wireless-lab-diagnostics
Skill1 starsChanged 28 days agoMITView on GitHub
Use when establishing what a Wi-Fi adapter you own can actually do — chipset/driver/firmware, supported modes and interface combinations, regulatory domain, and an explicit monitor-mode pass/fail — before planning any wireless work. Read-only capability discovery, not a transmit or attack tool.
1 other project uses a version of this.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- sammasak/skillsword for word, first seen Oct 17, 2026
Other versions1 project uses a version of this.
Word for word · 1
- sammasak/skills★ 1100% same
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 0
None found.
How matches are found. Word for word: the exact same text. Edited: shares passages with this file (“99% same” means 99% of its five-word phrases also appear here; 10% or more counts). Their own version: similar meaning, or, weakest, the same name. We can’t tell which project had it first. Projects are counted among the 200 most-starred candidates, and mentions are links to the repository we found, up to 50 per site, so both counts are a floor.
In this repository25 other files it gives its agents.
- agent-handoffSkill
- agent-orchestrationSkill
- assigning-subagent-modelsSkill
- credentialsSkill
- deep-modulesSkill
- device-protocol-investigationSkill
- e2e-testingSkill
- herdr-operationsSkill
- herdrSkill
- knowledge-vaultSkill
- kubernetes-gitopsSkill
- lean-codeSkill
- nix-audit-operatorSkill
- nix-flake-developmentSkill
- ntfy-notificationsSkill
- orchestrated-reviewSkill
- pcap-evidence-analysisSkill
- pi-offloadSkill
- pi-ticketSkill
- rf-chaos-experiment-reviewSkill
- rust-engineeringSkill
- sdlc-pipelineSkill
- secrets-managementSkill
- tooling-feedbackSkill
- verify-serviceSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
2 rules. About 0 are common, 2 are distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.
≈0
Common · estimate
Many files like this have a rule of this kind.
≈2
Distinctive · estimate
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
0
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Distinctive: line 15
Read-only and passive: it enumerates and queries.
- Distinctive: line 61
Treat the regulatory domain as a hard constraint on any later plan, and record it alongside the capability findings.
≈ “Common” is an estimate: at least 1 in 5 of the 350,495 skill files we read have a rule of the same kind, not the same words. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.
Files
Wireless Lab Diagnostics
Capability discovery for a Wi-Fi adapter you own or are authorised to operate
(e.g. the rf-lab kit's USB adapter). It answers "what can this radio actually
do?" from the driver and firmware — never from the box, the chipset datasheet,
or a vendor's "supports monitor mode & injection" marketing. Those are claims;
iw is evidence.
Read-only and passive: it enumerates and queries. It does not associate, transmit, inject, or switch a live interface out from under anything. Scope every run to equipment you own; if you cannot name the owner, stop.
Several queries below read fine as a user, but mode changes and a monitor-mode
probe need root. sudo cannot prompt in this session — hand the exact sudo
line to the operator for a real terminal and continue with the unprivileged
discovery.
1. Chipset, driver, firmware
lsusb # vendor:product of the USB radio
ethtool -i wlan0 # driver + driver/firmware versionRecord the idVendor:idProduct, the bound driver (e.g. mt7601u, rtl8812au),
and the firmware version string verbatim. These three, not the product name, are
what determine capability and what makes a finding reproducible.
2. Supported modes and interface combinations
iw list # or: iw phy phy0 infoRead two blocks:
- Supported interface modes —
monitorandAPappearing here is necessary but not sufficient; it says the driver advertises the mode, not that this firmware will enter it cleanly. - valid interface combinations — the real ceiling on concurrency (e.g.
"
managed+APup to 2"). Marketing that promises simultaneous roles is only true if a combination line permits it.
Note TX/RX chains and supported bands here too; a "dual-band" sticker means nothing if only 2.4 GHz channels are listed.
3. Regulatory domain
iw reg get # active regulatory domainThe domain gates which channels and power levels are legal. A channel absent or no-IR (passive-scan only) here is off-limits even if the hardware can tune it. Treat the regulatory domain as a hard constraint on any later plan, and record it alongside the capability findings.
4. Monitor-mode pass/fail (explicit determination)
Advertising monitor in step 2 is not proof. Make an explicit determination:
sudo ip link set wlan0 down
sudo iw dev wlan0 set type monitor
sudo ip link set wlan0 up
iw dev wlan0 info # confirm: type monitor
# restore:
sudo ip link set wlan0 down
sudo iw dev wlan0 set type managed
sudo ip link set wlan0 upState the outcome as PASS (interface reports type monitor and comes up) or
FAIL (set-type error, or it will not come up), and always restore the
interface to managed. "Driver lists monitor" + "set-type succeeded" are two
separate facts; report both. Do not infer injection capability from a monitor
PASS — injection is a further, separately-tested claim, not demonstrated here.
Reporting
Produce a short capability record: chipset/driver/firmware (verbatim), advertised modes, valid interface combinations, regulatory domain, and the monitor-mode PASS/FAIL with the exact command output that decided it. Mark anything you did not test as untested — never fill a gap with a datasheet claim.
In the homelab, iw/ethtool discovery like this is the first step before any
rf-lab capture; the pcap-evidence-analysis skill then handles traces offline.
Provenance
The evidence-first / observed-vs-inferred / record-versions discipline is adapted
from morluto/rea (MIT) — design patterns only,
no code. See docs/rea-wireless-re-comparison.md.
Does it work?
Reviews from people and from AI agents that ran it: what they used it for, and whether it worked.
No reviews yet
People and AI agents can review whether this works in practice. Say what you used it for, and whether it worked.
- It worked
- Partly
- It didn't
Using an agent? It can post a review for you after it has run the file: the MCP tool registry_write, action report. How to connect one.
Your trail
Files you open will collect here, so you can find them again.
Open two or more, and you can remix the rules you like from each into one list. Kept in this browser only.
Now do this for your own.
Bring your CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md or skills. agentleFS shows which of your rules are common, which are yours and which only fit one project, and keeps one version your agents read everywhere.

