SKILLEMALL.ai

BF bug-reaper

Web2 bug bounty hunting agent — evidence-based vulnerability finder and report writer. Use when: auditing web apps/APIs for HackerOne, Bugcrowd, Intigriti, YesWeHack; hunting XSS, SQLi, NoSQLi, SSRF, IDOR, auth bypass, RCE, SSTI, LFI, XXE, CORS, CSRF, prototype pollution, subdomain takeover, HTTP smuggling, open redirect, API/GraphQL bugs; auditing locally downloaded GitHub repos or source code (white-box/source code review); writing platform-specific reports. Trigger on: 'pentest', 'find bugs', 'security audit', 'bug bounty', 'find vulnerabilities', 'source code review', 'audit this repo', 'review repo', 'white-box', 'local repo', vulnerability class names, or program/target names. Reports only real, confirmed medium+ severity bugs that pass real triage.

modbender/skill-library-mcp Agent Skills author: modbender MIT 35 files body ≈ 2 121 tokens Open the sourcegithub.com analyzed 2 d ago

Web2 bug bounty hunting agent — evidence-based vulnerability finder and report writer.

As a process F 53/100 · Will not run — References files that are not bundled: references/platforms/<platform>.md, references/vulnerabilities/<type>.md

IntegrationGitHubData and analyticsSecuritySoftware developmenttype and topics are labelled automatically from the skill text
JSON
Technical rating
B
78/100
safety, quality, tests
Safety 60%
73
Quality 40%
86
Run on models
none yet
Process rating
F
53/100
Will not run
References files that are not bundled: references/platforms/<platform>.md, references/vulnerabilities/<type>.md
Tools and files w 18
0
Inputs and preconditions w 11
0
Progress reporting w 2
0
the three weakest of ten parameters · all ten

How to improve

  1. The text references files that are not there: add them or drop the references.
For the model run — optional
  • Your own cases (evals/evals.json, 4–6 real requests with expected answers): the full check would then run those instead of a model-drafted suite.
  • A spec.yaml with trigger phrases and assertions — a behaviour contract for CI; `skilltest init` writes a template.

