Agent skill

Bug Bounty Report Writing

by awarexone in awarexone/Agentic-Bug-Hunter

Guides writing bug bounty reports for HackerOne, Bugcrowd, Intigriti and Immunefi: impact-first titles, proven claims, CVSS 3.1 scoring and a pre-submit checklist.

MITAuto-check passedSecurity

Install Bug Bounty Report Writing

skills CLI
$ npx skills add awarexone/Agentic-Bug-Hunter --skill report-writing -a claude-code

Project install by default; add -g for ~/.claude/skills/.

GitHub CLI
$ gh skill install awarexone/Agentic-Bug-Hunter report-writing --agent claude-code

Project scope by default; add --scope user for a personal install. Needs GitHub CLI 2.90.0 or later (public preview).

Manual copy
$ git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/awarexone/Agentic-Bug-Hunter.git skills-src && mkdir -p .claude/skills && cp -r skills-src/skills/report-writing .claude/skills/report-writing && rm -rf skills-src

Use ~/.claude/skills/ instead of .claude/skills for a personal install. The folder must contain SKILL.md.

Claude Code skills documentation · loads skills from .claude/skills/

Facts

Skill name
report-writing
GitHub stars
5.3k
Used in
2 other repos
Token cost
~3.9k tokens
SKILL.md length
548 words
Files
1
Skills in repo
10
Repo updated
First seen
Licence
MIT

At a glance

Guides writing bug bounty reports for HackerOne, Bugcrowd, Intigriti and Immunefi: impact-first titles, proven claims, CVSS 3.1 scoring and a pre-submit checklist.

  • Works in 5 steps: Exposes PII / health / financial data of… → Allows account takeover or privilege… → Requires ZERO user interaction from… → …
  • Writing up a validated vulnerability for HackerOne or Bugcrowd
  • SKILL.md covers THE MOST IMPORTANT RULE, PERSISTENCE RULE, TITLE FORMULA and HACKERONE REPORT TEMPLATE, plus 7 more sections
  • Needs ATTACKER_TOKEN and ACCOUNT_A_TOKEN

What it does

This skill covers the writing step after a vulnerability finding has been validated. Its central rule is to state what an attacker can do and prove it, avoiding hedges such as could potentially or may allow, because triagers are people reading many reports. It supplies a title formula (bug class, exact endpoint, attacker role, impact, victim scope), an impact statement formula, per-platform templates, CVSS 3.1 scoring, a severity decision guide and counters for likely downgrade arguments.

Every session must leave a finding folder on disk with the report draft, a pre-submit checklist, references, downgrade counters and a final submission note, rather than relying on terminal scrollback. Files are named for the platform, such as hackerone-report.md or bugcrowd-report.md, with a submission-notes.md beside them. If tools/validate.py has already written that notes file, it is updated instead of duplicated. The excerpt is cut off partway through the HackerOne template.

When your agent uses it

  • Writing up a validated vulnerability for HackerOne or Bugcrowd
  • Choosing a CVSS 3.1 score and a severity for a finding
  • Rewriting a vague report title into an impact-first one
  • Running a last checklist before submitting a report

Example prompts

  • “Write the HackerOne report for the IDOR I confirmed on the invoices endpoint.”
  • “Score this finding with CVSS 3.1 and draft counters for a likely downgrade.”
  • “Rewrite my report title 'XSS in user input' so it is specific and impact-first.”

Workflow steps

5 steps, taken from the first numbered list in SKILL.md.

  1. Exposes PII / health / financial data of other users? → +1 severity
  2. Allows account takeover or privilege escalation? → +2 severity
  3. Requires ZERO user interaction from victim? → +1 severity
  4. Affects ALL users (not specific condition)? → +1 severity
  5. Remotely exploitable with no internal network access? → baseline for High+

What it can do on your machine

Read from SKILL.md and the folder at commit cd58a40. It shows what the files ask for, not the result of running them.

  • Tool permissions

    Pre-approves nothing: there is no allowed-tools line, so your agent's usual permission prompts apply.

    From allowed-tools in the SKILL.md frontmatter.

  • Runs code

    No scripts in the folder and no shell commands in SKILL.md (its code samples are markdown and python).

    From the folder's file list and the shell code blocks in SKILL.md.

  • Network

    Links to these hosts (documentation or services it may open):

    • first.org

    From URLs in SKILL.md, links to its own repository left out.

