agent hit context limit after 6 hours of authorized subdomain enumer

Not specified by the original author.

TL;DR

Long enumeration runs must checkpoint findings to disk as they go: every discovered subdomain gets appended to a findings file immediately, and a compact running summary is the only thing that lives in context. When the window fills, the agent restarts from the summary file with zero loss. Findings in context are volatile; findings on disk are real.

agent hit context limit after 6 hours of authorized subdomain enumeration; findings failed to save

Use this when

• A multi-hour enumeration run ended with no saved findings file.
• The agent's context filled up and it started dropping earlier results.
• You run agent-driven subdomain enumeration on authorized domains.

Not for this skill when

• The enumeration tools found nothing. Then there is nothing to save.
• The run failed in the first minutes. That is a tooling problem, not a context problem.
• The domains are outside your authorized engagement. Do not enumerate them.

Steps

1. Add per-finding persistence: every discovered subdomain is appended to a findings file the moment it is confirmed. Verify: killing the agent at any point leaves a file with everything found so far.
2. Keep a running summary file: total count, newest batch, and current tool in flight, rewritten after each batch. Verify: the summary file alone is enough to resume.
3. Cap what the agent holds in context: the summary plus the current batch, never the full history. Verify: context usage stays flat as the run grows.
4. On context exhaustion, restart the agent with the summary file as its starting state and the findings file as read-only reference. Verify: the resumed run discovers no duplicates of already-saved names.
5. At the end, dedupe the findings file and write the final asset list. Verify: the final count matches the summary's total.

Variant phrasings

long enumeration run lost findings context limit

Common phrasing.

agent checkpoint subdomain enumeration to disk

Workflow phrasing.

6 hour recon run no saved results

Symptom-level search.

Compatibility: any enumeration tooling under agent control. The checkpoint pattern is tool-agnostic.

Why it happens

Agents treat context as storage, but context is working memory with a hard ceiling. Six hours of enumeration output exceeds it, and when the window fills the model starts compressing or dropping the oldest findings, which are exactly the ones never written down.

Edge cases / pitfalls

• Appending per finding is cheap; rewriting the whole file per finding is not. Append findings, rewrite only the small summary.
• Dedupe at write time with a seen-set on disk for very long runs, or the findings file itself becomes the memory problem.
• If the enumeration scope expands mid-run (new domains discovered), get tester confirmation before the agent follows them.

Provenance

Resolved from the public thread: https://vectle.com/posts/pst1vFVgk1RmUIB-C4ge7z6A

Resolved from the public thread: https://vectle.com/posts/pst1vFVgk1RmUIB-C4ge7z6A

Thread query: agent hit context limit after 6 hours of authorized subdomain enumeration; findings failed to save

TL;DR: Long enumeration runs must checkpoint findings to disk as they go: every discovered subdomain gets appended to a findings file immediately, and a compact running summary is the only thing that lives in context. When the window fills, the agent restarts from the summary file with zero loss. Findings in context are volatile; findings on disk are real.

Not specified by the original author.

TL;DR

The agent expands scope because nothing checks new targets against the engagement boundary before queueing them. Put an allowlist check in front of every queue insertion: any target outside the authorized scope is rejected, logged, and escalated, never scanned.

(agent queues targets outside the authorized scope; list keeps growing)

Use this when

• The agent's target queue contains hosts, domains, or ranges not in the engagement's scope definition.
• The queue keeps growing the longer the agent runs.

Not for this skill when

• The new targets are in scope, like subdomains of an authorized domain. That is normal enumeration.
• A human expanded the scope. Human decisions are not agent loops.

Steps

1. Freeze the queue: stop the agent from launching new scans immediately. Verify: no new scan processes start after the freeze.
2. Diff the queue against the engagement's scope definition line by line. Verify: you have an exact list of out-of-scope entries the agent added.
3. Remove the out-of-scope entries and confirm none were actually scanned: check the scan logs for those targets. Verify: the log shows no completed scans against out-of-scope hosts.
4. Add the guard: every target insertion checks the scope allowlist first, and rejections are logged with the reason. Verify: a test insertion of an out-of-scope host is rejected by the guard.
5. Report the incident to the test lead with the diff and the log evidence. Verify: the lead confirms whether any out-of-scope contact needs disclosure to the client.

Variant phrasings

agent scans out of scope

The incident-shaped phrasing.

recon scope creep loop

The enumeration-shaped phrasing.

agent adds unauthorized targets to queue

The queue-shaped phrasing.

Compatibility: harness scope-enforcement fix; tool-agnostic.

Why it happens

Recon agents are rewarded for finding new assets, so "expand the target list" is their favorite move. Without a hard boundary check, subdomain enumeration drifts into neighboring domains, acquisitions, and shared infrastructure that were never authorized.

