River
Y CombinatorBacked by Y Combinator
FREE TEMPLATE

NDA Review Checklist and Deviation Register

Six documents and three sheets that sort every difference into what the law fixes and what you can negotiate, then check which way the data flows.

Free download  ·  No account needed

Deviation Register  ·  Marchmont Renewables mutual NDA, reviewed for Sablewood Analytics

Nine rows, seven of them positions, five asks going back

Ref§ClauseKindWhich way it cutsVerdict
D-12.1TermPositionReinforcesAsk
D-22.2Trade-secret tailPositionFlipsDrop
D-33ResidualsPositionNarrowsAsk, Deputy GC
D-44.3Oral disclosuresPositionFlipsDrop
D-57Governing lawPositionNeutralAsk
D-68AssignmentPositionNarrowsAsk
D-710Return or destroyPositionReinforcesAsk
SF‑15.2Flow-down to individualsFloorn/aOur own paper
SF‑29, 1.2Non-disparagementFloorn/aNote only

Two asks came out, and neither would have looked wrong

What a clause-by-clause run sendsWhat the direction score does with it
Strike the 30-day confirmation of oral disclosuresLeave it. It protects the receiving party, and here that is us
Ask for the perpetual trade-secret tailLeave it. It is a permanent obligation on their 40 GB, not on our 24 pages

40.0 GB in, 24 pages out. Six of nine positions protect a discloser.

Every NDA checklist asks one question nine times: does this clause match our position. That assumes every line in the document is negotiable, and two kinds are not. A statutory floor has no fallback and no approver, and one of the two here sits in a document that is not the one under review. So each row gets sorted into floor or position before anybody marks anything up, because a row sorted wrong either burns a round on a term no court will apply or gives away a remedy.

Sablewood Analytics reading Marchmont Renewables' mutual NDA is the review worked through here. Sablewood receives 40.0 gigabytes across four information categories and sends 24 pages across two, so it is the receiving party by a wide margin. Six of its nine standard positions were written to protect a discloser. Two asks came out of the markup on that ground alone, because sending them would have meant asking the counterparty to increase Sablewood's own exposure. The positions themselves get built in the contract playbook pack.

Two federal floors reach an ordinary commercial NDA and neither is findable by comparing documents. The trade secret immunity notice belongs in any agreement with an employee, contractors included, and leaving it out costs the employer its exemplary damages and fees against that person. A nondisclosure clause agreed before a dispute arises is not enforceable as to a harassment claim. The markup that comes out of all this goes through the redline comparison tool.

One review, and the quarter that priced its positions

The nine positions, the direction score that re-marks them, the floor check, and the log that says what each position costs to hold.

Standard Form Positions  ·  Sablewood Standard Mutual NDA v4.2

The last column is the one playbooks leave out

#We ask forFallback rungApproverHelps
P1Three years from disclosureFive yearsContractsRecipient
P2Trade secrets, while they stay secretNoneDeputy GCDiscloser
P3No residuals clauseUnaided memory onlyDeputy GCDiscloser
P4Oral disclosures, unconfirmed30-day confirmationContractsDiscloser
P5Illinois law, Cook CountyTheir home stateContractsNeither
P6Injunctive relief, no bondBond the court setsContractsDiscloser
P7No non-solicitation rider12 months, introduced staffDeputy GCRecipient
P8No assignment without consentNot unreasonably withheldContractsDiscloser
P9Return or destroy, backups outBackups onlyContractsRecipient

Six of nine protect a discloser, and that is not a defect

v4.2 was written for a selling motion, where Sablewood hands over product information and the counterparty hands over almost nothing. It becomes a defect the day a deal runs the other way, and nobody notices, because the form is called mutual and both sides of it read identically.

Every rung is language from at least one of the 28 executed NDAs behind the form. Two rungs from v4.1 failed that test.

Disclosure Direction  ·  Marchmont proof of concept

Symmetric text, and nothing symmetric underneath it

CategoryFromVolumeSensitivity
SCADA time series, three sites, 24 monthsMarchmont38.00 GBHigh
Maintenance work orders and failure codesMarchmont1.40 GBHigh
PPA pricing and curtailment settlementsMarchmont0.24 GBHighest
Outage and derate logsMarchmont0.32 GBMedium
Forecasting model architecture summarySablewood18 pagesHigh
Pricing and commercial terms sheetSablewood6 pagesMedium
Site walkthroughs, staff interviews, our model walkthroughBothUnsizedOral

Three counts, and no weighting scheme

Four of six sized categories flow toward Sablewood. Three of the four rated High or Highest flow toward Sablewood. In volume it is 40.0 GB in against 24 pages out. That is not a close call and it does not need a formula.

The three unsized rows are the ones the business never mentions, because none of them is data. One runs our way, and it is the recheck condition on D-4.

Statutory Floor Check  ·  run before the comparison, not after

A floor has no fallback, so it has no approver either

SF-1 · The row for a document that is not in front of you

Their section 5.2 obliges us to bind every individual with access under a written agreement. Our form says the same and we rely on it, so there is nothing to negotiate. The agreements that clause forces us to sign are a different matter.

