Token导航 LogoToken导航

Agent Skill · 待分类

nda-screening(新药筛选)

nda-screening 用于处理 GitHub 仓库、Issue、Pull Request 和代码协作信息,适合在 Codex、Claude、Cursor、Gemini CLI 中需要围绕仓库状态、代码变更或协作事项进行整理时使用。可结合来源仓库、安装命令和原始 README 继续核验具体用法。安装前建议确认权限范围、维护状态,以及是否会触发联网、命令执行或文件读写。

nda-screening 是待分类类 Agent Skill,可用宿主为 Codex、Claude、Cursor、Gemini CLI,通过GitHub 仓库获取,权限为只读;许可证信息还不明确,第三方扫描已通过,按安装量在待分类类的 11,209 个 Skill 里排第 9,502。

总安装 241周安装 17GitHub Stars 56下载 140核验 2026-05-01

安装说明

本站只整理中文说明,不托管安装包,也不代用户安装。
GitHub
许可证
unknown

安装方式

通过对话安装

复制提示词发给支持本地命令或 Skills 的 AI 助手,先确认命令和权限,再让它执行。

请帮我安装这个 Agent Skill:nda-screening(新药筛选)
来源仓库:https://github.com/vm0-ai/vm0-skills
仓库路径:skills/nda-screening
安装命令:
npx skills add https://github.com/vm0-ai/vm0-skills --skill nda-screening
安装前请先检查当前环境是否支持对应 CLI,并向我确认将要执行的命令、安装目录、联网范围和文件读写权限;确认后再执行。

命令行安装

复制命令到本机终端执行。该命令会通过 npx skills 从第三方来源获取 Skill;本站只展示命令,不托管安装包,也不自动执行。

skills.shnpx skills
npx skills add https://github.com/vm0-ai/vm0-skills --skill nda-screening

这个 Skill 是做什么的

这个 Skill 的分类还没最终确定,用法以来源仓库的说明为准。

nda-screening 用于处理 GitHub 仓库、Issue、Pull Request 和代码协作信息。适合在 Codex、Claude、Cursor、Gemini CLI 中围绕仓库状态、代码变更或协作事项进行整理。通过 npx skills add 命令从指定 GitHub 仓库安装,需确认权限和维护状态。

使用前建议核实是否会触发联网、命令执行或文件读写操作。可结合原始 README 进一步核验具体用法和功能边界。

来源仓库内路径:skills/nda-screening

上手步骤

4 步
  1. 1

    确认自己的宿主工具

    公开资料标注支持 Codex、Claude、Cursor、Gemini CLI;先确认自己用的是其中之一,再按对应工具的 Skills 目录放置。

  2. 2

    拿到安装命令

    可以直接复制的命令是 npx skills add https://github.com/vm0-ai/vm0-skills --skill nda-screening;命令里的占位符换成自己的路径或密钥再执行。

  3. 3

    安装后重启宿主

    命令执行完要完全退出宿主工具再打开,让新装的 Skill 被重新扫描到,否则列表里可能看不到。

  4. 4

    按最小权限试用

    它标注为只读,先用只读任务试一次,确认行为符合预期再扩大使用范围。

常见问题

6 条

nda-screening 怎么安装?

在终端执行 npx skills add https://github.com/vm0-ai/vm0-skills --skill nda-screening。装完完全退出宿主工具再打开,让它重新扫描本地 Skill。

nda-screening 支持哪些 AI 工具?

公开资料标注支持 Codex、Claude、Cursor、Gemini CLI。其他工具只要能读取本地 Skill 目录,一般也能手动放进去,但要自己确认触发方式是否一致。

nda-screening 需要什么权限?

权限级别是只读。该 Skill 主要提供规则、说明或参考内容,本身偏只读;真正读写文件、联网或执行命令仍取决于宿主 Agent 的任务。

nda-screening 是免费的吗?

公开资料没有标注明确许可证,收费和商用限制都无法确认。正式使用前请到来源仓库核对授权说明。

nda-screening 用的人多吗?

公开数据是累计安装 241 次,近一周安装 17 次,下载 140 次,GitHub 56 星。这些数字来自第三方目录统计,只能当作热度参考,不代表质量或安全性。

nda-screening 安全吗?

