boshu2/agentops/skills/reverse-engineer/SKILL.md
reverse-engineer
Reverse-engineer an authorized repo, binary, or product into a verifiable feature inventory and adoption map. Triggers: "reverse-engineer X", "tear down Y", "what should we steal from Z", "evaluate competitor/upstream", "should we fork/adopt/build-native".
- Source repository stars
- 416
- Declared platforms
- 0
- Static risk flags
- 2
- Last source update
- 2026-08-05
- Source checked
- 2026-08-05
Decision brief
What it does—and where it fits
Reverse-engineer an external system into two things: a mechanically-verifiable teardown (feature inventory + registry + specs, optionally a security audit) and a steal-map — what to adopt into our surfaces, what to leave behind. The teardown is the evidence; the steal-map is the…
Not for
- Tasks that require unconfirmed production actions or broad system permissions.
- Environments where the pinned source and install steps cannot be inspected.
Compatibility matrix
Platform support, with evidence labels
| Platform | Status | Evidence | What to check |
|---|---|---|---|
| Codex | Not declared | No explicit evidence | Portability before use |
| Claude Code | Not declared | No explicit evidence | Portability before use |
| Cursor | Not declared | No explicit evidence | Portability before use |
| Gemini CLI | Not declared | No explicit evidence | Portability before use |
Installation
Inspect first. Install second.
The source command is displayed only when detected. A safe inspection prompt is always available so your agent can explain every action before execution.
npx skills add https://github.com/boshu2/agentops --skill "skills/reverse-engineer"Inspect the Agent Skill "reverse-engineer" from https://github.com/boshu2/agentops/blob/c0f78fddd95ab30f8adadc5e513e27064980a529/skills/reverse-engineer/SKILL.md at commit c0f78fddd95ab30f8adadc5e513e27064980a529. List every install step, command, network request, credential, file read/write, external action, and rollback step. Explain whether it fits my task. Do not install or execute anything until I approve.
Workflow
What the source asks the agent to do
- 01
Phase 1 — Mechanical teardown (the script)
Produce evidence, not vibes. The script clones (pinned), scans CLI/config/artifact surface, and writes a feature inventory + machine-checkable registry + spec set.
Produce evidence, not vibes. The script clones (pinned), scans CLI/config/artifact surface, and writes a feature inventory + machine-checkable registry + spec set.Binary mode requires --authorized (see Invocation Contract + Self-Test). Use the bundled demo fixture if you lack authorization for a real binary. - 02
Phase 2 — The steal-map (the decision)
Map each capability the teardown found onto our surfaces. This is the part that turns research into a decision. Emit .agents/research//steal-map.md with a table; every row cites the teardown evidence and the matching surface in our repo.
steal — we lack it and it advances our core. Steal the pattern, not the storage engine: re-express in our primitives, never vendor their runtime.park — real, but it's substrate we deliberately delegate (e.g. orchestration per ADR-0009) or downstream of an unproven bet. Name it, don't build it.reject — it conflicts with our doctrine (e.g. a self-reported completion edge where we require a verdict — "no verdict = not done"). - 03
⚠️ Constraints — Hard Guardrails (MANDATORY)
Only operate on code/binaries you own or have explicit written authorization to analyze — this matters because unauthorized teardown is the legal/IP line.
Only operate on code/binaries you own or have explicit written authorization to analyze — this matters because unauthorized teardown is the legal/IP line.Do not provide steps to bypass protections/ToS or to extract proprietary source/system prompts.Do not output reconstructed proprietary source or embedded prompts (index only; redact in reports) — to prevent reproducing protected IP. - 04
Route one-way-door adoptions into planning
If adopting a steal is a one-way door (an architecture fork, a new bounded context, or a migration), do not decide it here. Hand the steal-map to Plan. Dueling Idea Genies or Premortem may challenge the choice as advisory evidence. Plan alone shapes the selected option in the ex…
If adopting a steal is a one-way door (an architecture fork, a new bounded context, or a migration), do not decide it here. Hand the steal-map to Plan. Dueling Idea Genies or Premortem may challenge the choice as adviso… - 05
Invocation Contract
Required: productname. Common flags: --mode=repo|binary|both, --upstream-repo, --upstream-ref (pins the clone to a specific commit/tag/branch; the resolved SHA is recorded in clone-metadata.json on any clone), --output-dir (default .agents/research//), --security-audit, --materi…
Required: productname. Common flags: --mode=repo|binary|both, --upstream-repo, --upstream-ref (pins the clone to a specific commit/tag/branch; the resolved SHA is recorded in clone-metadata.json on any clone), --output-…
Permission review
Static risk signals and limitations
Runs scripts
The documentation asks the agent to run terminal commands or scripts.
python3 skills/reverse-engineer/scripts/reverse_engineer.py <product> --mode=repo \Network access
The documentation includes network, browsing, or remote request actions.