  • Credentials

    Names these keys or tokens, usually read from environment variables:

    • ATTACKER_TOKEN
    • ACCOUNT_A_TOKEN

    From names ending in _API_KEY, _TOKEN, _SECRET, _KEY or _PASSWORD in SKILL.md.

Context cost

Bug Bounty Report Writing loads about 3.9k tokens when it runs. Until then it costs about 95 tokens; SKILL.md has 548 words of instructions outside code blocks.

Always · name and description, kept in context so the agent knows when to use it
~95
When it runs · the whole SKILL.md, loaded when a task matches
~3.9k

Estimates: characters ÷ 4, the usual rule of thumb; real counts depend on the model's tokenizer. Scripts and assets cost tokens only if the agent reads them.

Safety

Auto-check passed

The automated check found no risky patterns in SKILL.md.

Automated static check — not a guarantee. Review scripts before installing. It scans the text of SKILL.md for risky patterns (piping downloads into a shell, reading credential files, hidden Unicode, destructive commands); files beside SKILL.md are not scanned.

SKILL.md

The full file from awarexone/Agentic-Bug-Hunter at commit cd58a40, republished under its MIT licence (© awarexone). 548 words, ~3,887 tokens.

Download SKILL.mdSave it as .claude/skills/report-writing/SKILL.md (or your agent's skills folder).
name
report-writing
description
Bug bounty report writing for H1/Bugcrowd/Intigriti/Immunefi — report templates, human tone guidelines, impact-first writing, CVSS 3.1 scoring, title formula, impact statement formula, severity decision guide, downgrade counters, pre-submit checklist. Use after validating a finding and before submitting. Never use "could potentially" — prove it or don't report.

REPORT WRITING

Impact-first. Human tone. No theoretical language. Triagers are people.


THE MOST IMPORTANT RULE

Never use "could potentially" or "could be used to" or "may allow". Either it does the thing or it doesn't. If you haven't proved it, don't claim it.

BAD:  "This vulnerability could potentially allow an attacker to access user data."
GOOD: "An attacker can access any user's order history by changing the user_id
       parameter to the target user's ID. I confirmed this using two test accounts:
       attacker@test.com (ID 123) successfully retrieved victim@test.com (ID 456)
       orders, including their shipping address and payment method last 4 digits."

PERSISTENCE RULE

Every report-writing session must leave a complete finding folder on disk. Save the report draft, pre-submit checklist, references, downgrade counters, and final submission note under findings/<target-or-program>-<bug-class>/. Never rely on terminal or tmux scrollback for content the hunter needs later.

Minimum files:

text
findings/<target-or-program>-<bug-class>/
├── hackerone-report.md       # or bugcrowd-report.md / intigriti-report.md / immunefi-report.md
├── submission-notes.md       # final checklist, references, caveats, next action
└── evidence/                 # screenshots, curl output, response bodies when available

If tools/validate.py already wrote submission-notes.md, append/update it instead of creating a duplicate.


TITLE FORMULA

[Bug Class] in [Exact Endpoint/Feature] allows [attacker role] to [impact] [victim scope]

Good titles (specific, impact-first):

IDOR in /api/v2/invoices/{id} allows authenticated user to read any customer's invoice data
Missing auth on POST /api/admin/users allows unauthenticated attacker to create admin accounts
Stored XSS in profile bio field executes in admin panel — allows privilege escalation
SSRF via image import URL parameter reaches AWS EC2 metadata service
Race condition in coupon redemption allows same code to be used unlimited times

Bad titles (vague, useless to triager):

IDOR vulnerability found
Broken access control
XSS in user input
Security issue in API
Unauthorized access to user data

HACKERONE REPORT TEMPLATE

markdown
## Summary

[One paragraph: what the bug is, where it is, what an attacker can do. Be specific.
Include: endpoint, method, parameter, data exposed, required access level.]

Example: "The `/api/users/{user_id}/orders` endpoint does not verify that the
authenticated user owns the requested user_id. An attacker can enumerate any
user's order history, including PII (email, address, phone) and purchase history,
by incrementing the user_id parameter. No privileges beyond a standard free
account are required."

