docs: add pentesting prompt methodology guidance#266
docs: add pentesting prompt methodology guidance#266mason5052 wants to merge 1 commit intovxcontrol:mainfrom
Conversation
Signed-off-by: Mason Kim(ZINUS US_SALES) <mkim@zinus.com>
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Pull request overview
Adds pentesting-specific prompt-author guidance to PentAGI’s documentation, aiming to help prompt authors translate standard pentest methodology into reusable, reviewable agent instructions.
Changes:
- Adds a phase-based “Pentesting Prompt Methodology” section to the README and links it from the Table of Contents.
- Extends
backend/docs/prompt_engineering_pentagi.mdwith a pentester-oriented methodology checklist and external reference pointers. - Points contributors to existing prompt assets (notably
examples/prompts/base_web_pentest.mdand the pentester template).
Reviewed changes
Copilot reviewed 2 out of 2 changed files in this pull request and generated 2 comments.
| File | Description |
|---|---|
| README.md | Adds a pentesting prompt methodology section and a TOC entry intended to help prompt authors structure offensive-security prompts. |
| backend/docs/prompt_engineering_pentagi.md | Adds a pentesting methodology checklist plus curated reference links and pointers to in-repo prompt templates/examples. |
💡 Add Copilot custom instructions for smarter, more guided reviews. Learn how to get started.
| - [Pentesting Prompt Methodology](#pentesting-prompt-methodology) | ||
| - [Testing LLM Agents](#testing-llm-agents) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The Table of Contents nests “Pentesting Prompt Methodology” under “Development”, but the actual “### Pentesting Prompt Methodology” section appears under “Testing LLM Agents” later in the README. This makes the TOC structure misleading even though the anchor works; please either move the section under the Development chapter or relocate the TOC entry under the correct parent heading (Testing LLM Agents).
| - [Pentesting Prompt Methodology](#pentesting-prompt-methodology) | |
| - [Testing LLM Agents](#testing-llm-agents) | |
| - [Testing LLM Agents](#testing-llm-agents) | |
| - [Pentesting Prompt Methodology](#pentesting-prompt-methodology) |
| #### Recommended Reference Material | ||
| - Use public methodology resources such as [HackTricks](https://book.hacktricks.wiki/en/index.html) and [Pentest Book](https://pentestbook.six2dez.com/) as inspiration for attack-surface coverage and testing depth. | ||
| - Translate those references into concise phases, priorities, and verification rules for the agent instead of copying long checklists into the system prompt verbatim. | ||
| - Keep prompt examples aligned with live PentAGI assets such as `backend/pkg/templates/prompts/pentester.tmpl` and `../../examples/prompts/base_web_pentest.md`. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This bullet mixes a repo-root path (backend/pkg/...) with a relative-from-this-file path (../../examples/...). For clarity and consistency, prefer a single convention (e.g., repo-root paths like examples/prompts/base_web_pentest.md) and ideally make them markdown links so readers can click through.
| - Keep prompt examples aligned with live PentAGI assets such as `backend/pkg/templates/prompts/pentester.tmpl` and `../../examples/prompts/base_web_pentest.md`. | |
| - Keep prompt examples aligned with live PentAGI assets such as [`backend/pkg/templates/prompts/pentester.tmpl`](../pkg/templates/prompts/pentester.tmpl) and [`examples/prompts/base_web_pentest.md`](../../examples/prompts/base_web_pentest.md). |
Summary
examples/prompts/base_web_pentest.mdstarter promptProblem
Issue #79 asks for better guidance on how AI prompts should approach pentesting. PentAGI already includes prompt templates and a sample web pentest prompt, but the documentation does not explain how to translate pentesting methodology into reusable agent guidance.
Solution
backend/docs/prompt_engineering_pentagi.mdwith guidance for authorization boundaries, coverage-first mapping, attack-surface prioritization, low-risk validation, evidence capture, iterative memory use, and report-ready summariesUser Impact
Prompt authors now have a clearer path for turning pentest methodology into PentAGI prompts. This should make new prompt iterations easier to structure, easier to review, and easier to adapt to different engagement scopes.
Test Plan
git diff --checkCloses #79