITL Protocol — the open standard for human decisions in autonomous agent workflows. When a website or API needs human input, it returns HTTP 202 with a review URL. Autonomous agents like OpenClaw, Claude, Codex, or Goose forward the URL, poll for the structured result, and continue. Use this skill to make any website agent-ready, or to handle human-in-the-loop responses in your agent. Covers approval, selection, input forms, confirmation, and escalation review types. Supports polling, SSE, webhook transports, channel-native inline buttons (Telegram, Slack, Discord, WhatsApp, Teams), opaque token security, multi-step form wizards, and multi-round edit cycles.
license
Apache-2.0
compatibility
metadata
version
0.7
spec_url
https://github.com/rotorstar/hitl-protocol/blob/main/spec/v0.7/hitl-protocol.md
hitl
supported
true
types
[approval, selection, input, confirmation, escalation]
info
Teaches the HITL Protocol itself — for building HITL services and HITL-aware agents.

HITL Protocol

AI agents increasingly visit websites and services on behalf of their users: searching, booking, applying, purchasing. But some decisions are too important to leave to an agent alone — an agent can hallucinate, misinterpret, or make the wrong call at a critical moment — cancel the wrong insurance policy, book a non-refundable trip to the wrong city, wire money to the wrong account. HITL Protocol ("Human in the Loop") is an open standard that ensures humans stay in control of these moments. The user stays in their favorite messenger — Telegram, WhatsApp, Slack — and either taps a decision button right there or follows a link to a web page with a comfortable UI: cards, forms, buttons. No wall of text. No blind agent decisions. When you encounter a HITL response, tell your user that a decision is needed that should not be made by an agent alone — forward the prompt and make it easy to act: show the review link or render action buttons.

HITL Protocol is to human decisions what OAuth is to authentication — an open standard connecting Services, Agents, and Humans. When a service needs human input, it returns HTTP 202 with a review URL. The agent forwards the URL to the human. The human opens it in a browser, gets a rich UI, and makes an informed decision. The agent polls for the structured result and continues.

For simple decisions (confirm/cancel, approve/reject), agents can render native messaging buttons directly in Telegram, Slack, Discord, WhatsApp, or Teams — no browser needed. The service opts in via submit_url.

No SDK required. No UI framework mandated. Just HTTP + URL + polling.

Interactive Playground — try all review types, transports, and inline actions live in your browser.

Who Are You?

Your roleYou want to...Read
Service/website builderAdd HITL endpoints to your API so agents can request human inputService Integration Guide
Agent developerHandle HTTP 202 + HITL responses from servicesAgent Integration Guide
Both / LearningUnderstand the full protocolContinue reading below

The Flow

Standard flow (all review types):
1. Human → Agent:    "Find me jobs in Berlin"
2. Agent → Service:  POST /api/search {query: "Senior Dev Berlin"}
3. Service → Agent:  HTTP 202 + hitl object (review_url, poll_url, type, prompt)
4. Agent → Human:    "Found 5 jobs. Review here: {review_url}"
5. Human → Browser:  Opens review_url → rich UI (cards, forms, buttons)
6. Human → Service:  Makes selection, clicks Submit
7. Agent → Service:  GET {poll_url} → {status: "completed", result: {action, data}}
8. Agent → Human:    "Applied to 2 selected jobs."

Inline flow (v0.7 — simple decisions only, when submit_url present):
1. Human → Agent:    "Send my application emails"
2. Agent → Service:  POST /api/send {emails: [...]}
3. Service → Agent:  HTTP 202 + hitl object (incl. submit_url, submit_token, inline_actions)
4. Agent → Human:    Native buttons in chat: [Confirm] [Cancel] [Details →]
5. Human → Agent:    Taps [Confirm] in chat
6. Agent → Service:  POST {submit_url} {action: "confirm", submitted_via: "telegram"}
7. Service → Agent:  200 OK {status: "completed"}
8. Agent → Human:    Updates message: "Confirmed — 3 emails sent."

The agent never renders UI. The service hosts the review page. Sensitive data stays in the browser — never passes through the agent. The inline flow is an optional shortcut for simple decisions.