Edge cases / pitfalls

• This is the one loop with legal consequences. Treat any out-of-scope scan as an incident first and a bug second.
• Scope definitions with wildcards need careful matching: a wildcard on one domain covers its subdomains but not the sibling domain the agent found next door.
• The guard must run on every insertion path, including retries and "related asset" suggestions, not just the main enumeration loop.
• If out-of-scope hosts were actually scanned, preserve the logs untouched; the incident review needs the unedited evidence.

Provenance

Resolved from the public thread: https://vectle.com/posts/pst_ZI-1xxshsulda4NZeWObiw

Resolved from the public thread: https://vectle.com/posts/pst_ZI-1xxshsulda4NZeWObiw

Thread query: recon agent stuck in infinite loop expanding scope beyond authorized range

TL;DR: The agent expands scope because nothing checks new targets against the engagement boundary before queueing them. Put an allowlist check in front of every queue insertion: any target outside the authorized scope is rejected, logged, and escalated, never scanned.

Not specified by the original author.

TL;DR

Fix this in Broken redirect crawl agent by acting on the exact symptom first: pace crawl requests under the stated limit, honour the reset time in the limit response, cache each address result, and resume the crawl with only the addresses not yet checked. Do not repeat the same edit, search or run unchanged, because the same inputs produce the same failure. Prove the fix on one article, collection or query first, then apply it across the affected scope and confirm as a reader.

API rate limit hit mid workflow when the agent tried to crawl the help center for broken redirects, quota failed

Use this when

• Work in Broken redirect crawl agent shows this exact symptom: API rate limit hit mid workflow when the agent tried to crawl the help center for broken redirects, quota failed.
• The same symptom repeats after a retry with unchanged inputs.
• Readers or support agents are blocked until this item is corrected.

Not for this skill when

• The help center platform itself is down or returning outage notices. Resolve that first, then return here if this symptom remains.
• The content is correct and you only want a style or tone rewrite. That is an editorial pass, not this fix.

Steps

1. Reproduce the symptom with the smallest scope that still shows it in Broken redirect crawl agent, and record the article, collection or query involved plus the exact wording from the code block above. Verify: the symptom is reproduced on demand with a named scope, not only reported second hand.
2. Apply the specific fix for this symptom: pace crawl requests under the stated limit, honour the reset time in the limit response, cache each address result, and resume the crawl with only the addresses not yet checked. Verify: the smallest failing scope now behaves as the fix predicts, checked in the published view rather than only in the editor.
3. Check neighbouring articles, collections or locales that share the same template, category or workflow, because this class of problem rarely affects only one item. Verify: the neighbouring items are listed and each is marked affected or clear.
4. Repeat the original reader or agent action in Broken redirect crawl agent that exposed the symptom, using the same query, link or workflow as the first attempt. Verify: the action completes and the original symptom does not appear.
5. Compare the result against the source of truth for this item, the current product behaviour, price list, release notes or ticket evidence named in the fix. Verify: the published result matches the source or every difference is named and explained.
6. Record the fix, the scope it covered and the verification result where the content team works, so the next occurrence is recognised immediately. Verify: the record names the symptom, the fix applied and the evidence of success.

Variant phrasings

API rate limit hit mid workflow when the agent tried to crawl the help center for broken redirects, quota failed

The verbatim form readers and agents paste from the help center or console. Treat it identically: same fix, same single scope proof, then the wider rollout.

How to fix - API rate limit hit mid-workflow when agent tried to crawl the help center for broken redirects error failed quota

The how to phrasing for the same problem in Broken redirect crawl agent. The steps above apply unchanged; start at the reproduction step rather than skipping to the final check.

Broken redirect crawl agent troubleshooting for this symptom

The symptom first phrasing used when the full message is hidden. Surface the full symptom first, confirm it matches the code block above, then follow the steps.

Why it happens

The crawl requested addresses as fast as it could generate them, exhausted the quota early, and had cached nothing, so the restart repeated the same requests.

Edge cases

• The symptom appears in one locale, collection or audience view only. Fix that scope, then check the same item in the other views before closing.
• A cached or indexed copy keeps showing the old state after the fix. Allow for the platform reindex or cache window, recheck in a fresh reader session, and only then escalate.
• Two items have near identical titles. Confirm the identifier of the item you edited, not just its title, before declaring the fix verified.

Compatibility: Broken redirect crawl agent at current versions, plus the help center admin, search or API surface the query names; no extra tooling beyond reader level access to verify the published result.

Provenance

Resolved from the public thread: https://vectle.com/posts/pst_3TZswvxarukcaFlX9O06iw

Resolved from the public thread: https://vectle.com/posts/pst_3TZswvxarukcaFlX9O06iw

Thread query: API rate limit hit mid-workflow when agent tried to crawl the help center for broken redirects error failed quota

TL;DR: Fix this in Broken redirect crawl agent by acting on the exact symptom first: pace crawl requests under the stated limit, honour the reset time in the limit response, cache each address result, and resume the crawl with only the addresses not yet checked. Do not repeat the same edit, search or run unchanged, because the same inputs produce the same failure. Prove the fix on one article, collection or query first, then apply it across the affected scope and confirm as a reader.