fix(portable): Gemini keys, Telegram pairing UI, and config durability

Improve first-run and channel setup for non-technical users: detect newer
Gemini key formats, pin Node 22.22.3, add Control Panel Telegram approve
flow, and keep channels/models when config is rewritten. Persist uclaw
wizard state via uclaw-meta.json so restarts skip language/persona prompts.

Co-authored-by: Cursor <cursoragent@cursor.com>

portable/skills/en/claude-helper/SKILL.md

@@ -0,0 +1,77 @@
+---
+name: claude-helper
+description: "Getting better results from the model - prompting, context, and knowing when the tool is wrong for the job"
+metadata: { "openclaw": { "emoji": "🤖" } }
+---
+
+# Getting Better Results
+
+How to ask, what to include, and when to stop asking.
+
+## The three things that change output most
+
+**1. Say what the output is for.** "Summarise this" and "summarise this for
+someone deciding whether to attend" produce different, both-correct summaries.
+The purpose does more work than any phrasing trick.
+
+**2. Give the real material.** A paraphrase of a document produces an answer
+about the paraphrase. Paste the document, attach the file, share the error in
+full — including the parts that look irrelevant.
+
+**3. Say what a good answer looks like.** Length, format, who reads it. "Three
+bullets a non-technical manager can act on" beats "be concise".
+
+## What does not help
+
+- Politeness formulas, threats, or claiming urgency
+- "You are a world-class expert in…" — state the task, not a persona
+- Asking the same thing again in the hope of a different answer. Change what you
+  gave it instead.
+
+## When to start a new conversation
+
+Long conversations drift. Start fresh when:
+- You have changed subject entirely
+- Earlier wrong turns keep resurfacing
+- The context has filled with material that no longer matters
+
+Carry forward a short summary rather than the whole history.
+
+## When the answer might be wrong
+
+Language models produce fluent text regardless of whether they know the answer.
+Confidence is not a signal. Check independently when the answer involves:
+
+- **Specific numbers, dates, prices, versions** — especially recent ones
+- **Citations, links, case law, standards** — these get fabricated convincingly
+- **Anything you will act on** without being able to reverse it
+
+Ask for the reasoning or the source, and treat a refusal to give one as a warning.
+
+## When to use something else
+
+- **Arithmetic on real data** — use a spreadsheet or a script, not the model
+- **Anything needing today's facts** — the model needs to be given them
+- **Legal, medical or financial decisions** — a draft to take to a professional,
+  not the answer
+
+## Example prompts
+
+```
+Rewrite my prompt so it gets a more useful answer
+```
+
+```
+What information are you missing to answer this properly?
+```
+
+```
+Which parts of that answer should I verify before I use it?
+```
+
+## Working notes
+
+- When the user's request is ambiguous in a way that changes the answer, ask one
+  question rather than producing two versions.
+- Say plainly when something is outside what you can check, rather than hedging
+  through it.