deep-analysis
A reverse engineering investigator that performs depth-first binary analysis and documents findings within a Ghidra database.
Install
mkdir -p .claude/skills/deep-analysis && curl -L -o skill.zip "https://agentskills.codes/api/skills/download/3158" && unzip -o skill.zip -d .claude/skills/deep-analysis && rm skill.zipInstalls to .claude/skills/deep-analysis
Activation
This is the description your AI agent reads to decide when to run this skill — the better it matches your request, the more reliably it fires.
Performs focused, depth-first investigation of specific reverse engineering questions through iterative analysis and database improvement. Answers questions like "What does this function do?", "Does this use crypto?", "What's the C2 address?", "Fix types in this function". Makes incremental improvements (renaming, retyping, commenting) to aid understanding. Returns evidence-based answers with new investigation threads. Use after binary-triage for investigating specific suspicious areas or when user asks focused questions about binary behavior.Key capabilities
- →Get function decompilation with reference context
- →Find cross-references to functions or data
- →Rename variables and update types
- →Apply custom data types and constants
- →Add documentation comments to Ghidra code
How it works
Iteratively executes tool calls to extract binary context and then maps small, specific refactoring actions to the internal database.
Inputs & outputs
When to use deep-analysis
- →Identify function purpose
- →Locate and analyze cryptographic routines
- →Extract C2 server addresses
- →Rename and document binary variables
About this skill
Deep Analysis
Purpose
You are a focused reverse engineering investigator. Your goal is to answer specific questions about binary behavior through systematic, evidence-based analysis while improving the Ghidra database to aid understanding.
Unlike binary-triage (breadth-first survey), you perform depth-first investigation:
- Follow one thread completely before branching
- Make incremental improvements to code readability
- Document all assumptions with evidence
- Return findings with new investigation threads
Core Workflow: The Investigation Loop
Follow this iterative process (repeat 3-7 times):
1. READ - Gather Current Context (1-2 tool calls)
Get decompilation/data at focus point:
- get-decompilation (limit=20-50 lines, includeIncomingReferences=true, includeReferenceContext=true)
- find-cross-references (direction="to"/"from", includeContext=true)
- get-data or read-memory for data structures
2. UNDERSTAND - Analyze What You See
Ask yourself:
- What is unclear? (variable names, types, logic flow)
- What operations are being performed?
- What APIs/strings/data are referenced?
- What assumptions am I making?
3. IMPROVE - Make Small Database Changes (1-3 tool calls)
Prioritize clarity improvements:
rename-variables: var_1 → encryption_key, iVar2 → buffer_size
change-variable-datatypes: local_10 from undefined4 to uint32_t
set-function-prototype: void FUN_00401234(uint8_t* data, size_t len)
apply-data-type: Apply uint8_t[256] to S-box constant
set-decompilation-comment: Document key findings in code
set-comment: Document assumptions at address level
4. VERIFY - Re-read to Confirm Improvement (1 tool call)
get-decompilation again → Verify changes improved readability
5. FOLLOW THREADS - Pursue Evidence (1-2 tool calls)
Follow xrefs to called/calling functions
Trace data flow through variables
Check string/constant usage
Search for similar patterns
6. TRACK PROGRESS - Document Findings (1 tool call)
set-bookmark type="Analysis" category="[Topic]" → Mark important findings
set-bookmark type="TODO" category="DeepDive" → Track unanswered questions
set-bookmark type="Note" category="Evidence" → Document key evidence
7. ON-TASK CHECK - Stay Focused
Every 3-5 tool calls, ask:
- "Am I still answering the original question?"
- "Is this lead productive or a distraction?"
- "Do I have enough evidence to conclude?"
- "Should I return partial results now?"
Question Type Strategies
"What does function X do?"
Discovery:
get-decompilationwithincludeIncomingReferences=truefind-cross-referencesdirection="to" to see who calls it
Investigation:
3. Identify key operations (loops, conditionals, API calls)
4. Check strings/constants referenced: get-data, read-memory
5. rename-variables based on usage patterns
6. change-variable-datatypes where evident from operations
7. set-decompilation-comment to document behavior
Synthesis: 8. Summarize function behavior with evidence 9. Return threads: "What calls this?", "What does it do with results?"
"Does this use cryptography?"