-upstream-repo="https://github.com/org/repo.git" --upstream-ref=v1.0.0 \Runs scripts
The documentation asks the agent to run terminal commands or scripts.
python3 "$output_dir/validate-feature-registry.py"Evidence record
Why each signal appears
| Signal | Value | Evidence type | Meaning |
|---|---|---|---|
| Quality score | 85/100 | Computed | Documentation, specificity, maintenance, and trust rules |
| Repository stars | 416 | Source | Repository attention, not individual Skill quality |
| Compatibility | 0 platforms | Source | Declared in the catalog source record |
| Usage guide | automated source guide | Editorial | Generated or reviewed according to the visible evidence level |
Pinned source
Provenance and original SKILL.md
- Repository
- boshu2/agentops
- Skill path
- skills/reverse-engineer/SKILL.md
- Commit
- c0f78fddd95ab30f8adadc5e513e27064980a529
- License
- Apache-2.0
- Collected
- 2026-08-05
- Default branch
- main
View the original SKILL.md
Reverse Engineer
Reverse-engineer an external system into two things: a mechanically-verifiable teardown (feature inventory + registry + specs, optionally a security audit) and a steal-map — what to adopt into our surfaces, what to leave behind. The teardown is the evidence; the steal-map is the decision. Separating them works because a decision row that must cite a registry entry can be re-checked by anyone, while a decision made from impressions cannot be re-checked by its own author. The original failure mode this skill exists to prevent: reading a competitor's README and "deciding" from vibes.
Triggers: "reverse-engineer X", "tear down Y", "what should we steal from Z", "evaluate competitor/upstream", "should we fork/adopt/build-native".
⚠️ Constraints — Hard Guardrails (MANDATORY)
- Only operate on code/binaries you own or have explicit written authorization to analyze — this matters because unauthorized teardown is the legal/IP line.
- Do not provide steps to bypass protections/ToS or to extract proprietary source/system prompts.
- Do not output reconstructed proprietary source or embedded prompts (index only; redact in reports) — to prevent reproducing protected IP.
- Redact secrets/tokens/keys if encountered; run the secret-scan gate over outputs to prevent credential leakage.
- Always separate docs say vs code proves vs hosted/control-plane.
Phase 1 — Mechanical teardown (the script)
Produce evidence, not vibes. The script clones (pinned), scans CLI/config/artifact surface, and writes a feature inventory + machine-checkable registry + spec set.
python3 skills/reverse-engineer/scripts/reverse_engineer.py <product> --mode=repo \
--upstream-repo="https://github.com/org/repo.git" --upstream-ref=v1.0.0 \
--output-dir=".agents/research/<product>/"
Binary mode requires --authorized (see Invocation Contract + Self-Test). Use the bundled demo fixture if you lack authorization for a real binary.
Phase 2 — The steal-map (the decision)
Map each capability the teardown found onto our surfaces. This is the part that turns research into a decision. Emit .agents/research/<product>/steal-map.md with a table; every row cites the teardown evidence and the matching surface in our repo.
| Their capability | Our surface today | Verdict |
|---|---|---|
<feature> | <our file / skill / CLI, or "none"> | have / gap / steal / park / reject |
Verdict rules (hard-won — apply them, do not skip):
- steal — we lack it and it advances our core. Steal the pattern, not the storage engine: re-express in our primitives, never vendor their runtime.
- park — real, but it's substrate we deliberately delegate (e.g. orchestration per ADR-0009) or downstream of an unproven bet. Name it, don't build it.
- reject — it conflicts with our doctrine (e.g. a self-reported completion edge where we require a verdict — "no verdict = not done").
- have — we already do this; confirm it still holds, move on.
- gap — we should have it and don't. These are the steal candidates.
Discipline that makes the map trustworthy:
- Independently checked, not self-report. Get facts on how they implement each capability from code, cross-checked by a fresh reader — never from a README or one context's summary. Model family is optional metadata, not a trust requirement.