Feature Matrix

FeatureDetails
Review typesapproval, selection, input, confirmation, escalation
Form field typestext, textarea, number, date, email, url, boolean, select, multiselect, range, custom x-*
TransportPolling (required), SSE (optional), Callback/Webhook (optional)
Inline submitsubmit_url + native messaging buttons (Telegram, Slack, Discord, WhatsApp, Teams) — service opt-in
Statespending → opened → in_progress → completed / expired / cancelled
SecurityOpaque tokens (43 chars, base64url, 256-bit entropy), SHA-256 hash storage, timing-safe comparison, HTTPS only
Multi-roundprevious_case_id / next_case_id for iterative edit cycles (Approval type)
FormsSingle-step fields, multi-step wizard, conditional visibility, validation rules, progress tracking
TimeoutsISO 8601 duration, default_action: skip / approve / reject / abort
Discovery.well-known/hitl.json, SKILL.md metadata.hitl extension
Remindersreminder_at timestamps, review.reminder SSE event
Rate limiting60 requests/min per case on poll endpoint, Retry-After header

Five Review Types

TypeActionsMulti-roundForm fieldsUse case
Approvalapprove, edit, rejectYesNoArtifact review (CV, email, deployment plan)
SelectionselectNoNoChoose from options (job listings, targets)
InputsubmitNoYesStructured data entry (salary, dates, preferences)
Confirmationconfirm, cancelNoNoIrreversible action gate (send emails, deploy)
Escalationretry, skip, abortNoNoError recovery (deployment failed, API error)

HITL Object (HTTP 202 Response Body)

When a service needs human input, it returns HTTP 202 with this structure:

{
  "status": "human_input_required",
  "message": "5 matching jobs found. Please select which ones to apply for.",
  "hitl": {
    "spec_version": "0.7",
    "case_id": "review_abc123",
    "review_url": "https://service.example.com/review/abc123?token=K7xR2mN4pQ...",
    "poll_url": "https://api.service.example.com/v1/reviews/abc123/status",
    "type": "selection",
    "prompt": "Select which jobs to apply for",
    "timeout": "24h",
    "default_action": "skip",
    "created_at": "2026-02-22T10:00:00Z",
    "expires_at": "2026-02-23T10:00:00Z",
    "context": {
      "total_options": 5,
      "query": "Senior Dev Berlin"
    }
  }
}

Required Fields

FieldTypeDescription
spec_version"0.7"Protocol version
case_idstringUnique, URL-safe identifier (pattern: review_{random})
review_urlURLHTTPS URL to review page with opaque bearer token
poll_urlURLStatus polling endpoint
typeenumapproval / selection / input / confirmation / escalation / x-*
promptstringWhat the human needs to decide (max 500 chars)
created_atdatetimeISO 8601 creation timestamp
expires_atdatetimeISO 8601 expiration timestamp

Optional Fields

FieldTypeDescription
timeoutdurationHow long the review stays open (24h, PT24H, P7D)
default_actionenumskip / approve / reject / abort — action on expiry
callback_urlURL / nullEchoed callback URL if agent provided one
events_urlURLSSE endpoint for real-time status events
contextobjectArbitrary data for the review page (not processed by agent)
reminder_atdatetime / datetime[]When to re-send the review URL
previous_case_idstringLinks to prior case in multi-round chain
surfaceobjectUI format declaration (format, version)
submit_urlURLAgent-submit endpoint for channel-native inline buttons (v0.7)
submit_tokenstringBearer token for submit_url authentication (required if submit_url set)
inline_actionsstring[]Actions permitted via submit_url (e.g. ["confirm", "cancel"]). If absent, all actions for the type are allowed.

Poll Response (Completed)

{
  "status": "completed",
  "case_id": "review_abc123",
  "completed_at": "2026-02-22T10:15:00Z",
  "result": {
    "action": "select",
    "data": {
      "selected_jobs": ["job-123", "job-456"],
      "note": "Only remote positions"
    }
  }
}

The result object is present only when status is "completed". It always contains action (string) and data (object with type-dependent content).

Poll Response Statuses

StatusTerminalDescriptionKey fields
pendingNoCase created, human hasn't opened URLexpires_at
openedNoHuman opened the review URLopened_at
in_progressNoHuman is interacting with the formprogress (optional)
completedYesHuman submitted responseresult, completed_at, responded_by
expiredYesTimeout reachedexpired_at, default_action
cancelledYesHuman clicked cancelcancelled_at, reason

State Machine

            +---------------------------------------------+
            |                                             v
[created] -> pending -> opened -> in_progress -> completed [terminal]
               |         |          |
               |         |          +---------> cancelled  [terminal]
               |         |
               |         +--> completed     [terminal]
               |         +--> expired       [terminal]
               |         +--> cancelled     [terminal]
               |
               +----------> expired          [terminal]
               +----------> cancelled        [terminal]

Terminal states (completed, expired, cancelled) are immutable — no further transitions.