## Vulnerability Details

**Vulnerability Type:** IDOR / Broken Object Level Authorization
**CVSS 3.1 Score:** 6.5 (Medium) — AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N
**Affected Endpoint:** GET /api/users/{user_id}/orders

## Steps to Reproduce

**Environment:**
- Attacker account: attacker@test.com, user_id = 123
- Victim account: victim@test.com, user_id = 456
- Target: https://target.com

**Steps:**

1. Log in as attacker@test.com, obtain Bearer token

2. Send the following request:

GET /api/users/456/orders HTTP/1.1 Host: target.com Authorization: Bearer ATTACKER_TOKEN_HERE


3. Observe response:

```json
{
  "orders": [
    {"id": 789, "items": [...], "email": "victim@test.com", "address": "123 Main St..."}
  ]
}

The response contains victim's full order history and PII despite being requested by a different user.

Impact

An authenticated attacker can enumerate all user orders by iterating user_id values. This exposes: full name, email, shipping address, purchase history, and payment method (last 4). With ~100K users, this represents a mass PII breach affecting all registered users. Exploitation requires only a free account and takes minutes with a simple loop.

Add server-side ownership verification:

python
if order.user_id != current_user.id:
    raise Forbidden()

Supporting Materials

[Screenshot showing attacker's session returning victim's order data] [Video walkthrough if available]


---

## BUGCROWD REPORT TEMPLATE

```markdown
# [IDOR] User order history accessible without authorization via /api/users/{id}/orders

**VRT Category:** Broken Access Control > IDOR > P2

## Description

[Same impact-first paragraph as HackerOne summary]

## Steps to Reproduce

[Same structured steps — exact HTTP requests, exact responses]

## Proof of Concept

[Screenshot/video showing the actual impact]

## Expected vs Actual Behavior

**Expected:** 403 Forbidden when user_id does not match authenticated user
**Actual:** 200 OK with victim's full order data

## Severity Justification

P2 (High) — Direct read access to other users' PII. Affects all user accounts.
No user interaction required. Exploitable by any authenticated user.
Automated enumeration could exfil all [N] user records in minutes.

## Remediation

Add ownership verification: `if order.user_id != current_user.id: raise 403`

INTIGRITI REPORT TEMPLATE

markdown
# [Bug Class]: [Exact Impact] in [Endpoint/Feature]

## Description

[Impact-first paragraph. Start with what an attacker can do, not with how you found it.
Include: endpoint, method, parameter, data exposed, required privileges.]

## Steps to Reproduce

**Environment:**
- Attacker: email=attacker@test.com (standard account, no special role)
- Victim: email=victim@test.com
- Tested: [date]

**Reproduction steps:**

1. [Login as attacker / visit URL / send request]

2. Send the following HTTP request:

\```http
METHOD /endpoint HTTP/1.1
Host: target.com
Authorization: Bearer ATTACKER_TOKEN
Content-Type: application/json

{"param": "victim_id_here"}
\```

3. Observe response contains victim's private data:

\```json
{"email": "victim@test.com", "address": "123 Main St", ...}
\```

## Impact

[Specific, quantified impact. What data, how many users, what can attacker do.]

CVSS 3.1 Score: X.X ([Severity]) — AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N

## Remediation

[1-3 sentence concrete fix. Include code if helpful.]

## Attachments

[Screenshot or Loom video showing the impact — Intigriti triagers prefer video for complex bugs]

Intigriti-specific notes:

  • Title format: [Bug Class]: [One-line impact] (no formula required, but keep it specific)
  • Severity is set by you: Critical/High/Medium/Low/Exceptional
  • CVSS 3.1 is standard (CVSS 4.0 also accepted on newer programs)
  • PoC video is valued much more than screenshot alone — record with Loom
  • Safe harbor: Intigriti enforces it, be comfortable going slightly aggressive with testing

IMMUNEFI REPORT TEMPLATE

markdown
# [Bug Class] — [Protocol Name] — [Severity]

## Summary

[One paragraph with: root cause, affected function, economic impact, attack cost.
Include numbers where possible: "attacker can drain $X in Y transactions."]

