- /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: | ||
| Classification | ||
| Recommended Action | ||
| Typical Timeline | ||
| GREEN | ||
| Approve and route for signature per delegation of authority | ||
| Same day | ||
| YELLOW | ||
| Send to designated reviewer with specific issues flagged | ||
| 1-2 business days | ||
| RED | ||
| Engage counsel for full review; prepare counterproposal or standard form | ||
| 3-5 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 |