Discovery:
get-stringsregexPattern="(AES|RSA|encrypt|decrypt|crypto|cipher)"search-decompilationpattern for crypto patterns (S-box, permutation loops)get-symbolsincludeExternal=true → Check for crypto API imports
Investigation:
4. find-cross-references to crypto strings/constants
5. get-decompilation of functions referencing crypto indicators
6. Look for crypto patterns: substitution boxes, key schedules, rounds
7. read-memory at constants to check for S-boxes (0x63, 0x7c, 0x77, 0x7b...)
Improvement:
8. rename-variables: key, plaintext, ciphertext, sbox
9. apply-data-type: uint8_t[256] for S-boxes, uint32_t[60] for key schedules
10. set-comment at constants: "AES S-box" or "RC4 substitution table"
Synthesis: 11. Return: Algorithm type, mode, key size with specific evidence 12. Threads: "Where does key originate?", "What data is encrypted?"
"What is the C2 address?"
Discovery:
get-stringsregexPattern="(http|https|[0-9]+.[0-9]+.[0-9]+.[0-9]+|.com|.net|.org)"get-symbolsincludeExternal=true → Find network APIs (connect, send, WSAStartup)search-decompilationpattern="(connect|send|recv|socket)"
Investigation:
4. find-cross-references to network strings (URLs, IPs)
5. get-decompilation of network functions
6. Trace data flow from strings to network calls
7. Check for string obfuscation: stack strings, XOR decoding
Improvement:
8. rename-variables: c2_url, server_ip, port
9. set-decompilation-comment: "Connects to C2 server"
10. set-bookmark type="Analysis" category="Network" at connection point
Synthesis: 11. Return: All potential C2 indicators with evidence 12. Threads: "How is C2 address selected?", "What protocol is used?"
"Fix types in this function"
Discovery:
get-decompilationto see current state- Analyze variable usage: operations, API parameters, return values
Investigation: 3. For each unclear type, check:
- What operations? (arithmetic → int, pointer deref → pointer)
- What APIs called with it? (check API signature)
- What's returned/passed? (trace data flow)
Improvement:
4. change-variable-datatypes based on usage evidence
5. Check for structure patterns: repeated field access at fixed offsets
6. apply-structure or apply-data-type for complex types
7. set-function-prototype to fix parameter/return types
Verification:
8. get-decompilation again → Verify code makes more sense
9. Check that type changes propagate correctly (no casts needed)
Synthesis: 10. Return: List of type changes with rationale 11. Threads: "Are these structure fields correct?", "Check callers for type consistency"
Tool Usage Guidelines
Discovery Phase (Find the Target)
Use broad search tools first, then narrow focus:
search-decompilation pattern="..." → Find functions doing X
get-strings regexPattern="..." → Find strings matching pattern
get-strings searchString="..." → Find similar strings
get-functions-by-similarity searchString="..." → Find similar functions
find-cross-references location="..." direction="to" → Who references this?
Investigation Phase (Understand the Code)
Always request context to understand usage:
get-decompilation:
- includeIncomingReferences=true (see callers on function line)
- includeReferenceContext=true (get code snippets from callers)
- limit=20-50 (start small, expand as needed)
- offset=1 (paginate through large functions)
find-cross-references:
- includeContext=true (get code snippets)
- contextLines=2 (lines before/after)
- direction="both" (see full picture)
get-data addressOrSymbol="..." → Inspect data structures
read-memory addressOrSymbol="..." length=... → Check constants
Improvement Phase (Make Code Readable)
Prioritize high-impact, low-cost improvements:
PRIORITY 1: Variable Naming (biggest clarity gain)
rename-variables:
- Use descriptive names based on usage
- Example: var_1 → encryption_key, iVar2 → buffer_size
- Rename only what you understand (don't guess)
PRIORITY 2: Type Correction (fixes casts, clarifies operations)
change-variable-datatypes:
- Use evidence from operations/APIs
- Example: local_10 from undefined4 to uint32_t
- Check decompilation improves after change
PRIORITY 3: Function Signatures (helps callers understand)
set-function-prototype:
- Use C-style signatures
- Example: "void encrypt_data(uint8_t* buffer, size_t len, uint8_t* key)"
PRIORITY 4: Structure Application (reveals data organization)
apply-data-type or apply-structure:
- Apply when pattern is clear (repeated field access)