## Vulnerability Details

**Contract:** `VulnerableContract.sol`
**Function:** `claimRedemption()`
**Bug Class:** Accounting State Desynchronization
**Severity:** Critical

### Root Cause

[Exact code snippet showing the vulnerable code with comments]

## Proof of Concept

```solidity
// SPDX-License-Identifier: MIT
pragma solidity ^0.8.0;
// Foundry PoC — run: forge test --match-test test_exploit -vvvv

contract ExploitTest is Test {
    // ... full working exploit
}

Impact

[Quantified: "Attacker can drain X% of TVL = $Y at current rates. Requires $Z gas. Attack is repeatable."]

Show full SKILL.md (258 more words)Show less

[Specific code change with before/after]


---

## CVSS 3.1 QUICK SCORING

### Formula

CVSS = f(AV, AC, PR, UI, S, C, I, A)


### Metric Quick Picks

| Metric | Value | Weight | When |
|---|---|---|---|
| **Attack Vector (AV)** | Network | +0.85 | Via internet |
| | Local | +0.55 | Local access needed |
| **Attack Complexity (AC)** | Low | +0.77 | Repeatable |
| | High | +0.44 | Race/timing needed |
| **Privileges Required (PR)** | None | +0.85 | No login |
| | Low | +0.62 | Regular user account |
| | High | +0.27 | Admin account |
| **User Interaction (UI)** | None | +0.85 | No victim action |
| | Required | +0.62 | Victim must click |
| **Scope (S)** | Changed | higher | Affects browser/OS/other |
| | Unchanged | lower | Stays in app |
| **Confidentiality (C)** | High | +0.56 | All data exposed |
| | Low | +0.22 | Limited data |
| **Integrity (I)** | High | +0.56 | Can modify any data |
| **Availability (A)** | High | +0.56 | Crashes service |

### Typical Scores by Bug Class

| Bug | Typical CVSS | Severity |
|---|---|---|
| IDOR (read PII) | 6.5 | Medium |
| IDOR (write/delete) | 7.5 | High |
| Auth bypass → admin | 9.8 | Critical |
| Stored XSS (any user) | 5.4–8.8 | Med–High |
| SQLi (data exfil) | 8.6 | High |
| SSRF (cloud metadata) | 9.1 | Critical |
| Race condition (double spend) | 7.5 | High |
| GraphQL auth bypass | 8.7 | High |
| JWT none algorithm | 9.1 | Critical |

---

## SEVERITY DECISION GUIDE

### Critical (P1)
- Full account takeover of any user without interaction
- Remote code execution
- SQLi with ability to dump/modify entire DB
- Auth bypass to admin panel
- SSRF to cloud metadata → IAM credentials exfil

### High (P2)
- Mass PII exposure (email, phone, SSN, payment data)
- Privilege escalation from user to admin
- SSRF reaching internal services (data returned)
- Stored XSS executing for all users of sensitive feature
- Payment bypass / financial loss without limit

### Medium (P3)
- IDOR on specific user's non-critical data
- XSS on low-sensitivity page requiring victim interaction
- CSRF on important but non-critical action
- Rate limit bypass on OTP (with effort demonstrated)

### Low (P4)
- Information disclosure (non-sensitive, no PII)
- Clickjacking on sensitive action WITH working PoC
- CORS on limited data

---

## SEVERITY SELF-ASSESSMENT

Each YES raises severity:
  1. Exposes PII / health / financial data of other users? → +1 severity
  2. Allows account takeover or privilege escalation? → +2 severity
  3. Requires ZERO user interaction from victim? → +1 severity
  4. Affects ALL users (not specific condition)? → +1 severity
  5. Remotely exploitable with no internal network access? → baseline for High+

---

## DOWNGRADE COUNTERS

| Program Says | Counter With |
|---|---|
| "Requires authentication" | "Attacker needs only a free account — no special role or permission" |
| "Limited impact" | "Affects [N] users / exposes [PII type] / $[amount] at risk" |
| "Already known" | "Show me the report number — I searched hacktivity and found none" |
| "By design" | "Show me the documentation stating this is intended behavior" |
| "Low CVSS" | "CVSS doesn't capture business impact — attacker can extract [X] in [Y] minutes" |
| "Not exploitable" | "Here is the exact response showing victim's data returned to attacker session" |

---

## THE 60-SECOND PRE-SUBMIT CHECKLIST

[ ] Title follows formula: [Class] in [endpoint] allows [actor] to [impact] [ ] First sentence states exact impact in plain English [ ] Steps to Reproduce has exact HTTP request (copy-paste ready) [ ] Response showing the bug is included (screenshot or JSON body) [ ] Two test accounts used — not just one account testing itself [ ] CVSS score calculated and included [ ] Recommended fix is 1-2 sentences (not a lecture) [ ] No typos in endpoint paths or parameter names [ ] Report is < 600 words — triagers skim long reports [ ] Severity claimed matches impact described — don't overclaim [ ] Never used "could potentially" or "may allow" [ ] PoC is reproducible by triager from a fresh state


---

## CVSS 4.0 QUICK REFERENCE (newer programs)

CVSS 4.0 replaced CVSS 3.1 in November 2023. Some newer programs require it.

### Key Differences from CVSS 3.1

| Metric | CVSS 3.1 | CVSS 4.0 |
|---|---|---|
| Attack Vector | Network/Adjacent/Local/Physical | Same |
| Attack Complexity | Low/High | Low/High |
| **NEW**: Attack Requirements | (didn't exist) | None/Present (replaces some PR/UI) |
| Privileges Required | None/Low/High | Same |
| User Interaction | None/Required | None/Passive/Active |
| Scope | Unchanged/Changed | REMOVED |
| **NEW**: Sub-Impact metrics | (didn't exist) | Vulnerable/Subsequent system impact |

### CVSS 4.0 Score Examples

| Finding | CVSS 4.0 Score | Vector |
|---|---|---|
| Unauthenticated RCE | 10.0 | CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/SC:H/SI:H/SA:H |
| IDOR read PII, auth required | 6.9 | CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:H/VI:N/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N |
| Stored XSS, admin views it | 8.2 | CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:P/VC:H/VI:H/VA:N/SC:H/SI:H/SA:N |
| SSRF → cloud metadata | 8.7 | CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:H/VI:N/VA:N/SC:H/SI:H/SA:N |

### Quick CVSS 4.0 Calculator

Use: https://www.first.org/cvss/calculator/4.0 Key fields: VC/VI/VA = Vulnerable System Confidentiality/Integrity/Availability SC/SI/SA = Subsequent System (downstream impact) AT = None (no special condition) | Present (race/specific config needed) UI = None | Passive (victim visits URL) | Active (victim takes explicit action)


**Practical rule**: If program uses CVSS 4.0 and you don't know the vector, use the calculator and include the full string starting with `CVSS:4.0/AV:...`. Programs cannot dispute a valid vector string.

---

## HUMAN TONE GUIDELINES

**Write to a person, not a system:**
- Triagers are tired. Get to the impact in sentence 1.
- Use "I" not "the researcher" — you found it, own it
- Short paragraphs, bullet points for steps
- Hyperlink relevant docs if needed

**Escalation language (when payout is being downgraded):**

"This vulnerability does not require any special privileges — only a free account." "The exposed data includes [PII type], which is subject to GDPR requirements." "An attacker can automate this with a simple loop — all [N] records in minutes." "This is exploitable externally without network access to any internal system." "The impact is equivalent to a full data breach of [feature/data type]."


**Avoid:**
- Jargon the triager might not know
- 5-paragraph explanations of what IDOR is (they know)
- Theoretical chains ("could be combined with X to...")
- Passive voice ("it was observed that...")
- Qualifying language ("seems to," "appears to")

---

## STEPS TO REPRODUCE FORMAT (triager-optimized)