For Services: Quick Start

Return HTTP 202 when human input is needed:

// Express / Hono / any HTTP framework
app.post('/api/search', async (req, res) => {
  const results = await searchJobs(req.body.query);

  // Create review case with opaque token
  const caseId = `review_${crypto.randomBytes(16).toString('hex')}`;
  const token = crypto.randomBytes(32).toString('base64url'); // 43 chars
  const tokenHash = crypto.createHash('sha256').update(token).digest('hex');

  store.set(caseId, {
    status: 'pending',
    tokenHash,
    results,
    created_at: new Date().toISOString(),
    expires_at: new Date(Date.now() + 86400000).toISOString(),
  });

  res.status(202).json({
    status: 'human_input_required',
    message: `${results.length} jobs found. Please select which ones to apply for.`,
    hitl: {
      spec_version: '0.6',
      case_id: caseId,
      review_url: `https://yourservice.com/review/${caseId}?token=${token}`,
      poll_url: `https://api.yourservice.com/v1/reviews/${caseId}/status`,
      type: 'selection',
      prompt: 'Select which jobs to apply for',
      timeout: '24h',
      default_action: 'skip',
      created_at: store.get(caseId).created_at,
      expires_at: store.get(caseId).expires_at,
    },
  });
});

You also need: a review page (any web framework), a poll endpoint (GET /reviews/:caseId/status), and a response endpoint (POST /reviews/:caseId/respond). See Service Integration Guide for full details.

For Agents: Quick Start

Handle HTTP 202 responses — ~15 lines:

import time, httpx

response = httpx.post("https://api.jobboard.com/search", json=query)

if response.status_code == 202:
    hitl = response.json()["hitl"]

    # v0.7: Check for inline submit support
    if "submit_url" in hitl and "submit_token" in hitl:
        # Render native buttons in messaging platform (e.g. Telegram, Slack)
        send_inline_buttons(hitl["prompt"], hitl["inline_actions"], hitl["review_url"])
        # When human taps button → POST to submit_url (see Agent Integration Guide)
    else:
        # Standard flow: forward URL to human
        send_to_user(f"{hitl['prompt']}\
{hitl['review_url']}")

    # Poll for result (standard flow or fallback)
    while True:
        time.sleep(30)
        poll = httpx.get(hitl["poll_url"], headers=auth).json()

        if poll["status"] == "completed":
            result = poll["result"]  # {action: "select", data: {...}}
            break
        if poll["status"] in ("expired", "cancelled"):
            break

No SDK. No UI rendering. Just HTTP + URL forwarding + polling. See Agent Integration Guide for inline submit, SSE, callbacks, multi-round, and edge cases.

Three Transport Modes

TransportAgent needs public endpoint?Real-time?Complexity
Polling (default)NoNoMinimal
SSE (optional)NoYesLow
Callback (optional)YesYesMedium

Polling is the baseline — every HITL-compliant service MUST support it. SSE and callbacks are optional enhancements.

Channel-Native Inline Actions (v0.7)

For simple decisions, agents can render native messaging buttons instead of sending a URL. The human taps a button directly in the chat — no browser switch needed.

How it works: The service includes submit_url + submit_token in the HITL object. The agent detects these fields and renders platform-native buttons. When the human taps a button, the agent POSTs the action to submit_url. The messaging platform is passive — it renders whatever the agent sends. No messenger auto-detects HITL support.

When to use inline buttons:

Review typeInline possible?Reason
ConfirmationYes2 buttons: Confirm / Cancel
EscalationYes3 buttons: Retry / Skip / Abort
Approval (simple)Yes2 buttons: Approve / Reject (without edit)
Approval (with edit)URL onlyEdit requires rich UI
SelectionURL onlyNeeds list/cards UI
InputURL onlyNeeds form fields

Always include a URL fallback button (e.g. "Details →") linking to review_url — the human can always switch to the full review page.

Platform requirements: The agent must be a platform bot (Telegram Bot via BotFather, Slack App, Discord Bot, WhatsApp Business API, Teams Bot) to send native buttons. See Agent Integration Guide for platform-specific rendering patterns.

