Claude Code Spec Workflow is a set of Claude Code commands and agents that organizes software work into documented stages for new features and bug fixes. It is for developers who want Claude Code to handle requirements, design, implementation, issue resolution, and verification through repeatable workflows, with the catalogue entries providing the associated commands and agents.
Getting it into your agent
One page per mod, every tool's command on it. A separate URL per tool would split the same page into five that compete with each other.
npx skills add elementalsouls/Claude-BugHunter --skill bb-methodologygit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/elementalsouls/Claude-BugHunterWrote this? Show the measurements
A badge with what this costs and how it scanned, read live from this page, so it follows the numbers instead of freezing them. Markdown for a README, HTML for a documentation site or a project page.
[](https://agentmods.dev/skills/elementalsouls/claude-bughunter/bb-methodology)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/elementalsouls/claude-bughunter/bb-methodology"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/elementalsouls/claude-bughunter/bb-methodology/github.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" height="20"></a>Or the 80×15 button, for a site that already has a row of RSS and ATOM ones. Only the verdict fits; the numbers stay here.
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/elementalsouls/claude-bughunter/bb-methodology"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/elementalsouls/claude-bughunter/bb-methodology.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>- NVIDIA SkillSpector warn
SkillSpector: 1 finding, up to high
These are SkillSpector’s own severities. On a checked sample its high-severity flags on skills were ~96% false positives — a documented command, a public API, a “never do X” rule — so we show them as a caution to read, not a verdict. Why →
- high Server-Side Request Forgery · line 271 Code accesses a cloud instance metadata endpoint (e.g. 169.254.169.254). A single request can return temporary IAM credentials, making this a high-value SSRF target for credential theft.Fix: Remove access to cloud metadata endpoints unless strictly required. If metadata is needed, restrict it (e.g. IMDSv2 with hop limit) and never expose returned credentials.
What it costs to keep this loaded
Counted locally with the o200k_base tokenizer, which is exact for GPT models; Claude uses its own tokenizer and its counts differ. Treat this as one consistent yardstick across the catalogue rather than a bill. Prices are per million input tokens.
| Model | Per session | Once invoked |
|---|---|---|
| Fable 5.1 | $0.00090 | $0.07321 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00045 | $0.03660 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00018 | $0.01464 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00009 | $0.00732 |
Grade C, and why
bb-methodology scanned grade C with 2 findings against 26 rules in 11 categories — prompt injection, anti-refusal, data exfiltration, privilege escalation, supply chain, agent snooping, system-prompt leakage, SSRF and excessive agency — measured 9d ago.
A static scan of the body, not an audit. Every finding is printed with the line that produced it so you can judge whether it matters here. A mod is markdown that instructs an agent; that is exactly why what it instructs is worth reading.
Cloud metadata endpointhighServer-side request forgery
One request to 169.254.169.254 can return temporary IAM credentials.
| +-- Can reach 169.254.169.254? -> Extract keys -> RCE Makes network callslowCapability
Not a fault in itself. Listed so you know the mod talks to something, and to what.
3. No time diff? OOB (`curl attacker.com`, interactsh) -- watch for DNS callback Copies of this mod
3 near-identical copies found in the catalogue:
- bb-methodology — 100% identical, 1 lines differ
- bb-methodology — 100% identical, 1 lines differ
- bb-methodology — 91% identical, 88 lines differ
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 514 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Bug Bounty Methodology: Workflow + Mindset
Master orchestrator for hunting sessions. Combines the 5-phase non-linear workflow with the critical thinking framework that separates top 1% hunters from the rest.
PART 0: MODE CONFIRMATION (Before Anything Else)
Confirm the engagement type before deciding what counts as a finding. The same target produces a different report shape depending on which mode applies. Getting this wrong is the single biggest waste of time in this workflow — answer it explicitly before Phase 0.
| Engagement type | What counts as a finding | What gets rejected |
|---|---|---|
| Bug bounty (H1 / Bugcrowd / Intigriti / private VDP) | Impact-demonstrated bugs ONLY. Full chain to attacker-attainable harm. | Hygiene (EoL software alone, permissive CSP alone, stack traces, info disclosure without concrete impact, "best practice" violations) |
| Red team (external client engagement) | Hygiene findings + recon + IoCs + defensive-state observations are ALL deliverables | Nothing — even "no finding here" is reportable as a positive defensive observation |
| Pentest (signed SoW / WAPT) | Depends on SoW. Read scope explicitly. Usually accepts hygiene + impact + recon | Out-of-scope assets, unsigned testing |
| Internal audit | Compliance-mapped findings (PCI / ISO / NIST / DPDPA / GDPR) | Findings without a control-mapping |
Hard rule: Before Phase 0 runs, write the engagement type as the first line in your hunt notes. If you can't answer it from the user's instruction, ASK once. Don't assume — the mistake costs both you and the triager.
Lesson from an authorized engagement: First-pass on this target produced 5 hygiene findings (SP2013 EoL, permissive CSP, stack traces) shipped in red-team format. The engagement was bug-bounty. Findings would have been N/A'd as "informational, no impact demonstrated." After the corrected pass with hygiene-as-context-not-finding, the same target yielded 11 impact-demonstrated bugs including 3 Critical.
What this file has done since we first saw it
Hashed on every crawl. A supply-chain change to an agent config is a question of when, not whether, so the history is kept rather than the latest state alone.
- 9d ago First seen · 514 lines · 90 tokens per session scan C 687af8873d83
bb-methodology is a skill published in the GitHub repository elementalsouls/Claude-BugHunter (4,298 stars, last pushed 3d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 90 tokens to every session and 7,321 once invoked, about $0.0005 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it C with 2 findings (cloud metadata endpoint, makes network calls). No closer match exists in the catalogue, so it is treated as the original; first seen 2026-08-30.
Other skills, from other repositories
web2-vuln-classes
Complete reference for 26 web2 bug classes with root causes, detection patterns, bypass tables, exploit techniques, and real paid examples. Covers IDOR, auth bypass, XSS, SSRF (11 IP bypass techniques), SQLi, business logic, race conditions, OAuth/OIDC, file upload (10 bypass techniques), GraphQL, LLM/AI (ASI01-ASI10…
bug-bounty
Complete bug bounty workflow — recon (subdomain enumeration, asset discovery, fingerprinting, HackerOne scope, source code audit), pre-hunt learning (disclosed reports, tech stack research, mind maps, threat modeling), vulnerability hunting (IDOR, SSRF, XSS, auth bypass, CSRF, race conditions, SQLi, XXE, file upload…
credential-attack
Password spray methodology for bug bounty — when to do it vs web-vuln hunting, the wordlist-gen + breach-check + osint-employees + spray pipeline, mode selection (http-form / oauth / o365 / okta), rate-limit + lockout tactics, BBP legal guardrails, success detection, and the spray → authenticated /hunt chain pattern.…
graphql-audit
GraphQL security hunting — introspection abuse, field suggestion enumeration (clairvoyance), batching DoS, IDOR via aliasing, auth bypass, injection via arguments, subscription abuse, depth/complexity bombs, and WAF bypass. Covers graphw00f fingerprinting, gqlmap, graphql-cop, and inql. Use when a target exposes a…
mobile-pentest
Mobile app pentest for bug bounty (Android APK + iOS IPA) — runtime-first workflow: install app, proxy through Burp/mitmproxy, drive the UI, capture packets, then test the API exactly like a web target; escalate to decompile (apktool/jadx) and Frida/objection only when traffic is SSL-pinned, encrypted, or absent.…
report-writing
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…