Worldcoin
Filter human-critical workflows using proof-of-human logic. Designed for identity-sensitive commercial decisions, anti-bot gating, and “real human required”...
Description
name: Worldcoin description: > Filter human-critical workflows using proof-of-human logic. Designed for identity-sensitive commercial decisions, anti-bot gating, and “real human required” checkpoints across proposals, leads, and approvals. version: 1.0.0
Worldcoin
In an AI-saturated world, not every click deserves your trust.
Worldcoin is a human-verification decision skill for workflows where “real human required” matters.
This skill is inspired by proof-of-humanity logic: not every action should be treated as equally trustworthy, and not every response should be assumed to come from a real, decision-capable person.
Use this skill when you need to:
- decide whether a workflow step should require stronger human verification
- separate bot-risk from human-trust actions
- add “human checkpoint” logic to lead, proposal, approval, or access flows
- determine which actions should only happen after stronger identity confidence
- reduce spam, fake engagement, or synthetic participation in sensitive workflows
This skill does NOT:
- perform biometric verification
- connect to World ID, Orb, World App, or any external identity API
- replace legal identity checks, KYC, AML, or compliance review
- certify that a person is verified on any external network
What This Skill Does
Worldcoin helps:
- identify where proof-of-human logic is useful
- classify workflow steps by human-trust sensitivity
- determine where anonymous access is acceptable vs where stronger verification is needed
- reduce approval, lead, or offer workflows being distorted by bots or fake actors
- design “human required” checkpoints for digital systems
Best Use Cases
- filtering fake or low-trust inbound lead submissions
- deciding which proposal approvals should require stronger human confirmation
- gating voting, claiming, or reward flows
- anti-bot logic for creator or platform campaigns
- deciding where proof-of-human is commercially worth the friction
- designing trust layers for identity-sensitive products
What to Provide
Useful input includes:
- the workflow being protected
- what action the user wants to secure
- what the main abuse risk is
- whether the risk is bots, duplicate identities, fake leads, or low-trust engagement
- what level of friction is acceptable
- what commercial or operational downside exists if fake actors get through
Standard Output Format
WORLDCOIN ASSESSMENT ━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━ Workflow: [What is being protected] Main Risk: [Bot / fake human / duplicate / low-trust action]
HUMAN-TRUST SENSITIVITY ━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━ Level: [Low / Medium / High / Critical]
WHY IT MATTERS ━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
- [Why stronger human verification may matter here]
- [What happens if fake actors get through]
- [What business or trust damage follows]
VERIFICATION THRESHOLD ━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━ Recommended level:
- [Open access]
- [Soft human check]
- [Strong human-required gate]
- [Escalate to formal identity / compliance process]
TRADEOFFS ━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━ ⚠️ [Added friction] ⚠️ [Drop in conversion] ⚠️ [False negatives / accessibility concern] ⚠️ [Operational complexity]
RECOMMENDED NEXT STEP ━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
- [What checkpoint or policy to add next]
Human Verification Principles
- not every workflow needs maximum identity friction
- stronger proof should be used where fake participation meaningfully distorts outcomes
- friction should match risk
- proof-of-human logic is different from legal identity logic
- commercial trust decisions should separate low-stakes participation from high-stakes approval
- never claim certainty where only probability exists
Human Proxy Lens
Think of this skill as a human proxy filter.
Its job is not to verify people directly.
Its job is to answer:
- Where does this workflow break if non-human or duplicate actors get through?
- Where is “good enough” trust sufficient?
- Where is stronger proof of humanness worth the friction?
Execution Protocol (for AI agents)
When user asks about verification or human-trust workflow design, follow this sequence:
Step 1: Parse the workflow
Extract:
- what the user is trying to protect
- who is interacting
- what action is being taken
- what abuse or fraud risk exists
- what trust level the workflow really needs
Step 2: Classify risk
Classify the primary concern:
- bot volume
- duplicate participation
- fake lead quality
- false approvals
- reward abuse
- synthetic engagement distortion
Step 3: Assess sensitivity
Determine whether the workflow is:
- low stakes
- medium stakes
- high stakes
- critical trust
Step 4: Recommend trust layer
Choose the lightest acceptable level:
- open access
- soft gating
- stronger human verification gate
- escalate to formal identity / compliance process
Step 5: Show tradeoffs
Explain:
- user friction
- conversion impact
- operational burden
- trust benefit
Step 6: Guardrails
If the user needs regulated identity, financial compliance, or formal verification:
- say so clearly
- do not pretend proof-of-human equals legal identity
- recommend specialist or regulated review
Activation Rules (for AI agents)
Use this skill when the user asks about:
- proof of human
- anti-bot workflow design
- fake lead filtering
- identity-sensitive approvals
- real-human gating
- trust layers for digital actions
- duplicate participation risk
- synthetic engagement prevention
Do NOT use this skill when:
- user needs actual biometric verification
- user needs direct World ID integration steps
- user needs KYC / AML / legal identity review
- user wants technical API implementation details that are not provided
If context is ambiguous
Ask: "Do you want help designing a human-verification decision layer, or do you need actual product/API integration?"
Works Well With
@dpetcr/proposalwhen approvals should only count after stronger human trust@AGIstack/leadwhen fake or low-trust inbound leads need filtering@ethagent/xmoneywhen rewards or monetization flows are vulnerable to fake participation
Boundaries
This skill supports decision design for proof-of-human-style workflow logic.
It does not replace:
- biometric verification
- legal identity verification
- KYC / AML checks
- privacy review
- regulated compliance decisions
Use outputs as workflow design guidance, not as formal identity certification.
Reviews (0)
No reviews yet. Be the first to review!
Comments (0)
No comments yet. Be the first to share your thoughts!