Non-Goals

  • Does NOT render review UI — the service hosts and renders the review page. The agent is a messenger.
  • Does NOT define the review page framework — any web technology works (React, plain HTML, etc.).
  • Does NOT replace OAuth — HITL is for decisions, not authentication.
  • Does NOT submit on behalf of the human — unless the human explicitly triggers an inline action button in a messaging platform (v0.7 submit_url).

SKILL.md Extension for Services

Services that use HITL can declare support in their own SKILL.md frontmatter:

metadata:
  hitl:
    supported: true
    types: [selection, confirmation]
    supports_inline_submit: true
    review_base_url: "https://yourservice.com/review"
    timeout_default: "24h"
    info: "May ask user to select preferred jobs or confirm applications."

See spec Section 12 for the full field reference.

Best Practice: Enforce HITL Choice

Problem: Agents tend to take the efficient path and silently skip HITL — defaulting to no human review. Even though the protocol says agents MUST NOT ignore HTTP 202, nothing prevents an agent from never sending requests that trigger HITL in the first place.

Solution: Force agents to make an explicit choice per request. Add prefer_hitl and skip_hitl flags to your API and reject requests that provide neither.

Declare this in your SKILL.md:

metadata:
  hitl:
    supported: true
    hitl_required: true
    types: [selection, confirmation]
    info: "HITL is required. You MUST send prefer_hitl: true or skip_hitl: true."

Add an Agent Guidelines section to your SKILL.md body:

## Agent Guidelines

HITL is required for this service. Every request MUST include exactly one of:

| Parameter | Type | Effect |
|-----------|------|--------|
| `prefer_hitl` | boolean | `true` → human reviews via HITL (HTTP 202) |
| `skip_hitl` | boolean | `true` → direct execution, no human review (HTTP 201) |

You MUST choose one. Omitting both returns 400 `HITL_CHOICE_REQUIRED`.
Sending both returns 400 validation error.

### Example: With HITL

POST /api/search
{"query": "Senior Dev Berlin", "prefer_hitl": true}

→ 202 + hitl object (human reviews results)

### Example: Without HITL

POST /api/search
{"query": "Senior Dev Berlin", "skip_hitl": true}

→ 201 {"results": [...], "hitl_skipped": true}

### Example: Missing choice

POST /api/search
{"query": "Senior Dev Berlin"}

→ 400 {"error": "HITL_CHOICE_REQUIRED", "message": "You must send prefer_hitl or skip_hitl."}

See Service Integration Guide — Enforcing HITL Choice for validation gate implementation.

Optional: Quality Improvement Signal

Services can include improvement_suggestions in successful (non-202) responses to give agents structured feedback they can act on — without requiring a new HITL flow.

Declare support in your SKILL.md:

metadata:
  hitl:
    supported: true
    supports_improvement_suggestions: true
    info: "Returns improvement_suggestions in 201 responses. Agents may offer up to 2 improvement cycles."

Suggestion object schema:

FieldTypeDescription
fieldstringWhich data field can be improved
issuestringWhat is missing or suboptimal
agent_actionstringExact question/action for the agent to take
impactstringHuman-readable benefit (e.g. "+25 quality points")
priority"high" / "medium" / "low"Order of importance

Agent behavior:

  • Always share the primary result first
  • Offer up to 2 improvement cycles — one question per suggestion, re-submit with enriched data
  • Stop when improvement_suggestions is empty or maxAttempts reached
  • Never loop indefinitely

See Agent Checklist — Quality Improvement Loop and Example 13.

RFC Alignment

This protocol and skill documentation are aligned with these core RFCs:

  • RFC 9110 — HTTP semantics (202 Accepted, conditional requests, retry behavior)
  • RFC 2119 + RFC 8174 — normative terms (MUST, SHOULD, MAY)
  • RFC 3339 — timestamp formats used by HITL case lifecycle fields
  • RFC 6750 — bearer token usage for review and inline submit authorization

For the complete implementation matrix, see README RFC Alignment.

Resources

平台分布

OpenClaw

70.3%
按下载量换算4,101

安全审计

VirusTotal

通过

ClawScan

通过

Static analysis

未展示

权限和风险

接触敏感数据

该 Skill 可能接触密钥、Token、环境变量或敏感配置,应进入高风险复核队列,默认不自动发布。

安装前确认

本站仅展示第三方公开信息,不托管安装包,不提供自动安装或运行环境。安装前应自行审查源码、依赖和命令行为。目前只有一个公开来源,建议同时核对源仓库。

继续浏览同类 Skills