active-directory-attacks

Provide comprehensive techniques for attacking Microsoft Active Directory environments. Covers reconnaissance, credential harvesting, Kerberos attacks, lateral movement, privilege escalation, and domain dominance for red team operations and penetration testing.

Quality

73%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

Securityby

Critical

Do not install without reviewing

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./skills/active-directory-attacks/SKILL.md

Quality

Content

64%Scale 1-3

Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.

This is a highly actionable skill with extensive, executable command examples covering a broad range of AD attack techniques. Its main weaknesses are the monolithic structure that could benefit from splitting into referenced sub-files, and the lack of integrated validation checkpoints within multi-step attack workflows. The content is mostly concise but has some redundancy and boilerplate that could be trimmed.

Suggestions

Integrate explicit validation checkpoints into multi-step workflows (e.g., 'Verify DCSync rights before attempting: crackmapexec ldap ... --check-replication-rights') rather than listing constraints separately at the end.

Split the content into referenced sub-files (e.g., kerberos-attacks.md, credential-attacks.md, relay-attacks.md, cve-exploits.md) and keep SKILL.md as a concise overview with the quick reference table and links.

Remove the redundant 'When to Use' boilerplate and consolidate the tool table with the quick reference table to reduce duplication.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The skill is mostly efficient with concrete commands rather than explanations, but includes some unnecessary sections like the 'Purpose' restating the description, the 'Inputs/Prerequisites' and 'Outputs/Deliverables' sections that are somewhat obvious, and the 'When to Use' boilerplate at the end. The tool table and quick reference table are somewhat redundant with each other.	2 / 3
Actionability	Nearly every technique includes fully executable, copy-paste-ready commands with specific tool invocations, flags, and arguments. Multiple tool alternatives are provided for each attack type, and the examples section shows complete end-to-end attack chains with numbered steps.	3 / 3
Workflow Clarity	The core workflow has numbered steps and the examples show sequenced attack chains, but validation checkpoints are largely missing. For destructive operations like ZeroLogon exploitation, the password restore step is mentioned but there's no explicit 'verify before proceeding' pattern. The constraints section lists some safety checks but they're separated from the workflow rather than integrated as validation gates.	2 / 3
Progressive Disclosure	The content references 'references/advanced-attacks.md' for advanced techniques, which is good progressive disclosure, but no bundle files exist to support this reference. The main file itself is quite long (~300 lines) and could benefit from splitting credential attacks, Kerberos attacks, and CVE exploits into separate referenced files rather than inlining everything.	2 / 3
	Total	9 / 12 Passed

Description

82%Scale 1-3

Based on the skill's description, can an agent find and select it at the right time? Clear, specific descriptions lead to better discovery.

This is a strong description with excellent specificity and domain-relevant trigger terms that security professionals would naturally use. Its main weakness is the absence of an explicit 'Use when...' clause, which would help Claude know precisely when to select this skill. The description is well-scoped to a clear niche with minimal conflict risk.

Suggestions

Add an explicit 'Use when...' clause, e.g., 'Use when the user asks about attacking Active Directory, AD exploitation, red teaming Windows domains, or pentesting AD environments.'

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	Lists multiple specific concrete actions: reconnaissance, credential harvesting, Kerberos attacks, lateral movement, privilege escalation, and domain dominance. These are well-defined, specific categories of activity.	3 / 3
Completeness	Clearly answers 'what does this do' with the list of attack techniques, but lacks an explicit 'Use when...' clause. The context of red team/pentesting is mentioned but not framed as trigger guidance. Per rubric guidelines, missing 'Use when' caps completeness at 2.	2 / 3
Trigger Term Quality	Includes strong natural keywords users would say: 'Active Directory', 'Kerberos attacks', 'lateral movement', 'privilege escalation', 'credential harvesting', 'red team', 'penetration testing', 'domain dominance', 'reconnaissance'. These cover the terms a security professional would naturally use.	3 / 3
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	Highly distinctive with a clear niche: Microsoft Active Directory attack techniques for red team operations. The combination of AD-specific terminology (Kerberos, domain dominance) and offensive security context makes it very unlikely to conflict with other skills.	3 / 3
	Total	11 / 12 Passed

Validation

90%

Warnings & errors only

Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.

Validation — 10 / 11 Passed

Validation for skill structure

Criteria	Description	Result
frontmatter_unknown_keys	Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata	Warning

	Total	10 / 11 Passed

Repository: popey/claude-code-skills
Path: skills/active-directory-attacks/SKILL.md
Commit: a5a6601

Reviewed: 5 days ago

Table of Contents

Discovery Implementation Validation

Is this your skill?

If you maintain this skill, you can claim it as your own. Once claimed, you can manage eval scenarios, bundle related skills, attach documentation or rules, and ensure cross-agent compatibility.