When selling your business or exploring a potential deal, many owners now turn to AI tools to draft non-disclosure agreements. The instinct makes sense. It is fast and accessible. But the execution is often flawed. Most business owners are not lawyers and cannot reasonably be expected to understand every protection that should be built into an NDA. Without that foundation, it is difficult to craft the right prompts, and weak prompts lead to weak agreements. The result is often an NDA that looks professional but lacks real strength. Many DIY NDAs are thin where it matters most. They frequently lack meaningful remedies and strong injunction language. When a disclosure actually happens, the agreement may not provide the protection you thought you had.
The Rise of DIY NDAs
Lately, more and more people have been telling me the same thing: they used ChatGPT or another AI tool to draft their NDA. The appeal is obvious. It is fast, inexpensive, and it seems boilerplate. It usually reads like a real legal agreement and creates a sense of confidence.
The problem is that NDAs are not tested when they are signed. They are tested when someone breaks them. And that is where many DIY NDAs begin to fall apart.
The False Comfort Problem
Most AI-generated NDAs look complete on the surface. They are well formatted and filled with familiar legal language. Many even include detailed definitions of confidential information. But NDAs are not about sounding legal. They are about being enforceable.
The real question is simple: if someone discloses your confidential information, what can you actually do about it? The answer to that question lives in the remedies section. Unfortunately, that is where many DIY NDAs are weakest.
Why Remedies Matter as Much or More Than Definitions
A surprising number of NDAs spend the majority of their length defining what qualifies as confidential information. That part is important, but definitions alone do not protect you. Protection comes from consequences. If the agreement does not clearly spell out what happens after a breach, you are left arguing from scratch.
That uncertainty reduces leverage. It increases legal expense. And in real disputes, leverage matters far more than document length.
The Injunction Gap
One of the most common problems I see in AI-generated NDAs is weak or missing injunction language. An injunction is what allows you to go to court and ask a judge to stop someone immediately. Not months later after a trial, but right now.
Speed matters in confidentiality cases. If trade secrets are posted online or shared with a competitor, financial damages alone rarely fix the harm. Once information becomes public, it cannot be made private again.
Strong NDAs recognize this reality. They include clear language confirming that a breach will cause irreparable harm, acknowledging that monetary damages are not sufficient, and expressly allowing the disclosing party to seek immediate injunctive relief. Without that language, you may already be starting from a weaker position.
Why Courts Care About This Language
Many business owners assume a judge will simply understand that confidentiality is important. Sometimes that is true. Sometimes it is not. Courts rely heavily on the contract in front of them. If the agreement is vague about remedies, you may face arguments that damages can be calculated later or that the contract does not clearly allow emergency relief.
That kind of ambiguity slows everything down. And delay is the enemy in confidentiality disputes.
The Enforcement Reality
An NDA is more than a legal document. It is also a negotiation tool. A strong remedies clause changes the conversation the moment a breach occurs. Instead of debating what you are allowed to do, you are enforcing what was already agreed upon.
That shift matters. It moves you from persuasion to enforcement. And enforcement is where real leverage lives.
The Illusion of “Good Enough”
AI tools are remarkable, and I use them every day. But speed creates a new risk: the illusion that close enough is good enough. In the context of NDAs, close enough often is not good enough.
You do not discover the weaknesses in an NDA when you sign it. You discover them when you are trying to stop damage in real time. That is the worst possible moment to realize the protections are thin.
What Strong NDA Remedies Look Like
You do not need to be a lawyer to understand the basics of a strong NDA. At a minimum, the agreement should contain clear injunctive relief language without bond that allows immediate court action. It should include an acknowledgment of irreparable harm and clarify that monetary damages alone are insufficient. Strong agreements often include cumulative remedies provisions and, in some cases, fee-shifting language where you can get your attorneys’ fees paid to add real deterrence.
These are not academic details. They are practical enforcement tools.
Why This Matters More Than Ever
Confidential information moves faster today than ever before. A single forwarded email or social media post can cause damage in minutes. The speed of modern communication means that contracts must be stronger, not faster.
There is an irony here. The same tools that make it easy to generate an NDA also make it easier to destroy the value the NDA is supposed to protect.
A Better Approach
This is not an argument against AI. It is an argument for judgment. AI is a powerful starting point. It can help frame issues and organize ideas. But when the stakes involve intellectual property, deal flow, or trade secrets, enforcement language should not be treated as an afterthought.
The real value of an NDA is not how quickly it can be generated. It is how strongly it protects you when it is tested.
The Bottom Line
Many NDAs look strong on the surface but are weak where it matters most. If remedies and injunction provisions are thin or unclear, the agreement may provide comfort without real protection. And comfort is not what you need when confidential information is at risk.
Before relying on a DIY NDA, it is worth asking a simple question: if this agreement is breached tomorrow, do I have the tools to stop the damage immediately? If the answer is unclear, the agreement probably is too.
In confidentiality matters, strong remedies are not a luxury. It is imperative.
Have the NDA reviewed by a lawyer or pay the price later.