- Probe the real state, don't argue from stale. Re-verify our side against the live tree before calling something a gap; every "X is missing" carries the search that proved it.
- The steal is the pattern, not the platform. Their robustness is usually one idea (unification, a gate, a reconcile loop). Steal the idea; leave the scaffolding.
Route one-way-door adoptions into planning
If adopting a steal is a one-way door (an architecture fork, a new bounded context, or a migration), do not decide it here. Hand the steal-map to Plan. Dueling Idea Genies or Premortem may challenge the choice as advisory evidence. Plan alone shapes the selected option in the existing intent source; neither strategy grants readiness or continuation authority.
Invocation Contract
Required: product_name. Common flags: --mode=repo|binary|both, --upstream-repo, --upstream-ref (pins the clone to a specific commit/tag/branch; the resolved SHA is recorded in clone-metadata.json on any clone), --output-dir (default .agents/research/<product>/), --security-audit, --materialize-archives (authorized-only opt-in; embedded-archive extraction is off/index-only by default), --authorized (mandatory for binary mode — refuses without it). Full list: python3 skills/reverse-engineer/scripts/reverse_engineer.py --help.
Output Specification
Phase-1 teardown under output_dir/: feature-inventory.md, feature-registry.yaml, feature-catalog.md, spec-architecture.md, spec-code-map.md, spec-clone-vs-use.md, spec-clone-mvp.md, plus spec-cli-surface.md only when a CLI is detected and clone-metadata.json only when the script performs a clone (i.e., --upstream-repo is supplied and the target is not already checked out); --upstream-ref pins which commit, it is not what triggers the file. Security mode adds output_dir/security/: threat-model.md, attack-surface.md, dataflow.md, crypto-review.md, authn-authz.md, findings.md, reproducibility.md, validate-security-audit.sh. Phase-2: steal-map.md.
-
Artifact directory: the exact
--output-dir, defaulting to$REPO/.agents/research/<product>/. -
Filename convention: the fixed phase-1 and phase-2 names above; security files live only in the
security/child directory. -
Serialization/schema format: registry is YAML, clone metadata is one JSON object, and inventories/specs/steal-map are nonempty Markdown files.
-
Validator command: with
$output_dir,$security_audit,$sbom, and$upstream_ref_set(each flag0|1) set:set -euo pipefail required=(feature-inventory.md feature-registry.yaml feature-catalog.md spec-architecture.md spec-code-map.md spec-clone-vs-use.md spec-clone-mvp.md analysis-root-path.txt validate-feature-registry.py steal-map.md) for name in "${required[@]}"; do test -f "$output_dir/$name" test ! -L "$output_dir/$name" test -s "$output_dir/$name" done test -f "$output_dir/docs-features.txt" test ! -L "$output_dir/docs-features.txt" test ! -L "$output_dir/spec-cli-surface.md" if [[ -e "$output_dir/spec-cli-surface.md" ]]; then test -f "$output_dir/spec-cli-surface.md" test -s "$output_dir/spec-cli-surface.md" fi python3 "$output_dir/validate-feature-registry.py" if [[ "$upstream_ref_set" == 1 ]]; then test -f "$output_dir/clone-metadata.json" test ! -L "$output_dir/clone-metadata.json" jq -e 'type == "object"' "$output_dir/clone-metadata.json" >/dev/null else [[ "$upstream_ref_set" == 0 ]] fi grep -Fqx '| Their capability | Our surface today | Verdict |' "$output_dir/steal-map.md" if [[ "$security_audit" == 1 ]]; then test -x "$output_dir/security/validate-security-audit.sh" if [[ "$sbom" == 1 ]]; then "$output_dir/security/validate-security-audit.sh" "$output_dir" --sbom else [[ "$sbom" == 0 ]] "$output_dir/security/validate-security-audit.sh" "$output_dir" --no-sbom fi else [[ "$security_audit" == 0 ]] [[ "$sbom" == 0 ]] fi -
Downstream handoff: give the validated
steal-map.mdto Plan for one-way-door candidates; ordinaryhave,park, andrejectdecisions remain evidence-backed terminal rows.
