Token导航 LogoToken导航

Agent Skill · 待分类

triage-nda(分类 NDA)

triage-nda 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。

triage-nda 是待分类类 Agent Skill,可用宿主为 Codex、Claude、Cursor、Gemini CLI,通过GitHub 仓库获取,权限为需要联网;许可证信息还不明确,第三方扫描有提醒项,按安装量在待分类类的 11,209 个 Skill 里排第 363。

总安装 19,045周安装 778GitHub Stars 11,717下载 6,208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:triage-nda(分类 NDA)
来源仓库:https://github.com/anthropics/knowledge-work-plugins
仓库路径:skills/triage-nda
安装命令:
npx skills add https://github.com/anthropics/knowledge-work-plugins --skill triage-nda
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/anthropics/knowledge-work-plugins --skill triage-nda

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。

triage-nda 用于处理 GitHub 仓库、Issue、Pull Request 等协作信息。适合围绕代码变更、仓库状态和协作事项进行整理与分析。可通过 npx 命令从指定仓库安装并使用该技能。使用前需确认 token 权限和操作边界,避免越权访问或修改。

triage-nda 属于待分类类 Skill,可作为该场景下的辅助能力补充。

来源仓库内路径:skills/triage-nda

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/anthropics/knowledge-work-plugins --skill tria…;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

    它需要需要联网,先在测试目录或测试账号里跑,确认没问题再放到正式项目。

常见问题

6 条

triage-nda 怎么安装?

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

triage-nda 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。

triage-nda 需要什么权限?

权限级别是需要联网。该 Skill 可能需要联网访问来源站点、仓库或外部 API;具体网络访问范围需要结合源码和 README 复核。

triage-nda 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。

triage-nda 用的人多吗?

公开数据是累计安装 19,045 次,近一周安装 778 次,下载 6,208 次,GitHub 11,717 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。

triage-nda 安全吗?

第三方扫描有提醒项,说明存在需要人工确认的行为。安装前请打开源码看清它读了什么、联网到哪里。

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。
  • 来源仓库有 11,717 星,维护活跃度相对可查。

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。
  • 第三方扫描存在提醒项或未通过项,需要人工逐条确认。
  • 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。

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
triage-nda

分类 NDA · 本页

19,04511,717需要联网未明确有提醒

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

/triage-nda -- NDA Pre-Screening

If you see unfamiliar placeholders or need to check which tools are connected, see CONNECTORS.md.

Triage the NDA: @$1

Rapidly triage incoming NDAs against standard screening criteria. Classify the NDA for routing: standard approval, counsel review, or full legal review.

Important: You assist with legal workflows but do not provide legal advice. All analysis should be reviewed by qualified legal professionals before being relied upon.

Invocation

/triage-nda

Workflow

Step 1: Accept the NDA

Accept the NDA in any format:

  • File upload: PDF, DOCX, or other document format
  • URL: Link to the NDA in a document system
  • Pasted text: NDA text pasted directly

If no NDA is provided, prompt the user to supply one.

Step 2: Load NDA Playbook

Look for NDA screening criteria in local settings (e.g., legal.local.md).

The NDA playbook should define:

  • Mutual vs. unilateral requirements
  • Acceptable term lengths
  • Required carveouts
  • Prohibited provisions
  • Organization-specific requirements

If no NDA playbook is configured:

  • Proceed with reasonable market-standard defaults
  • Note clearly that defaults are being used
  • Defaults applied:

- Mutual obligations required (unless the organization is only disclosing) - Term: 2-3 years standard, up to 5 years for trade secrets - Standard carveouts required: independently developed, publicly available, rightfully received from third party, required by law - No non-solicitation or non-compete provisions - No residuals clause (or narrowly scoped if present) - Governing law in a reasonable commercial jurisdiction

Step 3: Quick Screen

Evaluate the NDA against each screening criterion systematically.

1. Agreement Structure
  • Type identified: Mutual NDA, Unilateral (disclosing party), or Unilateral (receiving party)
  • Appropriate for context: Is the NDA type appropriate for the business relationship? (e.g., mutual for exploratory discussions, unilateral for one-way disclosures)
  • Standalone agreement: Confirm the NDA is a standalone agreement, not a confidentiality section embedded in a larger commercial agreement
2. Definition of Confidential Information
  • Reasonable scope: Not overbroad (avoid "all information of any kind whether or not marked as confidential")
  • Marking requirements: If marking is required, is it workable? (Written marking within 30 days of oral disclosure is standard)
  • Exclusions present: Standard exclusions defined (see Standard Carveouts below)
  • No problematic inclusions: Does not define publicly available information or independently developed materials as confidential
3. Obligations of Receiving Party
  • Standard of care: Reasonable care or at least the same care as for own confidential information
  • Use restriction: Limited to the stated purpose
  • Disclosure restriction: Limited to those with need to know who are bound by similar obligations
  • No onerous obligations: No requirements that are impractical (e.g., encrypting all communications, maintaining physical logs)
4. Standard Carveouts

