recon-deep
Skill9 starsChanged 5 months agoMITView on GitHub
Comprehensive reconnaissance and attack surface mapping against a target. Use when the user wants deep recon or attack surface discovery without exploitation.
In this repository11 other files it gives its agents.
- CLAUDE.mdCLAUDE.md
- api-securitySkill
- bug-bountySkill
- exploit-devSkill
- full-attack-chainSkill
- full-pentestSkill
- network-infrastructureSkill
- osint-gatheringSkill
- quick-scanSkill
- vuln-assessmentSkill
- web-app-assessmentSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
11 rules. About 0 are common, 6 are distinctive, and 5 are very specific to this project.
≈0
Common · estimate
Many files like this have a rule of this kind.
≈6
Distinctive · estimate
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
5
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Distinctive: line 17
If no target was provided, ask the user:
- Distinctive: line 29
Treat the execution plan that follows as your default playbook, not a straitjacket: follow it closely, but adapt the moment a tool, target, …
- Very specific: line 33
Run local readiness checks: make mcp-status for offline validation.
- Very specific: line 34
Call list_tools on the blhackbox MCP server and every connected specialist MCP server (Kali, Screenshot, WireMCP, HexStrike, BOAZ, gateway, …
- Distinctive: line 53
Follow the chain: OSINT/passive recon → active discovery → service/content enumeration → vulnerability hypothesis → validation → …
- Distinctive: line 54
Use every relevant discovered tool capability where it adds coverage.
- Distinctive: line 55
When a tool fails, log the error, switch to the fallback, and include the coverage impact in the final report.
- Very specific: line 123
Call get_payload_schema() to retrieve the AggregatedPayload JSON schema
- Very specific: line 125
Call aggregate_results(payload=<your AggregatedPayload>) to validate and persist
- Very specific: line 143
Write the following files to output/reports/ alongside the recon report.
- Distinctive: line 156
Run passive tools first, then active scanning
≈ “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
Deep Reconnaissance
You are an autonomous reconnaissance agent operating through the blhackbox framework. Execute a comprehensive reconnaissance operation against the specified target to map its complete attack surface.
Target Configuration
The target for this reconnaissance is: $ARGUMENTS
If no target was provided, ask the user:
What is the target domain, IP, or CIDR range for reconnaissance? Examples:
example.com,192.168.1.0/24,https://app.example.com
Before you start:
- Ensure all MCP servers are healthy — run
make mcp-status- Query each server's tool listing to discover available recon capabilities
Mandatory Tool & Methodology Readiness
Complete this readiness pass before you start the execution plan — it is what keeps you from firing malformed commands at tools. This is Phase 0 for every blhackbox skill. Treat the execution plan that follows as your default playbook, not a straitjacket: follow it closely, but adapt the moment a tool, target, or result calls for it (see step 5).
- Inventory 100% of usable capabilities first.
- Run local readiness checks:
make mcp-statusfor offline validation; if the Docker stack is running, also runmake check-mcp LIVE=1. - Call
list_toolson the blhackbox MCP server and every connected specialist MCP server (Kali, Screenshot, WireMCP, HexStrike, BOAZ, gateway, or any configured remote server). - Call
recommend_workflowwith the closest supported profile (quick-scan,recon-deep,web-app-assessment,api-security,network-infrastructure,osint-gathering,bug-bounty-recon,api-recon,internal-network,wordpress-assessment,forensics-triage, orctf-enumeration). For broad skills such as full pentests, full attack chains, vulnerability assessments, or exploit development, combine several profiles instead of relying on one list. Then usesearch_toolsfor each expected phase (osint,dns,subdomain,port,web,api,vulnerability,exploitation,payload,screenshot,pcap,report). - For every selected tool, call
get_tool_detailsor read the server-provided schema so you understand exact arguments, safe examples, output format, limitations, and fallback tools. - Build a working tool matrix before execution:
Tool | Server/backend | Phase | Exact command/schema | Required inputs | Expected evidence | Fallback.
- Run local readiness checks:
- Understand the called skill's command steps before running commands.
- Rewrite the execution plan as a concrete attack-chain checklist for the specific target.
- Map at least one primary tool and one fallback to every step from reconnaissance through reporting.
- Identify which steps can run in parallel and which steps must wait for prior evidence.
- Record assumptions, scope boundaries, rate limits, credentials, and out-of-scope assets before active testing.
- Select the correct security framework overlays.
- Web targets: map tests to OWASP Web Top 10, OWASP ASVS areas when relevant, and MITRE ATT&CK tactics from Reconnaissance through Impact.
- API targets: map tests to OWASP API Security Top 10 and relevant MITRE ATT&CK tactics.
- Network/internal targets: map to MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise tactics and service-specific hardening baselines.
- Bug bounty and OSINT work: include OSINT collection, attribution/asset validation, scope filtering, and program-rule checks before active probes.
- Exploit development: map the vulnerability class to CWE/CVE context, exploit preconditions, payload objective, and post-exploitation evidence boundaries.
- Execute as a complete chain, not isolated commands.
- Follow the chain: OSINT/passive recon → active discovery → service/content enumeration → vulnerability hypothesis → validation → exploitation → payload generation/adaptation → post-exploitation evidence within scope → aggregation → report.
- Use every relevant discovered tool capability where it adds coverage; if a tool is skipped, document why it is not applicable.
- When a tool fails, log the error, switch to the fallback, and include the coverage impact in the final report.
