mcpField
N
nda-analyser

nda-analyser

github.com/mohitagw15856Documents1.5k49 installsUpdated 5d ago
Repository

About nda-analyser

nda-analyser is a document-analysis skill for reviewing non-disclosure agreements. It summarizes parties and terms, checks common risk clauses, suggests negotiation points, and provides an informational verdict rather than legal advice.

Key features

  1. 01Classifies NDA type and party roles
  2. 02Reviews confidentiality definitions and exclusions
  3. 03Checks key clauses including residuals
  4. 04Creates a negotiation checklist
  5. 05Provides a plain-English verdict with legal disclaimer

Use cases

  1. 01Reviewing an NDA before signing
  2. 02Identifying clauses to negotiate
  3. 03Assessing confidentiality terms for a business deal

Install

Copy the command and run it in a terminal.

$npx skills add https://github.com/mohitagw15856/pm-claude-skills --skill nda-analyser

After installing, type/nda-analyserin Claude Code to confirm it loaded.

Details

From the project README

NDA Analyser Skill

NDAs are often treated as routine paperwork but contain terms with significant long-term consequences. This skill analyses them systematically.

Required Inputs

  • NDA text (paste in full or describe key clauses)
  • Your party position (disclosing / receiving / mutual)
  • Purpose of the NDA (e.g. pre-sales, hiring, M&A, partnership)
  • Industry context (optional)

Output Structure

1. NDA Type and Parties
  • Type: Unilateral / Mutual
  • Disclosing party: [Name]
  • Receiving party: [Name]
  • Purpose: [As stated]
  • Governing law: [Jurisdiction]
  • Term: [Duration of obligations]
2. Definition of Confidential Information
  • How broadly defined? Narrow / Standard / Very broad
  • Oral disclosures included? Yes / No / With conditions
  • Standard exclusions present? [public domain, prior knowledge, independently developed, legally required disclosure]
  • Flag: [Unusual inclusions or missing exclusions]
3. Key Clause Analysis

[Clause name] — Concern / Watch / Standard

  • What it says: [Plain English]
  • Issue: [Why flagged]
  • Standard position: [What this typically looks like]
  • Negotiation suggestion: [If applicable]

Clauses always covered: permitted use, non-solicitation/non-compete, term and post-termination obligations, return/destruction of information, remedies, liability, residuals clause.

4. Negotiation Checklist
PointCurrent positionSuggested ask
[e.g. Confidentiality term][e.g. 5 years][e.g. Reduce to 2 years]
5. Plain English Verdict

2-3 sentences. Standard NDA, one-sided, or needs a lawyer?


WARNING: This analysis is for informational purposes only and is not legal advice. Consult a qualified solicitor before signing.

Quality Checks

  • Definition of confidential information assessed for scope (narrow / standard / very broad)
  • Residuals clause checked (allows memory use of disclosed information — high-risk)
  • Non-solicitation / non-compete provisions flagged
  • Post-termination obligations duration noted
  • Plain English verdict given (standard / one-sided / needs lawyer)
  • Disclaimer is included

Anti-Patterns

  • Do not present the analysis as legal advice — the disclaimer must appear prominently and the output must recommend qualified legal review before any signing decision
  • Do not skip the residuals clause check — residuals clauses allow the receiving party to use disclosed information from memory, which is one of the highest-risk provisions in any NDA
  • Do not evaluate only the clauses explicitly flagged by the user — a complete analysis must cover all standard clause types even if the user only asked about one
  • Do not assess breadth of the confidentiality definition without checking for oral disclosure coverage — oral disclosures with no written confirmation requirement are a common enforcement gap
  • Do not omit the plain English verdict — a clause-by-clause analysis without a summary conclusion leaves the user unable to act on the findings

Example Trigger Phrases

  • "Analyse this NDA"
  • "Review this confidentiality agreement"
  • "Is this NDA standard or unusual?"
  • "What should I negotiate in this mutual NDA?"

Comments

Markdown supported