All of the following carveouts should be present:

  • Public knowledge: Information that is or becomes publicly available through no fault of the receiving party
  • Prior possession: Information already known to the receiving party before disclosure
  • Independent development: Information independently developed without use of or reference to confidential information
  • Third-party receipt: Information rightfully received from a third party without restriction
  • Legal compulsion: Right to disclose when required by law, regulation, or legal process (with notice to the disclosing party where legally permitted)
5. Permitted Disclosures
  • Employees: Can share with employees who need to know
  • Contractors/advisors: Can share with contractors, advisors, and professional consultants under similar confidentiality obligations
  • Affiliates: Can share with affiliates (if needed for the business purpose)
  • Legal/regulatory: Can disclose as required by law or regulation
6. Term and Duration
  • Agreement term: Reasonable period for the business relationship (1-3 years is standard)
  • Confidentiality survival: Obligations survive for a reasonable period after termination (2-5 years is standard; trade secrets may be longer)
  • Not perpetual: Avoid indefinite or perpetual confidentiality obligations (exception: trade secrets, which may warrant longer protection)
7. Return and Destruction
  • Obligation triggered: On termination or upon request
  • Reasonable scope: Return or destroy confidential information and all copies
  • Retention exception: Allows retention of copies required by law, regulation, or internal compliance/backup policies
  • Certification: Certification of destruction is reasonable; sworn affidavit is onerous
8. Remedies
  • Injunctive relief: Acknowledgment that breach may cause irreparable harm and equitable relief may be appropriate is standard
  • No pre-determined damages: Avoid liquidated damages clauses in NDAs
  • Not one-sided: Remedies provisions apply equally to both parties (in mutual NDAs)
9. Problematic Provisions to Flag
  • No non-solicitation: NDA should not contain employee non-solicitation provisions
  • No non-compete: NDA should not contain non-compete provisions
  • No exclusivity: NDA should not restrict either party from entering similar discussions with others
  • No standstill: NDA should not contain standstill or similar restrictive provisions (unless M&A context)
  • No residuals clause (or narrowly scoped): If a residuals clause is present, it should be limited to information retained in unaided memory of individuals and should not apply to trade secrets or patented information
  • No IP assignment or license: NDA should not grant any intellectual property rights
  • No audit rights: Unusual in standard NDAs
10. Governing Law and Jurisdiction
  • Reasonable jurisdiction: A well-established commercial jurisdiction
  • Consistent: Governing law and jurisdiction should be in the same or related jurisdictions
  • No mandatory arbitration (in standard NDAs): Litigation is generally preferred for NDA disputes

Step 4: Classify

Based on the screening results, assign a classification:

GREEN -- Standard Approval

All of the following must be true:

  • NDA is mutual (or unilateral in the appropriate direction)
  • All standard carveouts are present
  • Term is within standard range (1-3 years, survival 2-5 years)
  • No non-solicitation, non-compete, or exclusivity provisions
  • No residuals clause, or residuals clause is narrowly scoped
  • Reasonable governing law jurisdiction
  • Standard remedies (no liquidated damages)
  • Permitted disclosures include employees, contractors, and advisors
  • Return/destruction provisions include retention exception for legal/compliance
  • Definition of confidential information is reasonably scoped

Routing: Approve via standard delegation of authority. No counsel review required.

  • Action: Proceed to signature with standard delegation of authority
YELLOW -- Counsel Review Needed

One or more of the following are present, but the NDA is not fundamentally problematic:

  • Definition of confidential information is broader than preferred but not unreasonable
  • Term is longer than standard but within market range (e.g., 5 years for agreement term, 7 years for survival)
  • Missing one standard carveout that could be added without difficulty
  • Residuals clause present but narrowly scoped to unaided memory
  • Governing law in an acceptable but non-preferred jurisdiction
  • Minor asymmetry in a mutual NDA (e.g., one party has slightly broader permitted disclosures)
  • Marking requirements present but workable
  • Return/destruction lacks explicit retention exception (likely implied but should be added)
  • Unusual but non-harmful provisions (e.g., obligation to notify of potential breach)

Routing: Flag specific issues for counsel review. Counsel can likely resolve with minor redlines in a single review pass.