```markdown
**Setup:**
- Account A (attacker): email=attacker@test.com, ID=111
- Account B (victim): email=victim@test.com, ID=222
- Both created via normal registration — no special access

**Steps:**

1. Log in as Account A
2. Send this request (replace `111` with victim ID `222`):

\```
GET /api/v2/resource/222 HTTP/1.1
Host: target.com
Authorization: Bearer ACCOUNT_A_TOKEN
\```

3. Response contains Account B's private data:

\```json
{"id": 222, "email": "victim@test.com", "name": "Victim User", "address": "..."}
\```

**Expected:** 403 Forbidden
**Actual:** 200 OK with victim's private data

© awarexone, MIT. Rendered from Markdown: HTML in the file is shown as text, images as links, and headings moved down two levels. Raw file

Files

Just SKILL.md in skills/report-writing of awarexone/Agentic-Bug-Hunter.

Open the folder on GitHubat commit cd58a40

Used in 2 other repositories

We found 2 copies of this SKILL.md (exact, near-identical or edited) in other folders, from 2 other GitHub owners. This page covers the copy in awarexone/Agentic-Bug-Hunter, which our catalogue first saw on October 7, 2026.

Compare with similar skills

Bug Bounty Report Writing next to the 5 skills that share the most tags, products or categories with it. Stars are the repository's; “used in” counts other GitHub owners with a copy.

