T

triage-nda

by @anthropicsv
4.1(20)

Automatically evaluate NDA terms, identifying high-risk liabilities and exceptions, generating structured review reports to accelerate legal processes.

legal-compliancerisk-managementcompliancedocument-reviewcontract-analysisGitHub
Installation
npx skills add anthropics/knowledge-work-plugins --skill triage-nda
compare_arrows

Before / After Comparison

1
Before

Legal personnel read non-disclosure agreements (NDAs) line by line, marking liability clauses, exception clauses, and governing laws. A 10-page NDA takes 45-60 minutes, and key risk points are easily overlooked.

After

AI automatically parses agreement clauses, identifying liability boundaries, intellectual property ownership, and dispute jurisdiction. It generates a structured risk checklist and modification suggestions in 3 minutes, ensuring no key risks are missed.

description SKILL.md

triage-nda

/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

Weekly Installs476Repositoryanthropics/know…-pluginsGitHub Stars11.0KFirst SeenMar 13, 2026Security AuditsGen Agent Trust HubPassSocketPassSnykWarnInstalled oncodex460gemini-cli457opencode457cursor456github-copilot455cline455

forumUser Reviews (0)

Write a Review

Effect
Usability
Docs
Compatibility

No reviews yet

Statistics

Installs200
Rating4.1 / 5.0
Version
Updated2026年4月27日
Comparisons1

User Rating

4.1(20)
5
25%
4
50%
3
25%
2
0%
1
0%

Rate this Skill

0.0

Compatible Platforms

🔧Claude Code

Timeline

Created2026年4月9日
Last Updated2026年4月27日
🎁 Agent Knowledge Cards