Nda Review

⚠️ EXPERIMENTAL — This skill is provided for educational and informational purposes only. It does NOT constitute legal advice. All responsibility for usage rests with the user. Consult qualified legal professionals before acting on any output.

NDA Review

Deep clause-by-clause NDA review tool that analyzes agreements from Recipient or Discloser perspective. Produces structured issue logs with preferred redlines, fallback positions, rationale, owners, and deadlines.

Table of Contents

• Tools
  • NDA Clause Reviewer
• Reference Guides
• Workflows
  • Full NDA Review
  • Perspective-Based Review
• Immediate Red Flags
• Review Checklists
• Variation Callouts
• Risk Rating Guide
• Common Pitfalls
• Troubleshooting
• Success Criteria
• Scope & Limitations
• Anti-Patterns
• Tool Reference

Clarify First

Before reviewing the NDA, confirm these inputs. If any is unknown or vague, ASK — do not assume:

• Your perspective: Recipient or Discloser — flips every risk rating and the direction of each redline (the core --perspective input)
• Deal context — M&A, employment, VC/fundraising, or standard commercial — triggers the variation callouts (standstill, invention assignment, portfolio conflicts)
• What you cannot accept — non-compete, IP grant, perpetual term — sets which of the 7 immediate red flags force escalation vs negotiation

Stop rule: ask only the 2-3 that most change the output. If the user says "just draft it," proceed and list your assumptions at the top of the issue log.

Tools

NDA Clause Reviewer

Performs deep analysis of NDA text, extracting and classifying each clause against best practices. Detects overbroad definitions, missing carveouts, problematic residuals, IP grants, indemnification, and audit rights.

# Review from recipient perspective (default)
python scripts/nda_clause_reviewer.py nda_draft.txt

# Review from discloser perspective
python scripts/nda_clause_reviewer.py nda_draft.txt --perspective discloser

# JSON output for integration
python scripts/nda_clause_reviewer.py nda_draft.txt --json

# Save issue log
python scripts/nda_clause_reviewer.py nda_draft.txt --output issues.json --json

What it produces:

• Clause-by-clause issue log with H/M/L risk ratings
• Preferred redline for each issue
• Fallback position if preferred is rejected
• Rationale for each recommendation
• Owner assignment (legal, business, executive)
• Deadline category (pre-signing, 30-day, 90-day)

Reference Guides

NDA Clause Reference

references/nda_clause_reference.md

Five deep reference modules:

• Duration & Scope (term, survival, scope limitations)
• Key Clauses (definition, purpose, permitted use, marking)
• Party Obligations (standard of care, use restriction, disclosure limits)
• Remedies & Liability (injunctive relief, damages, indemnification)
• Standard Exceptions (public knowledge, prior possession, independent development, third-party receipt, legal compulsion)

NDA Review Templates

references/nda_review_templates.md

Output templates and worked examples:

• Executive Summary format
• Clause-by-clause Issue Log table format
• Ownership and timing defaults by topic category
• Worked examples for social media endorsement and group licensing scenarios

Workflows

Full NDA Review

1. Triage first -- Run nda-triage skill for quick GREEN/YELLOW/RED classification
2. Deep review -- Run nda_clause_reviewer.py with appropriate --perspective
3. Review issue log -- Address HIGH-risk items first, then MEDIUM, then LOW
4. Prepare redlines -- Use preferred positions; prepare fallbacks
5. Assign owners -- Legal owns clause language; business owns commercial terms
6. Set deadlines -- Pre-signing items before next meeting; post-signing items within 30-90 days
7. Negotiate -- Present redlines; use fallbacks as needed
8. Final review -- Verify all issues resolved before execution

Perspective-Based Review

Immediate Red Flags

Stop review and escalate if any of these 7 red flags are present.

Review Checklists

Recipient Checklist (8 Topics)

Discloser Checklist (5 Topics)

Variation Callouts

Different NDA contexts require different review emphasis.

M&A Context

Employment Context

VC / Fundraising Context

Risk Rating Guide

Risk Rating by Issue Type

Common Pitfalls

Troubleshooting

Success Criteria

• Complete clause-by-clause review in under 15 minutes: Automated analysis replaces 1-2 hours of manual review.
• Zero missed HIGH-risk issues: Every non-compete, IP assignment, and missing carveout is identified.
• Actionable redlines for every H and M issue: Each issue has preferred position, fallback, and rationale.
• Clear ownership assignment: Every issue has a designated owner (legal, business, executive).
• Perspective-appropriate recommendations: Recipient and discloser reviews produce different risk weightings.
• Context-aware review: M&A, employment, and VC variations are flagged when relevant.

Scope & Limitations

Covers:

• Deep clause-by-clause NDA analysis with pattern matching and risk classification
• Perspective-based review (Recipient vs. Discloser)
• Issue log generation with redlines, fallbacks, rationale, owners, and deadlines
• Detection of 7 immediate red flags for triage
• Context variation awareness (M&A, Employment, VC)

Does NOT cover:

• Legal advice -- this tool supports review, it does not replace qualified legal counsel
• Rapid triage -- use nda-triage for quick GREEN/YELLOW/RED screening
• Contract types beyond NDAs -- use contract-review for general commercial agreements
• Jurisdiction-specific enforceability analysis -- requires local counsel assessment
• Non-English NDAs -- pattern matching is English-language only

Anti-Patterns

Tool Reference

nda_clause_reviewer.py

Purpose: Performs deep clause-by-clause NDA analysis. Detects overbroad definitions, missing carveouts, problematic provisions, and generates an issue log with redlines, fallbacks, rationale, owners, and deadlines.

Usage:

python scripts/nda_clause_reviewer.py <nda_file> [--perspective PERSPECTIVE] [--json] [--output FILE]

Flags:

Example Output (JSON):

{
  "file": "vendor_nda.txt",
  "perspective": "recipient",
  "issues": [
    {
      "id": 1,
      "clause": "Definition of Confidential Information",
      "issue": "Overbroad definition with no marking requirement",
      "risk": "H",
      "preferred_redline": "Narrow to information marked Confidential or confirmed in writing within 10 days",
      "fallback": "Add marking requirement for written; 10-day confirmation for oral",
      "rationale": "Overbroad definition traps all shared information as confidential",
      "owner": "legal",
      "deadline": "pre-signing"
    }
  ],
  "summary": {
    "total_issues": 5,
    "high": 2,
    "medium": 2,
    "low": 1
  }
}

Example Output (Text):

NDA CLAUSE REVIEW — ISSUE LOG
==============================
File: vendor_nda.txt
Perspective: Recipient
Issues Found: 5 (H:2 M:2 L:1)

 #  Risk  Clause                           Issue
 1  H     Definition of Confidential Info  Overbroad definition; no marking requirement
        Preferred: Narrow to marked information with 10-day oral confirmation
        Fallback:  Add marking requirement for written; 10-day confirmation for oral
        Rationale: Overbroad definition traps all shared information
        Owner: legal | Deadline: pre-signing

 2  H     Standard Carveouts               Missing independent development carveout
        Preferred: Add standard independent development exception
        Fallback:  Add with documentary evidence requirement
        Rationale: Missing carveout blocks internal R&D
        Owner: legal | Deadline: pre-signing