Bug Bounty Report Writing compared with similar skills
SkillStarsUsed inTokensAuto-checkLicenceRepo updated
Bug Bounty Report Writing this skillawarexone/Agentic-Bug-Hunter5.3k2 repos~3.9kAutomated safety check: PassMIT
Web3 Triage and Report Examplestradecatlabs/vibe-coding-cn17k2 repos~7.7kAutomated safety check: PassMIT
Write Reportbugbountywithmarco/bugbounty-disclosed-reports122—~585Automated safety check: PassNone
Report Writingsickn33/agentic-awesome-skills47k1 repos~3.2kAutomated safety check: PassMIT
Bugcrowd Reportingsickn33/agentic-awesome-skills47k1 repos~5.9kAutomated safety check: PassMIT
Report Writingelementalsouls/Claude-BugHunter4.8k—~5.2kAutomated safety check: PassMIT

Similar skills

  • Web3 Triage and Report Examples

    tradecatlabs/vibe-coding-cn

    Seven-question triage gate, Immunefi report format and dissected paid bounty examples for deciding whether a smart contract finding is worth submitting.

    17k GitHub starsUsed in 2 repos~7.7k tokens
    SecurityAuto-check passed
  • Write Report

    bugbountywithmarco/bugbounty-disclosed-reports

    Write a disclosure-quality bug bounty report for a finding, matching the HackerOne report format used in this repo's corpus.

    122 GitHub stars~585 tokensUpdated 2 mo ago
    SecurityAuto-check passed
  • Report Writing

    sickn33/agentic-awesome-skills

    Bug bounty report writing for H1/Bugcrowd/Intigriti/Immunefi

    47k GitHub starsUsed in 1 repo~3.2k tokens
    SecurityAuto-check passed
  • Bugcrowd Reporting

    sickn33/agentic-awesome-skills

    Bugcrowd-specific reporting tactics complementing report-writing

    47k GitHub starsUsed in 1 repo~5.9k tokens
    SecurityAuto-check passed
  • Report Writing

    elementalsouls/Claude-BugHunter

    Bug bounty report writing for H1/Bugcrowd/Intigriti/Immunefi — report templates, human tone guidelines, impact-first writing, CVSS 3.1 scoring, title formula, impact statement formula, severity…

    4.8k GitHub stars~5.2k tokensUpdated yesterday
    SecurityAuto-check passed
  • Metabigor OSINT Recon

    j3ssie/metabigor

    Operates the metabigor CLI to map a target's network ranges, subdomains, ports, related domains, CDNs and archived URLs from free sources without API keys.

    1.9k GitHub stars~2.4k tokensUpdated 2 mo ago
    SecurityAuto-check passed

More from awarexone/Agentic-Bug-Hunter

All 10 skills in this repo
  • Web3 Smart Contract Audit

    awarexone/Agentic-Bug-Hunter

    Guides smart contract audits and bounty target selection with ten DeFi bug classes, kill signals, a Foundry PoC template and grep patterns.

    5.3k GitHub starsUsed in 3 repos~4.5k tokens
    Auto-check passed
  • Bug Bounty Hunting Methodology

    awarexone/Agentic-Bug-Hunter

    Orchestrates a bug bounty session with a 5-phase workflow and a critical-thinking framework covering developer psychology, anomaly detection and What-If experiments.

    5.3k GitHub starsUsed in 2 repos~4.7k tokens
    Auto-check passed
  • Client Request Signature Reversal

    awarexone/Agentic-Bug-Hunter

    Recovers a client-side request signature or anti-bot token just far enough to replay blocked requests in bug bounty testing, starting from a captured packet.

    5.3k GitHub stars~4.7k tokensUpdated 3 days ago
    Auto-check passed
  • Meme Coin Security Audit

    awarexone/Agentic-Bug-Hunter

    Screens EVM and Solana meme coins for rug pull signs such as hidden mint, honeypot logic and fee tricks, starting with fast kill signals before any code review.

    5.3k GitHub starsUsed in 1 repo~2.4k tokens
    Auto-check passed
  • Bug Bounty Triage Validation

    awarexone/Agentic-Bug-Hunter

    Screens a vulnerability finding with a seven-question gate and pre-submission checks before any report is written, so weak or out-of-scope findings are dropped early.