第三方扫描结果为通过,但这只覆盖已知的静态检查项,不能替代自己读一遍源码和安装命令。

值得选的地方和要先想清楚的地方

值得选的地方

  • 同时适配 4 种工具,换客户端不用重新找替代品。
  • 第三方扫描已通过,常见的高风险行为没有命中。
  • 标注为只读权限,试用阶段不容易误改本地文件。

先想清楚的地方

  • 许可证没有明确标注,能不能商用、能不能再分发都不确定。
  • 第三方目录整理,版本更新和行为细节以来源仓库为准。

适不适合你

更适合

  • 已经在用 Codex,想直接扩展它能力的人。
  • 需要处理待分类类任务、又不想每次都手写提示词的人。
  • 只想先试试效果、不希望它改动本地文件的人。

不太适合

  • 需要明确授权才能用到公司项目里的场景。
  • 需要厂商级技术支持和 SLA 的生产系统。

待分类类 Skill 对比

6 个同类
Skill总安装GitHub 星权限许可证扫描
infsh-cli

infsh CLI · Codex、Claude

4,374,576382权限未标注未明确未收录
ai-video-generation

AI 视频生成 · Codex、Claude

4,313,376382调用外部服务未明确有提醒
lark-openapi-explorer

云雀 OpenAPI 浏览器 · Codex、Claude

2,064,1209,011需要联网未明确有提醒
lark-workflow-standup-report

Lark 工作流程站立报告 · Codex、Claude

2,041,6328,978需要联网未明确通过
use-my-browser

使用我的浏览器 · Codex、Claude

1,848,49140操作浏览器未明确未通过
nda-screening

新药筛选 · 本页

24156只读未明确通过

按安装量取同分类前几名;数字来自第三方目录统计,只作热度参考,不代表质量结论。

SKILL.md 原文

Evaluation Framework

Work through the following ten areas systematically for every NDA that comes in.

1. Agreement Format and Direction

  • Mutual vs. unilateral: Determine whether both parties share information (mutual) or only one side discloses (unilateral, and if so, confirm the direction is correct for the relationship)
  • Context fit: Verify the NDA type matches the business scenario -- mutual for exploratory discussions, unilateral when information flows one way
  • Standalone check: Confirm this is a pure confidentiality agreement rather than a confidentiality section buried inside a broader commercial contract

2. Scope of Protected Information

  • Breadth: The definition should be appropriately bounded, not an all-encompassing net like "any and all information regardless of form or marking"
  • Designation mechanics: If marking or written identification is required, confirm the process is workable (written confirmation within 30 days of oral disclosure is the market norm)
  • Required exceptions: Standard carve-outs must be present (see Area 4 below)
  • Overreach: The definition must not capture publicly available data or material the receiving party developed on its own

3. Recipient Duties

  • Care standard: The agreement should require reasonable care, or at minimum the same level of protection the recipient applies to its own sensitive information
  • Purpose limitation: Usage must be confined to the stated business objective
  • Sharing restrictions: Distribution limited to individuals with a genuine need who are bound by equivalent obligations
  • Practicality: No operationally burdensome mandates such as encrypting every communication or maintaining physical access logs

4. Required Carve-Outs

Every acceptable NDA must contain all five of these exceptions:

  • Publicly available: Information already in or entering the public domain without fault of the recipient
  • Already known: Information the recipient possessed before it was disclosed
  • Self-developed: Information the recipient created independently without accessing or referencing the disclosed material
  • Legitimate third-party source: Information obtained from another party who was free to share it
  • Compelled disclosure: The right to disclose under legal, regulatory, or judicial compulsion, with notice to the discloser where law permits

5. Authorized Sharing

  • Internal personnel: Employees with a need to access the information
  • Professional advisors: Outside counsel, accountants, and consultants operating under matching confidentiality duties
  • Corporate affiliates: Parent, subsidiary, or sister companies when the business purpose requires it
  • Regulatory and judicial: Disclosures mandated by law, regulation, or court order

6. Time Boundaries

  • Agreement duration: A reasonable window for the business relationship, typically one to three years
  • Post-termination survival: Confidentiality duties should persist for a defined period after the agreement ends, typically two to five years; trade secrets may justify longer protection
  • No perpetual obligations: Indefinite confidentiality commitments are unacceptable unless narrowly limited to trade secret material

7. Information Return and Disposal

  • Trigger: Obligation activates upon termination or upon written request
  • Scope: Covers all copies of protected information in any medium
  • Compliance exception: Must allow retention of copies that law, regulation, or internal compliance and backup policies require
  • Verification: A written confirmation of disposal is standard; a sworn affidavit is excessive

8. Enforcement and Remedies

  • Equitable relief: An acknowledgment that breach could cause irreparable harm and that injunctive or equitable remedies may be appropriate -- this is standard language
  • No pre-set damages: Liquidated damages provisions are unusual and unwelcome in NDAs
  • Balanced application: In mutual agreements, remedy provisions should apply equally to both sides

9. Hidden Provisions to Flag

Watch for terms that do not belong in a standard confidentiality agreement:

  • Employee non-solicitation -- inappropriate in an NDA
  • Non-compete restrictions -- inappropriate in an NDA
  • Exclusivity -- should not prevent either party from pursuing parallel discussions with others
  • Standstill -- only appropriate in a formal M&A context
  • Residuals clause -- if present, must be tightly limited to unaided memory of authorized individuals and must exclude trade secrets and patented material
  • IP transfer or license -- an NDA should grant zero intellectual property rights
  • Audit provisions -- not customary in standard confidentiality agreements

10. Jurisdiction and Dispute Mechanics

  • Forum selection: Should be a well-regarded commercial jurisdiction
  • Internal consistency: Governing law and dispute forum should be in the same or closely related jurisdictions
  • Dispute pathway: Litigation is generally preferred over arbitration for NDA disputes; mandatory arbitration is a flag

Classification Rules

GREEN -- Approve for Signature

Every one of these conditions must hold:

  • Mutual structure (or correctly-directed unilateral)
  • All five required carve-outs present
  • Duration within standard bands (one to three year term, two to five year survival)
  • Free of non-solicitation, non-compete, and exclusivity provisions
  • No residuals clause, or one that is tightly constrained
  • Reasonable forum and governing law
  • Standard remedy provisions without liquidated damages
  • Authorized sharing extends to employees, advisors, and contractors
  • Return/disposal provisions include a compliance retention exception
  • Confidential information definition is reasonably bounded

Next step: Route for execution under standard delegation authority. No attorney review needed.