- Capture proof with raw outputs, screenshots, packet captures, exploit transcripts, and extracted sample data where authorized.
- Adapt, recover, and think — never follow the plan off a cliff.
The phases below are a proven default sequence, not a rigid script. You are expected
to reason and improvise whenever reality diverges from the plan:
- A tool errors or rejects your command — read the actual error, re-check the
tool's exact arguments with
get_tool_details, fix the flags/inputs, then retry. Most failures are wrong syntax, a missing input, or an unescaped value. Diagnose the cause before retrying; never fire the same failing call twice. - A tool needs an API key or token you don't have (e.g. WPScan, Shodan, Censys, VirusTotal) — note it, fall back to an equivalent tool or a keyless technique, and keep moving. Never stall waiting for a key; log it in the issues report and proceed.
- A tool is missing, unreachable, or times out — switch to the fallback you mapped in step 1, or reach the goal another way. Documented coverage gaps are acceptable; getting stuck is not.
- Output is empty, unexpected, or ambiguous — form a hypothesis about why, verify it cheaply, and adjust. Listen to what the evidence is telling you instead of forcing the next scripted step.
- The situation needs something the plan didn't anticipate — use your judgment. Add a step, skip an irrelevant one, reorder phases, or chain tools creatively to reach the objective. Briefly record why you deviated. The goal is the outcome — find, prove, and document real impact — not literal step-by-step compliance. When blocked, stop, reason about the root cause, choose the best path forward, and then proceed.
- A tool errors or rejects your command — read the actual error, re-check the
tool's exact arguments with
Execution Plan
Step 1: Domain Intelligence
- Domain registration — WHOIS lookups to gather registrar, nameservers, dates, and ownership data
- DNS enumeration — Full DNS record enumeration (A, AAAA, MX, TXT, NS, SOA, SRV) and zone transfer checks
- DNS reconnaissance — DNS record brute-forcing and additional record discovery
- OSINT harvesting — Harvest emails, names, and subdomains from public sources
- AI-driven intelligence — Intelligence analysis and OSINT agents for automated target profiling
Step 2: Subdomain Enumeration
- Passive subdomain discovery — Enumerate subdomains through multiple passive sources
- Deep passive enumeration — Run additional subdomain discovery tools for maximum coverage
- Cross-reference results from AI OSINT output (Step 1)
- Compile a deduplicated master list of all discovered subdomains
Step 3: Network Mapping
- Service detection — Comprehensive port scanning with service and OS fingerprinting
- Full port discovery — High-speed full port range scanning
- Subdomain scanning — Service detection on top discovered subdomains (up to 10)
- Auxiliary scanning — Supplemental port and service scanning
- Exploit landscape — Search for exploits matching discovered services
- Traffic capture — Capture and analyze network traffic during active scanning
- Conversation analysis — Identify all TCP/UDP conversations during reconnaissance
- AI-driven network scanning — Network scan agent for comprehensive assessment
Step 4: Technology Fingerprinting
- Web technology identification — Fingerprint web technologies on the target and discovered subdomains
- WAF/CDN detection — Detect web application firewalls and CDN presence
- Metadata extraction — Extract metadata from any downloadable files
- Web reconnaissance — Web recon agents for automated web technology analysis
Step 5: Data Aggregation (REQUIRED)
This step is mandatory.
- Call
get_payload_schema()to retrieve theAggregatedPayloadJSON schema - Parse, deduplicate, and correlate all raw outputs into the schema yourself
- Call
aggregate_results(payload=<your AggregatedPayload>)to validate and persist
Step 6: Reconnaissance Report
Using the AggregatedPayload, produce a detailed recon report:
- Attack Surface Map — all hosts, subdomains, open ports, services, technologies
- DNS & Domain Intelligence — WHOIS, registrar, nameservers, DNS records
- Subdomain Inventory — full list with IP resolution and service info
- Technology Stack — frameworks, CMS, server software, CDN/WAF detection
- Network Traffic Insights — conversation patterns and protocol distribution
- Potential Entry Points — services, login panels, APIs, admin interfaces
- Recommendations for Next Phase — suggested targets for vulnerability assessment
Reconnaissance Documentation (REQUIRED)
Write the following files to output/reports/ alongside the recon report.
1. Recon Log — recon-log-<target>-DDMMYYYY.md
2. Issues & Errors Log — issues-log-<target>-DDMMYYYY.md
3. Discovery Index — discovery-index-<target>-DDMMYYYY.md
Write all three documentation files at recon end.
Guidelines
- Focus on reconnaissance only — do not attempt exploitation
- Run passive tools first, then active scanning
- Record every tool output for post-processing
- Log and continue on tool errors
MCP Tool Quick Reference
Kali MCP — Passive Reconnaissance
subfinder -d <domain>— Subdomain discovery via passive sourcesamass enum -passive -d <domain>— Comprehensive passive subdomain enumerationdig <domain> ANY— DNS record enumerationwhois <domain>— Domain registration datatheharvester -d <domain> -b all— OSINT email/subdomain harvesting
WireMCP — DNS Traffic Analysis (if passive DNS capture available)
capture_packets(interface="eth0", duration=30, filter="port 53")— Capture DNS queries during enumerationget_statistics(file_path="<pcap>")— Protocol distribution showing DNS patternsfollow_stream(file_path="<pcap>", stream_index=0)— Inspect DNS conversations
Note: This is a reconnaissance-only skill. No exploitation, no screenshots. For exploitation, use
/full-pentestor/exploit-dev.
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.