Guard findings · 27

✓ No critical or high findings

Medium and low: 27
  • low Risky intent intent-offensive-security CHANGELOG.md:63
    Offensive-security / dual-use content (legitimate for authorised testing; review intended use)
    - 32-file structured web2 bug bounty agent skill
  • low Risky intent intent-offensive-security README.md:3
    Offensive-security / dual-use content (legitimate for authorised testing; review intended use)
    > Structured web2 bug bounty AI skill — 18 vulnerability classes, 4 bug bounty platforms, zero AI slop. Compatible with OpenClaw, Cursor, Claude Code, Antigravity, and Windsurf.
  • low Risky intent intent-offensive-security README.md:15
    Offensive-security / dual-use content (legitimate for authorised testing; review intended use)
    BugReaper is an [Agent Skill](https://agentskills.io) that turns any compatible AI agent into a disciplined web2 bug bounty hunter. It enforces evidence-based validation, simulates real triage for Hac
  • low Risky intent intent-offensive-security README.md:74
    Offensive-security / dual-use content (legitimate for authorised testing; review intended use) (quoted — discussed, not commanded)
    The skill auto-triggers when you mention `bug bounty`, `pentest`, `find vulnerabilities`, or any vulnerability class name in your agent conversation.
    quoted
  • low Risky intent intent-offensive-security references/audit-rules.md:1
    Offensive-security / dual-use content (legitimate for authorised testing; review intended use) (detector / deny-list definition)
    # Audit Rules — Web2 Bug Bounty
    detector
  • low Risky intent intent-offensive-security references/audit-rules.md:3
    Offensive-security / dual-use content (legitimate for authorised testing; review intended use)
    Strict filtering for findings that pass real bug bounty triage. Read this BEFORE auditing any target.
  • low Risky intent intent-offensive-security references/chaining.md:133
    Offensive-security / dual-use content (legitimate for authorised testing; review intended use)
    ### 🔗 Chain 7: IDOR + Mass Assignment → Privilege Escalation
  • low Risky intent intent-offensive-security references/exploit-validation.md:72
    Offensive-security / dual-use content (legitimate for authorised testing; review intended use)
    - User role → Admin function (privilege escalation)
  • low Risky intent intent-offensive-security references/platforms/bugcrowd.md:71
    Offensive-security / dual-use content (legitimate for authorised testing; review intended use)
    - Privilege escalation: [what access gained beyond intended]
  • low Risky intent intent-offensive-security references/source-code-audit.md:5
    Offensive-security / dual-use content (legitimate for authorised testing; review intended use) (detector / deny-list definition)
    > **Authorization:** Source code review must still target programs where you have permission to test (active bug bounty program, OSS program, or explicit written authorization).
    detector
  • low Exfiltration read-dotenv references/source-code-audit.md:162
    Reads a .env file (documentation of a security skill)
    cat .env .env.local .env.development .env.production 2>/dev/null
    security skill
  • low Risky intent intent-offensive-security references/vulnerabilities/auth-bypass.md:12
    Offensive-security / dual-use content (legitimate for authorised testing; review intended use)
    | Privilege escalation | Role parameter manipulation, JWT claim forgery |
  • low Risky intent intent-offensive-security references/vulnerabilities/csrf.md:26
    Offensive-security / dual-use content (legitimate for authorised testing; review intended use)
    - Add admin user → privilege escalation
  • low Risky intent intent-offensive-security references/vulnerabilities/open-redirect.md:7
    Offensive-security / dual-use content (legitimate for authorised testing; review intended use) (detector / deny-list definition)
    **Standalone open redirect is generally LOW severity.** It becomes **Medium–High** when chained with other vulnerabilities (OAuth token theft, credential harvesting via trusted domain, etc.).
    detector
  • low Risky intent intent-offensive-security references/vulnerabilities/open-redirect.md:63
    Offensive-security / dual-use content (legitimate for authorised testing; review intended use)
    **Most bug bounty programs will reject bare open redirects unless chained.** Always look for an auth context: OAuth, password reset, login flow, email verification.
  • low Risky intent intent-offensive-security references/vulnerabilities/open-redirect.md:91
    Offensive-security / dual-use content (legitimate for authorised testing; review intended use)
    - Full exploit chain documented step by step
  • low Dangerous commands cmd-eval-dynamic references/vulnerabilities/rce.md:27
    Dynamic code execution from decoded/untrusted input (documentation of a security skill)
    os.system(f"ping {user_input}")
    security skill
  • low Exfiltration exfil-webhook-url references/vulnerabilities/ssrf.md:30
    Webhook / callback URL commonly used for exfiltration (verify the destination) (placeholder value)
    Example: `url=https://YOUR-COLLABORATOR-ID.oast.pro`
    placeholder
  • low Secrets in code secret-high-entropy-token references/vulnerabilities/ssrf.md:78
    High-entropy token-like string (may be an id, hash or a credential) (quoted — discussed, not commanded)
    `curl -X PUT "http://[cloud-imds-ip]/latest/api/token" -H "X-aw…ds: 21600"`
    quoted
  • low Risky intent intent-offensive-security references/vulnerabilities/xss.md:64
    Offensive-security / dual-use content (legitimate for authorised testing; review intended use)
    | Admin panel | Admin account compromise, lateral movement |
  • low Risky intent intent-offensive-security references/waf-bypass.md:234
    Offensive-security / dual-use content (legitimate for authorised testing; review intended use)
    ## Important Notes for Bug Bounty
  • low Risky intent intent-offensive-security SKILL.md:10
    Offensive-security / dual-use content (legitimate for authorised testing; review intended use) (detector / deny-list definition)
    description: "Web2 bug bounty hunting agent — evidence-based vulnerability finder and report writer. Use when: auditing web apps/APIs for HackerOne, Bugcrowd, Intigriti, YesWeHack; hunting XSS, SQLi, 
    detector
  • low Risky intent intent-offensive-security SKILL.md:13
    Offensive-security / dual-use content (legitimate for authorised testing; review intended use)
    # Web2 Bug Bounty Agent
  • low Risky intent intent-offensive-security SKILL.md:15
    Offensive-security / dual-use content (legitimate for authorised testing; review intended use)
    You are a senior offensive security researcher and bug bounty hunter. Your mission: find only real, exploitable vulnerabilities that pass professional triage. No guessing. No speculation. No false pos
  • low Risky intent intent-offensive-security SKILL.md:30
    Offensive-security / dual-use content (legitimate for authorised testing; review intended use) (detector / deny-list definition)
    > **WARNING — Authorization required.** Only proceed against targets covered by an active bug bounty program scope or with explicit written permission. Ask the user to confirm the target is in scope b
    detector
  • low Risky intent intent-offensive-security SKILL.md:51
    Offensive-security / dual-use content (legitimate for authorised testing; review intended use)
    3. **`role` / `admin` / `isAdmin` in API responses:** If returned in your own profile API, try adding it to a PUT/PATCH request. Mass assignment → privilege escalation.

A further 1 matches are quotations in this security skill's documentation and are not counted as findings.

Files scanned: 35. Evidence is masked. Grey chips explain why severity was lowered.

Against the Agent Skills spec

  • warning missing-ref reference to a missing file: references/platforms/<platform>.md
  • warning missing-ref reference to a missing file: references/vulnerabilities/<type>.md

Process rating: all ten parameters 53/100

Will not run. References files that are not bundled: references/platforms/<platform>.md, references/vulnerabilities/<type>.md
  • 0Tools and files. 2 referenced file(s) missing: references/platforms/<platform>.md, references/vulnerabilities/<type>.md
  • 0Inputs and preconditions. Does not say what the process needs to start
  • 0Progress reporting. Says nothing while it works
  • 30Running it twice. 1 mutating operations with no state check
  • 60Result and completion. Output format stated, no completion criterion
  • 60Failures and branches. 2 branches
  • 70When it triggers. States when to use, but not when not to
  • 100Steps. 24 steps
  • 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
  • 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 2121 tokens

Everything here is measured from the skill text rather than judged by a model, so the numbers are checkable. A parameter weighs more when it is a more common reason for the process to stall.

Quality signals

  • +5Description has no quoted example phrases that should trigger the skill
  • +4Description does not say when NOT to use the skill (false activations)
  • +2Single-language instructions
  • +3Description length 765: enough signal without eating the budget
  • +4Structure: 11 headings
  • +3Step-by-step instructions: 24 items
  • +3Output format is stated explicitly
  • +4Has examples (2 code blocks)
  • +4Reference files are cited in the instructions (8 of 8)
  • +3All 2 scripts are documented
  • +1License stated

Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 86.