CTF Write-up Generator Generate a standardized submission-style CTF writeup for a solved challenge. Default behavior: During an active competition, optimize for speed, clarity, and reproducibility Keep writeups short enough that a teammate or organizer can validate the solve quickly Always produce a submission -style writeup Prefer one complete solve script from challenge data to final flag Workflow Step 1: Gather Information Collect the following from the current session, challenge files, and user input: Challenge metadata — name, CTF event, category, difficulty, points, flag format Solution artifacts — exploit scripts, payloads, screenshots, command output Timeline — key steps taken, dead ends, pivots

Scan for exploit scripts and artifacts

find . -name '.py' -o -name '.sh' -o -name 'exploit' -o -name 'solve' | head -20

Check for flags in output files

grep -rniE '(flag|ctf|eno|htb|pico){' . 2

/dev/null Step 2: Generate Write-up Write the writeup file as writeup.md (or writeup-.md ) using the submission template below. Templates Submission Format

title : "" ctf : "" date : YYYY - MM - DD category : web | pwn | crypto | reverse | forensics | osint | malware | misc difficulty : easy | medium | hard points : <number

flag_format : "flag{...}" author : ""

Summary <1-2 sentences: what the challenge was and the core technique. Keep it direct.>

Solution

Step 1: < Explain the key observation in 3-8 short lines. Keep it direct.

```python < one complete solving script from provided challenge data to printing the final flag

```

Step 2: (optional) < Only add this when a second short step genuinely helps readability, such as separating the core observation from final verification.

Step 3: (optional) < Use only if the challenge really needs it. Keep the total number of steps small.

Flag ``` flag{example_flag_here} ``` Guidance: Prefer 1-3 short steps total Keep code to the smallest complete solving script Do not split "recover secret", "derive key", and "decrypt flag" into separate partial snippets The script should start from the challenge data and end by printing the flag Avoid long background sections Avoid dead ends unless they explain a key pivot Avoid multiple alternative solves; pick one clean path Redact the flag only if the user explicitly asks for redaction Best Practices Checklist Before finalizing the writeup, verify: Metadata complete — title, CTF, date, category, difficulty, points, author all filled Flag handling matches request — keep the real flag unless the user asked for redaction Reproducible steps — a reader can follow your writeup and reproduce the solution Code is runnable — exploit scripts include all imports, correct variable names, and comments No sensitive data — no real credentials, API keys, or private infrastructure details Length stays concise — the writeup is short enough for fast review Tools and versions noted — mention specific tool versions if behavior depends on them Proper attribution — credit teammates, referenced writeups, or tools that were essential Grammar and formatting — consistent heading levels, code blocks have language tags Quality Guidelines DO: Explain just enough for fast verification Include one complete solving path, not multiple alternative routes Include one complete script that goes all the way to the final flag Show actual output (truncated if very long) to prove the approach worked Tag code blocks with language ( python , bash , sql , etc.) Keep the main path front-loaded so a reader can validate it quickly DON'T: Copy-paste raw terminal dumps without explanation Paste several partial snippets that force the reader to reconstruct the final solve Leave placeholder text in the final writeup Include irrelevant tangents that don't contribute to the solution Assume the reader knows the specific challenge setup Challenge $ARGUMENTS