    5.3k GitHub starsUsed in 3 repos~3.4k tokens
    Auto-check passed
  • Web2 Recon

    awarexone/Agentic-Bug-Hunter

    Web2 recon pipeline — subdomain enumeration (subfinder, Chaos API, assetfinder), live host discovery (dnsx, httpx), URL crawling (katana, waybackurls, gau), directory fuzzing (ffuf), JS analysis…

    5.3k GitHub starsUsed in 2 repos~6.4k tokens
    Auto-check: warnings

Questions about Bug Bounty Report Writing

What does Bug Bounty Report Writing do?

Guides writing bug bounty reports for HackerOne, Bugcrowd, Intigriti and Immunefi: impact-first titles, proven claims, CVSS 3.1 scoring and a pre-submit checklist. This skill covers the writing step after a vulnerability finding has been validated. Its central rule is to state what an attacker can do and prove it, avoiding hedges such as could potentially or may allow, because triagers are people reading many reports.

When should I use Bug Bounty Report Writing?

Bug Bounty Report Writing fits situations like: writing up a validated vulnerability for HackerOne or Bugcrowd; choosing a CVSS 3.1 score and a severity for a finding; rewriting a vague report title into an impact-first one; running a last checklist before submitting a report.

How do I install Bug Bounty Report Writing in Claude Code?

Run `npx skills add awarexone/Agentic-Bug-Hunter --skill report-writing -a claude-code`. Or copy the skill folder (skills/report-writing in awarexone/Agentic-Bug-Hunter) into .claude/skills/report-writing in your project. Claude Code loads it when a task matches its description.

How do I install Bug Bounty Report Writing in Codex?

Run `npx skills add awarexone/Agentic-Bug-Hunter --skill report-writing -a codex`. Or copy the skill folder (skills/report-writing in awarexone/Agentic-Bug-Hunter) into .agents/skills/report-writing in your project. Codex loads it when a task matches its description.

Can I use Bug Bounty Report Writing in Cursor, Gemini CLI or GitHub Copilot?

Cursor, Gemini CLI, GitHub Copilot and OpenCode also load SKILL.md folders. With the skills CLI, run `npx skills add awarexone/Agentic-Bug-Hunter --skill report-writing -a cursor` (or -a gemini-cli, github-copilot or opencode for the others). To copy it by hand, put the folder in .cursor/skills/report-writing, .gemini/skills/report-writing, .github/skills/report-writing and .opencode/skills/report-writing in your project.

What does Bug Bounty Report Writing need to run?

Going by SKILL.md and its folder, Bug Bounty Report Writing needs credentials named ATTACKER_TOKEN and ACCOUNT_A_TOKEN.

Does Bug Bounty Report Writing access the network?

SKILL.md names 1 domain. As links in the text: first.org. This is read from the text; nothing was executed.

Is Bug Bounty Report Writing safe to install?

Our automated static check of SKILL.md found no risky patterns, such as piping downloads into a shell, reading credential files or hidden Unicode. It is not a guarantee. Review the folder before installing.

What licence does Bug Bounty Report Writing use?

Bug Bounty Report Writing is published under the MIT licence (the repository's licence). It allows redistribution, so the full SKILL.md is shown on this page.

How many tokens does Bug Bounty Report Writing use?

About 3.9k tokens (SKILL.md is roughly 16k characters). Agents keep only the skill's name and description in context until a task matches; then they load SKILL.md in full.

What are the alternatives to Bug Bounty Report Writing?

Skills that share tags, products or a category with Bug Bounty Report Writing: Web3 Triage and Report Examples (tradecatlabs/vibe-coding-cn, 17k stars), Write Report (bugbountywithmarco/bugbounty-disclosed-reports, 122 stars), Report Writing (sickn33/agentic-awesome-skills, 47k stars) and Bugcrowd Reporting (sickn33/agentic-awesome-skills, 47k stars). The comparison table on this page puts their stars, adoption, token cost, safety result and licence side by side.

Who maintains Bug Bounty Report Writing?

awarexone (a GitHub organization) maintains it in awarexone/Agentic-Bug-Hunter, which has 5,296 GitHub stars. The repository holds 10 skills in this directory. The repository was last updated on October 5, 2026.

Source: awarexone/Agentic-Bug-Hunter on GitHub. Facts on this page come from the repository at the commit we read; the author's words are quoted as theirs.