Sablewood today
People going on the project4, of whom 3 are contractors
Employee agreementRevised November, carries the cross-reference
Contractor agreement2014, no notice, covers three of the four
What that costsNo exemplary damages or attorney fees against those three

The exposure runs against the company that drafted the agreement rather than the person who signed it. A reviewer trimming text to tighten our position is trimming our own remedy, and comparing documents never finds it, because our form is missing it too.

SF-2 · Already unenforceable, so not worth a round

Their non-disparagement covenant and the sweep covering all dealings between the parties are agreed before any dispute exists. Record it, brief the project lead, send no comment.

Two federal floors are not a survey. The check names Delaware, Illinois, Iowa and New York as jurisdictions nobody examined rather than reporting a clean result.

Turnaround Log  ·  61 inbound NDAs, one quarter

What a position concedes, and what it actually blocks

#RaisedConcededConcede rateSole blocksDays
P1413380.5%24.8
P4494693.9%1433.6
P5471838.3%512.0
P93126.5%00.0
Two or more open614.4
27 extra rounds64.8

P1 and P4 read identically on concede rate

Both give way most of the time. One was the only item standing between a document and a signature twice, the other 14 times, which is 51.9 percent of every extra round in the quarter. Retire P4 and the 23 multi-round NDAs become nine.

What retiring it costs

Three counterparties in 49 agreed to delete the requirement, and those three go away. The recommendation carries the saving and the loss in one sentence, because the person approving it is entitled to both.

P9 holds 93.5 percent of the time and has never blocked a signature. Free to keep, and there is no reason to touch it.

What's in the pack

01

Deviation Register

One row per difference, each with a kind, a direction, a verdict, the rung it opens at and the role that approves it. Two counts at the bottom.

02

Standard Form Positions

Nine positions with the language you open at, the rung you take, the approver, and which side of a disclosure the clause actually helps.

03

Disclosure Direction

What each side hands over, by category, with volumes and sensitivities, including the oral categories nobody remembers because they are not data.

04

Statutory Floor Check

The two federal floors, the document each one actually lands in, and the jurisdictions the check did not examine rather than a clean result.

05

Turnaround Log

Raised, conceded, sole blocks and days per position, so an expensive position is visible next to a cheap one that concedes just as often.

06

Review Note

What is going back and what is not, with the reason on every dropped row and the condition that would make dropping it wrong.

07

Markup

Ask rows only, written as replacement language with one sentence of reason, so nothing has to be drafted on the other side.

08

Approval Recommendation

The approval level, the single clause that needs somebody senior, and what the company accepts by sending a short markup instead of a long one.

How to use it

  1. 1

    Open in River, or take it blank

    Hand River the inbound NDA, your standard form and the individual agreements you use for staff and contractors, or take the Word documents and CSV sheets from the template library.

  2. 2

    Fill in the column playbooks skip

    Every position needs the side of a disclosure it helps, not just a preferred and a fallback. Nothing downstream runs without it, and it comes from the clause rather than from who sent the paper.

  3. 3

    Score the deal before reading the document

    Categories, volumes and sensitivities in both directions, including site access and interviews. Then mark each position reinforces, flips, narrows or neutral against this deal.

  4. 4

    Floor check, then compare, then route

    Follow the flow-down clause into the agreement it forces you to sign next. Then the register, and the approver hears about the one exception rather than about the whole document. What the signed agreement obliges you to do afterwards belongs in the obligation register.

Frequently asked questions

Is this free?

The download costs nothing and needs no account. Edit with AI opens a free River account and installs the same pack as a private space, with the agent ready to read your standard form and the NDA that arrived. Both buttons point at one pack, and the download is the whole of it.

What does Edit with AI actually do?

It reads your standard form against the last executed NDAs to build the positions list, asks the business what each side is handing over, follows the flow-down clause into your individual agreements, and fills the register. Every row quotes both clauses rather than summarising either.

We already have a playbook. Why is this different?

A playbook gives every clause a preferred and a fallback, which quietly treats every clause as negotiable. Two rows in the worked review have no fallback because the law decides them, and two more were dropped because our own position was arguing for the counterparty on this deal.

The agreement is mutual. Does direction change anything?

It changed two of seven positions here. Mutual describes the text, not the exposure. Sablewood receives 40.0 gigabytes and sends 24 pages, so a clause protecting a disclosing party is protecting Marchmont, and asking for it would have made Sablewood's own position worse.

Why count sole blocks rather than how often a position concedes?

Because a concession inside a round that was happening anyway costs nothing. Two positions in the worked quarter concede at 80.5 and 93.9 percent and cost 4.8 days against 33.6. Concede rate reads them as the same finding, and the playbook pack is where that rate belongs.

Where does this review stop?

At the markup and the routing. A proof of concept moving operating data usually produces data terms next, which is DPA review, and a signed evaluation usually produces a full agreement, which is vendor review. Commercial terms found inside an NDA get flagged and routed rather than reviewed here.

Does it say whether a clause is enforceable in our state?

No. The floor check reports two federal requirements and then names the jurisdictions nobody examined, which in the worked review is four of them. State restrictions on confidentiality terms vary a great deal, and a check that closed that gap with a guess would be worth less than one that flags it.

Find out which lines are actually negotiable

Edit with AI