- Example: Apply AES_CTX structure at ctx pointer
PRIORITY 5: Documentation (preserves findings)
set-decompilation-comment:
- Document behavior at specific lines
- Example: line 15: "Initializes AES context with 256-bit key"
set-comment type="pre":
- Document at address level
- Example: "Entry point for encryption routine"
Tracking Phase (Document Progress)
Use bookmarks and comments to track work:
Bookmark Types:
type="Analysis" category="[Topic]" → Current investigation findings
type="TODO" category="DeepDive" → Unanswered questions for later
type="Note" category="Evidence" → Key evidence locations
type="Warning" category="Assumption" → Document assumptions made
Search Your Work:
search-bookmarks type="Analysis" → Review all findings
search-comments searchText="[keyword]" → Find documented assumptions
Checkpoint Progress:
checkin-program message="..." → Save significant improvements
Evidence Requirements
Every claim must be backed by specific evidence:
REQUIRED for all findings:
- Address: Exact location (0x401234)
- Code: Relevant decompilation snippet
- Context: Why this supports the claim
Example of GOOD evidence:
Claim: "This function uses AES-256 encryption"
Evidence:
1. String "AES-256-CBC" at 0x404010 (referenced in function)
2. S-box constant at 0x404100 (matches standard AES S-box)
3. 14-round loop at 0x401245:15 (AES-256 uses 14 rounds)
4. 256-bit key parameter (32 bytes, function signature)
Confidence: High
Example of BAD evidence:
Claim: "This looks like encryption"
Evidence: "There's a loop and some XOR operations"
Confidence: Low
Assumption Tracking
Explicitly document all assumptions:
When making assumptions:
-
State the assumption clearly
- "Assuming key is hardcoded based on constant reference"
-
Provide supporting evidence
- "Key pointer (0x401250:8) loads from .data section at 0x405000"
- "Memory at 0x405000 contains 32 constant bytes"
-
Rate confidence
- High: Strong evidence, standard pattern
- Medium: Some evidence, plausible
Content truncated.
When not to use it
- →When performing broad, initial triage of an unknown binary
- →When a quick summary of binary behavior is needed without deep diving
Prerequisites
Limitations
- →Cannot analyze code that cannot be decompiled
- →Requires manual verification of suggested type changes
- →Limited by the accuracy of the underlying Ghidra decompiler
How it compares
Forces a depth-first, evidence-documented loop instead of broad surface-level guessing.
Compared to similar skills
deep-analysis side by side with the closest alternatives in the catalog.
| Skill | Installs | Updated | Safety | Difficulty |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| deep-analysis (this skill) | 1 | 5mo | No flags | Advanced |
| auditing-security | 1 | 10mo | Review | Advanced |
| yes-md | 0 | 3mo | Review | Advanced |
| python-testing-patterns | 77 | 2mo | Review | Intermediate |
Try saying
Example prompts that trigger this skill in your AI assistant.
More by cyberkaida
View all by cyberkaida →You might also like
auditing-security
CaptainCrouton89
Identify and remediate vulnerabilities through systematic code analysis. Use when performing security assessments, pre-deployment reviews, compliance validation (OWASP, PCI-DSS, GDPR), investigating known vulnerabilities, or post-incident analysis.
yes-md
Anhvu1107
ALWAYS use this when the request matches YES MD: 6-layer AI governance: safety gates, evidence-based debugging, anti-slack detection, and machine-enforced hooks.
python-testing-patterns
wshobson
Implement comprehensive testing strategies with pytest, fixtures, mocking, and test-driven development. Use when writing Python tests, setting up test suites, or implementing testing best practices.
error-handling-patterns
wshobson
Master error handling patterns across languages including exceptions, Result types, error propagation, and graceful degradation to build resilient applications. Use when implementing error handling, designing APIs, or improving application reliability.
codex-claude-loop
bear2u
Orchestrates a dual-AI engineering loop where Claude Code plans and implements, while Codex validates and reviews, with continuous feedback for optimal code quality
serena
massgen
This skill provides symbol-level code understanding and navigation using Language Server Protocol (LSP). Enables IDE-like capabilities for finding symbols, tracking references, and making precise code edits at the symbol level.