YELLOW -- Targeted Attorney Review

At least one of these conditions exists, but the agreement is fundamentally sound:

  • Confidential information definition is broader than ideal but not unreasonable
  • Duration exceeds the standard band but remains within market norms (five-year term, seven-year survival)
  • One standard carve-out is absent but could be easily added
  • Residuals clause exists but is narrowly tailored to unaided memory
  • Governing law in an acceptable but secondary-choice jurisdiction
  • Modest asymmetry in a mutual agreement (one party has slightly wider sharing rights)
  • Marking requirements exist but are manageable in practice
  • Return/disposal section lacks an explicit compliance retention exception (likely implied, should be added)
  • Unusual but benign provisions (such as a duty to report suspected breaches)

Next step: Forward to the assigned reviewer with a specific list of issues. Typically resolvable with a single round of targeted edits.

RED -- Full Legal Engagement Required

At least one of these conditions exists:

  • Wrong structure for the relationship (unilateral when mutual is needed, or facing the wrong direction)
  • Critical carve-outs missing (particularly independent development or compelled disclosure)
  • Non-solicitation or non-compete language embedded in the NDA
  • Exclusivity or standstill terms without proper M&A context
  • Extreme duration (ten or more years, or perpetual without trade secret justification)
  • Definition so broad it could encompass public information or independently created work
  • Expansive residuals clause that functions as a de facto usage license
  • Intellectual property assignment or license grant concealed in the NDA
  • Liquidated damages or penalty terms
  • Audit rights with vague scope or no notice requirements
  • Hostile jurisdiction combined with mandatory arbitration
  • The document is not actually a confidentiality agreement (contains substantive commercial obligations, exclusivity, or deal terms beyond non-disclosure)

Next step: Do not execute. Engage counsel for comprehensive review. Prepare a counterproposal using the organization's standard-form NDA, or decline and negotiate.

Frequently Encountered Issues

Overreaching Confidential Information Definition

Preferred approach: Limit protected information to non-public material disclosed in connection with the stated purpose. Information should be marked as confidential or be of a nature that a reasonable person would recognize as sensitive given the context.

Absent Independent Development Exception

Preferred approach: Insist on a carve-out for material developed internally without access to or reliance on the discloser's protected information. Exposure without it: Creates vulnerability to claims that internally-built products or features derived from the counterparty's confidential material.

Employee Non-Solicitation Buried in an NDA

Preferred approach: Remove entirely. Non-solicitation terms belong in employment agreements, acquisition documents, or specific commercial deals. Fallback: If the other side insists, confine to active targeting (exclude general recruiting) and cap the duration at twelve months.

Overreaching Residuals Language

Preferred approach: Resist residuals clauses entirely. If unavoidable, restrict to: (a) general concepts and know-how retained in the unassisted memory of authorized personnel; (b) explicitly carve out trade secrets and patentable subject matter; (c) confirm no IP rights are granted. Exposure if too broad: Effectively creates a blanket license to exploit the discloser's sensitive information for any purpose.

Indefinite Confidentiality Duties

Preferred approach: Set a defined survival window of two to five years from disclosure or termination, whichever falls later. Offer a separate trade secret carve-out providing protection for as long as qualifying information retains trade secret status.

Routing Summary

ClassificationRecommended PathExpected Turnaround
GREENExecute under standard signature authoritySame business day
YELLOWRoute to designated reviewer with flagged issuesOne to two business days
REDFull counsel engagement; counterproposal or standard form substitutionThree to five business days

For YELLOW and RED outcomes:

  • Identify the specific reviewer or role responsible (when organizational routing rules exist)
  • Provide a concise issue summary so the reviewer can quickly orient
  • For RED-classified agreements, recommend substituting the organization's own standard NDA as a counterproposal when one is available

平台分布

Codex

34.3%
按下载量换算48

Claude

33.24%
按下载量换算47

Cursor

19.37%
按下载量换算27

Gemini CLI

10.29%
按下载量换算14

安全审计

Gen Agent Trust Hub

通过

Socket

通过

Snyk

通过

权限和风险

只读

该 Skill 主要提供规则、说明或参考内容,本身偏只读;真正读写文件、联网或执行命令仍取决于宿主 Agent 的任务。

安装前确认

本站仅展示第三方公开信息,不托管安装包,不提供自动安装或运行环境。安装前应自行审查源码、依赖和命令行为。目前只有一个公开来源,建议同时核对源仓库。

继续浏览同类 Skills