  • Action: Counsel can likely resolve in a single review pass
RED -- Significant Issues

One or more of the following are present:

  • Unilateral when mutual is required (or wrong direction for the relationship)
  • Missing critical carveouts (especially independent development or legal compulsion)
  • Non-solicitation or non-compete provisions embedded in the NDA
  • Exclusivity or standstill provisions without appropriate business context
  • Unreasonable term (10+ years, or perpetual without trade secret justification)
  • Overbroad definition that could capture public information or independently developed materials
  • Broad residuals clause that effectively creates a license to use confidential information
  • IP assignment or license grant hidden in the NDA
  • Liquidated damages or penalty provisions
  • Audit rights without reasonable scope or notice requirements
  • Highly unfavorable jurisdiction with mandatory arbitration
  • The document is not actually an NDA (contains substantive commercial terms, exclusivity, or other obligations beyond confidentiality)

Routing: Full legal review required. Do not sign. Requires negotiation, counterproposal with the organization's standard form NDA, or rejection.

  • Action: Do not sign; requires negotiation or counterproposal

Step 5: Generate Triage Report

Output a structured report:

## NDA Triage Report

**Classification**: [GREEN / YELLOW / RED]
**Parties**: [party names]
**Type**: [Mutual / Unilateral (disclosing) / Unilateral (receiving)]
**Term**: [duration]
**Governing Law**: [jurisdiction]
**Review Basis**: [Playbook / Default Standards]

## Screening Results

| Criterion | Status | Notes |
|-----------|--------|-------|
| Mutual Obligations | [PASS/FLAG/FAIL] | [details] |
| Definition Scope | [PASS/FLAG/FAIL] | [details] |
| Term | [PASS/FLAG/FAIL] | [details] |
| Standard Carveouts | [PASS/FLAG/FAIL] | [details] |
| [etc.] | | |

## Issues Found

### [Issue 1 -- YELLOW/RED]
**What**: [description]
**Risk**: [what could go wrong]
**Suggested Fix**: [specific language or approach]

[Repeat for each issue]

## Recommendation

[Specific next step: approve, send for review with specific notes, or reject/counter]

## Next Steps

1. [Action item 1]
2. [Action item 2]

Step 6: Routing Suggestion

Based on the classification, recommend the appropriate next step:

ClassificationRecommended ActionTypical Timeline
GREENApprove and route for signature per delegation of authoritySame day
YELLOWSend to designated reviewer with specific issues flagged1-2 business days
REDEngage counsel for full review; prepare counterproposal or standard form3-5 business days

For YELLOW and RED classifications:

  • Identify the specific person or role that should review (if the organization has defined routing rules)
  • Include a brief summary of issues suitable for the reviewer to quickly understand the key points
  • If the organization has a standard form NDA, recommend sending it as a counterproposal for RED-classified NDAs

Common NDA Issues and Standard Positions

Issue: Overbroad Definition of Confidential Information

Standard position: Confidential information should be limited to non-public information disclosed in connection with the stated purpose, with clear exclusions. Redline approach: Narrow the definition to information that is marked or identified as confidential, or that a reasonable person would understand to be confidential given the nature of the information and circumstances of disclosure.

Issue: Missing Independent Development Carveout

Standard position: Must include a carveout for information independently developed without reference to or use of the disclosing party's confidential information. Risk if missing: Could create claims that internally-developed products or features were derived from the counterparty's confidential information. Redline approach: Add standard independent development carveout.

Issue: Non-Solicitation of Employees

Standard position: Non-solicitation provisions do not belong in NDAs. They are appropriate in employment agreements, M&A agreements, or specific commercial agreements. Redline approach: Delete the provision entirely. If the counterparty insists, limit to targeted solicitation (not general recruitment) and set a short term (12 months).

Issue: Broad Residuals Clause

Standard position: Resist residuals clauses. If required, limit to: (a) general ideas, concepts, know-how, or techniques retained in the unaided memory of individuals who had authorized access; (b) explicitly exclude trade secrets and patentable information; (c) does not grant any IP license. Risk if too broad: Effectively grants a license to use the disclosing party's confidential information for any purpose.

Issue: Perpetual Confidentiality Obligation

Standard position: 2-5 years from disclosure or termination, whichever is later. Trade secrets may warrant protection for as long as they remain trade secrets. Redline approach: Replace perpetual obligation with a defined term. Offer a trade secret carveout for longer protection of qualifying information.

Notes

  • If the document is not actually an NDA (e.g., it's labeled as an NDA but contains substantive commercial terms), flag this immediately as a RED and recommend full contract review instead
  • For NDAs that are part of a larger agreement (e.g., confidentiality section in an MSA), note that the broader agreement context may affect the analysis
  • Always note that this is a screening tool and counsel should review any items the user is uncertain about

平台分布

Codex

32.52%
按下载量换算2,019

Claude

31.8%
按下载量换算1,974

Cursor

19.5%
按下载量换算1,211

Gemini CLI

8.96%
按下载量换算556

安全审计

Gen Agent Trust Hub

通过

Socket

通过

Snyk

可疑

权限和风险

需要联网

该 Skill 可能需要联网访问来源站点、仓库或外部 API;具体网络访问范围需要结合源码和 README 复核。

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。来源安全扫描存在提醒或未通过项,安装前请自行复核。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