Reproducibility + fixtures
--upstream-ref pins the clone (fetch FETCH_HEAD, record SHA) so contracts can be committed as golden fixtures and diffed across runs. Regression test: bash skills/reverse-engineer/scripts/repo_fixture_test.sh. To update a fixture when contracts legitimately change, re-run with the new pinned ref, copy the contract files into fixtures/<product>/, and commit.
Self-Test (acceptance)
bash skills/reverse-engineer/scripts/self_test.sh
Must show: feature inventory generated, registry generated, registry validator exits 0; in security mode validate-security-audit.sh exits 0 and the secret scan passes.
Examples
Reverse-engineer an OSS CLI (repo mode) → steal-map
Run the skill for cc-sdd with --mode=repo --upstream-repo="https://github.com/gotalab/cc-sdd.git" --upstream-ref=v1.0.0. It clones the pinned source, scans the surface, writes inventory/registry/specs, and maps each feature onto our surfaces (have, gap, steal, park, or reject) in steal-map.md. Supply selected steals to Plan.
Binary analysis with security audit
Run the skill for ao with --authorized --mode=binary --binary-path="$(command -v ao)" --security-audit. It performs authorized static analysis plus the security suite under output_dir/security/; the secret-scan check must pass.
Troubleshooting
| Problem | Cause | Solution |
|---|---|---|
| Refuses binary analysis | Missing --authorized | Add --authorized (explicit written authorization required). |
No clone-metadata.json | --upstream-repo not passed | Pass --upstream-repo (and optionally --upstream-ref). |
| Fixture diff fails | Upstream changed / stale golden | Re-run pinned, refresh fixtures/, commit. |
spec-cli-surface.md missing | No Node/Python/Go CLI detected | Surface is documented in spec-code-map.md instead. |
| Steal-map is all "steal" | Skipped the park/reject rules | Substrate we delegate is park; doctrine conflicts are reject — not everything novel is worth adopting. |
Quality Rubric
- Every steal-map row cites teardown evidence and our matching surface (or "none").
- Verdicts use the full set —
have/gap/steal/park/reject— not everything marked "steal". - Facts on how they implement come from code and a fresh independent check — not a README.
- One-way-door adoptions are supplied to Plan, not decided here.
- Secret-scan gate passed over all outputs; no proprietary source/prompts reproduced.
See Also
- plan — shape selected steals in the existing intent source
- idea-genie — optional advisory challenge (duel mode)
- premortem — optional advisory challenge of the exact plan
- research — general exploration; this is its external-system specialization
Reference Documents
- references/reverse-engineer.feature — executable spec: repo-mode feature catalog + code map, binary-mode security audit, durable spec artifacts
Alternatives
Compare before choosing
coreyhaines31/marketingskills
ab-testing
When the user wants to plan, design, or implement an A/B test or experiment, or build a growth experimentation program. Also use when the user mentions "A/B test," "split test," "experiment," "test this change," "variant copy," "multivariate test," "hypothesis," "should I test this," "which version is better," "test two versions," "statistical significance," "how long should I run this test," "growth experiments," "experiment velocity," "experiment backlog," "ICE score," "experimentation program
alirezarezvani/claude-skills
app-store-optimization
App Store Optimization (ASO) toolkit for researching keywords, analyzing competitor rankings, generating metadata suggestions, and improving app visibility on Apple App Store and Google Play Store. Use when the user asks about ASO, app store rankings, app metadata, app titles and descriptions, app store listings, app visibility, or mobile app marketing on iOS or Android. Supports keyword research and scoring, competitor keyword analysis, metadata optimization, A/B test planning, launch checklist
JasonColapietro/suede-creator-skills
suede-ab-testing
Suede-owned experimentation discipline for hypotheses, sample sizing, test duration, significance, and repeatable experiment programs. Use when comparing variants, deciding whether a result is reliable, or building an experiment backlog and cadence. NOT FOR: analytics instrumentation (use suede-analytics), post-click conversion diagnosis (use suede-site-alchemy), or writing the variant copy itself (use suede-copy).
narrative-io/narrative-skills-marketplace
design-analysis
Translate a fuzzy analytical question into a rigorous investigation plan. Interrogates the ask, grounds the plan in the available data dictionary, applies analytical best practices, and produces a structured brief of query specifications for a downstream query-writing skill. Plans, does not write SQL. Use when: "why did X drop", "is there a relationship between A and B", "who are our highest-value customers", "what's driving the change in Y", "investigate this trend", "design an analysis for", "