重构主控编排与运行时预热链路，统一工作区提示词/专家调度协议并补齐 wiki 记忆注入与写回闭环。

同时收敛启动与运维脚本默认行为（含 wiki worker）、更新 Admin 可观测性与相关测试，降低首轮时延并提高运行稳定性。

Made-with: Cursor

openclaw/.github/pull_request_template.md

@@ -0,0 +1,147 @@
+## Summary
+
+Describe the problem and fix in 2–5 bullets:
+
+If this PR fixes a plugin beta-release blocker, title it `fix(<plugin-id>): beta blocker - <summary>` and link the matching `Beta blocker: <plugin-name> - <summary>` issue labeled `beta-blocker`. Contributors cannot label PRs, so the title is the PR-side signal for maintainers and automation.
+
+- Problem:
+- Why it matters:
+- What changed:
+- What did NOT change (scope boundary):
+
+## Change Type (select all)
+
+- [ ] Bug fix
+- [ ] Feature
+- [ ] Refactor required for the fix
+- [ ] Docs
+- [ ] Security hardening
+- [ ] Chore/infra
+
+## Scope (select all touched areas)
+
+- [ ] Gateway / orchestration
+- [ ] Skills / tool execution
+- [ ] Auth / tokens
+- [ ] Memory / storage
+- [ ] Integrations
+- [ ] API / contracts
+- [ ] UI / DX
+- [ ] CI/CD / infra
+
+## Linked Issue/PR
+
+- Closes #
+- Related #
+- [ ] This PR fixes a bug or regression
+
+## Root Cause (if applicable)
+
+For bug fixes or regressions, explain why this happened, not just what changed. Otherwise write `N/A`. If the cause is unclear, write `Unknown`.
+
+- Root cause:
+- Missing detection / guardrail:
+- Contributing context (if known):
+
+## Regression Test Plan (if applicable)
+
+For bug fixes or regressions, name the smallest reliable test coverage that should catch this. Otherwise write `N/A`.
+
+- Coverage level that should have caught this:
+  - [ ] Unit test
+  - [ ] Seam / integration test
+  - [ ] End-to-end test
+  - [ ] Existing coverage already sufficient
+- Target test or file:
+- Scenario the test should lock in:
+- Why this is the smallest reliable guardrail:
+- Existing test that already covers this (if any):
+- If no new test is added, why not:
+
+## User-visible / Behavior Changes
+
+List user-visible changes (including defaults/config).  
+If none, write `None`.
+
+## Diagram (if applicable)
+
+For UI changes or non-trivial logic flows, include a small ASCII diagram reviewers can scan quickly. Otherwise write `N/A`.
+
+```text
+Before:
+[user action] -> [old state]
+
+After:
+[user action] -> [new state] -> [result]
+```
+
+## Security Impact (required)
+
+- New permissions/capabilities? (`Yes/No`)
+- Secrets/tokens handling changed? (`Yes/No`)
+- New/changed network calls? (`Yes/No`)
+- Command/tool execution surface changed? (`Yes/No`)
+- Data access scope changed? (`Yes/No`)
+- If any `Yes`, explain risk + mitigation:
+
+## Repro + Verification
+
+### Environment
+
+- OS:
+- Runtime/container:
+- Model/provider:
+- Integration/channel (if any):
+- Relevant config (redacted):
+
+### Steps
+
+1.
+2.
+3.
+
+### Expected
+
+-
+
+### Actual
+
+-
+
+## Evidence
+
+Attach at least one:
+
+- [ ] Failing test/log before + passing after
+- [ ] Trace/log snippets
+- [ ] Screenshot/recording
+- [ ] Perf numbers (if relevant)
+
+## Human Verification (required)
+
+What you personally verified (not just CI), and how:
+
+- Verified scenarios:
+- Edge cases checked:
+- What you did **not** verify:
+
+## Review Conversations
+
+- [ ] I replied to or resolved every bot review conversation I addressed in this PR.
+- [ ] I left unresolved only the conversations that still need reviewer or maintainer judgment.
+
+If a bot review conversation is addressed by this PR, resolve that conversation yourself. Do not leave bot review conversation cleanup for maintainers.
+
+## Compatibility / Migration
+
+- Backward compatible? (`Yes/No`)
+- Config/env changes? (`Yes/No`)
+- Migration needed? (`Yes/No`)
+- If yes, exact upgrade steps:
+
+## Risks and Mitigations
+
+List only real risks for this PR. Add/remove entries as needed. If none, write `None`.
+
+- Risk:
+  - Mitigation: