Decide what to do next after a result — the branching logic that turns a single outcome into the next lead. Load whenever a step just finished (success, partial, or dead end) and it's unclear where to go: "what now", "I got a shell/creds/a hash", "this didn't work", triaging which of several leads to pursue. This is the decision engine between techniques.
Installs into .claude/skills of the current project.
Are you the author of Tradecraft Pivot Decisions?
Add the live security badge to your README. It updates with every re-scan.
[](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/noorqureshi-tradecraft-pivot-decisions)
---
name: tradecraft-pivot-decisions
description: >
Decide what to do next after a result — the branching logic that turns a single outcome into the
next lead. Load whenever a step just finished (success, partial, or dead end) and it's unclear
where to go: "what now", "I got a shell/creds/a hash", "this didn't work", triaging which of
several leads to pursue. This is the decision engine between techniques.
domain: tradecraft
type: methodology
stability: locked
modes: [pentest, bugbounty, defense]
mitre: []
tools: []
schema_version: 1
---
# Pivoting: deciding the next move
## When it applies
A step just produced a result and you must choose the next action instead of blindly running the
next tool. Applies after every meaningful step — this is what keeps an engagement adaptive.
## Why it works
Value comes from routing on evidence: a result changes the probability and payoff of every other
lead. Making the routing explicit (what the result unlocks, what it rules out) avoids both
tunnel-vision and aimless scanning, and produces the `decision` + `rationale` entries the Attack
Map is built from.
## Method
1. **Classify the result**: confirmed / partial / blocked / failed. Record it as the lead's `status`.
2. **Ask what it unlocks** (route by artifact — the signal → skill map):
- creds / hash → crack or spray (`network-credential-cracking`, `network-password-spraying`)
- a shell → enumerate & escalate (`privesc-enumeration` → `privesc-*`)
- SSRF / file read → reach internal services, metadata (`cloud-imds-ssrf`, `web-ssrf`)
- a token / key → what identity does it become? (`cloud-iam-privesc`, `ad-*`)
- two small bugs that combine → `exploit-chaining`
- internal foothold → `network-pivoting-tunneling`, map the graph (`tradecraft-attack-path-mapping`)
3. **Score the candidates**: impact toward the objective × likelihood × cost/noise; pick the top one.
4. **On a dead end**, don't just stop: record *why* (so it's not retried), then fall back to the
next-best lead from the scenario. "Blocked by infra" ≠ "not vulnerable" — say which.
5. **Update the plan**: re-order remaining leads; note the new pivot. Then act on the single top lead.
## Gotchas
- Sunk cost: abandon a low-yield lead even after effort if a better one appeared.
- "It failed" without a reason is a lost lesson — always record the mechanism of the failure.
- Chasing novelty over objective: the next move is the one that best advances the stated goal.
## Verify success
After each result there is a recorded decision (status + rationale) and exactly one chosen next
lead that advances the objective — the engagement never stalls on "what now".
## References
OODA loop applied to offense; MITRE ATT&CK tactic transitions; the `exploit-chaining` skill.