Guides drafting of a post-closing restrictive covenant agreement and accompanying memorandum where cumulative restriction duration, choice-of-law tensions, and garden leave mechanics require enforceability analysis.
Scanned 9/11/2026
Install to Claude Code
npx -y skills add sunyifeisb-art/legalwork --skill draft-restrictive-covenant-agreement --agent claude-codeInstalls into .claude/skills of the current project.
Are you the author of Draft Restrictive Covenant Agreement?
Add the live security badge to your README — it updates automatically with every re-scan.
[](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/sunyifeisb-art-draft-restrictive-covenant-agreement)More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page.
---
name: draft-restrictive-covenant-agreement
task_id: corporate-ma/draft-restrictive-covenant-agreement
description: Guides drafting of a post-closing restrictive covenant agreement and accompanying memorandum where cumulative restriction duration, choice-of-law tensions, and garden leave mechanics require enforceability analysis.
activates_for: [planner, solver, checker]
---
# Skill: Post-Closing Restrictive Covenant Agreement Drafting
## 1. Subject-matter triage
- This task has two outputs: draft the operative restrictive covenant agreement first, then the memorandum that explains and justifies the drafting choices.
- If the source set contains more than one triggering relationship, jurisdiction, departure date, or pre-existing restraint, enumerate each before analysis and draft against each applicable scenario separately.
- If only one governing law or one triggering employment/relationship path is in scope, say so expressly and avoid blended analysis.
## 2. Failure modes the skill is correcting
- The total restraint period is not tested for enforceability when existing covenants and new covenants overlap or run consecutively.
- The agreement assumes a single governing law without addressing a forum, services-location, or residence-based enforceability challenge.
- Garden leave is drafted without a clear trigger, duration, pay treatment, and interaction with the restrictive period.
- The agreement omits a passive investment exception or states it too broadly to survive scrutiny.
- Contractor non-solicitation is drafted like employee non-solicitation without tailoring to relationship intensity or access to sensitive information.
- Cause-based and no-cause separations are treated the same even where the governing law or deal context calls for different covenant treatment.
- The memo describes risks but does not tie each drafting point to a specific enforceability rule and a concrete revision.
## 3. Legal frameworks / domain conventions that apply
- Acquisition-related restrictive covenants are generally analyzed under reasonableness principles tied to legitimate business protection; the core variables are duration, scope, and activity restriction. Use the controlling state-law standard that applies to the covenant.
- Where the agreement’s governing law differs from the work state, residence, or service location, evaluate whether the chosen law will be respected and whether another state’s restrictive-covenant limits may control under conflict-of-law principles.
- Where a prior covenant already binds the founder, the enforceability question turns on the cumulative restraint period and whether the new agreement extends or restarts the clock.
- Garden leave should be drafted with a clear invocation right, a definite leave period, and a defined compensation mechanic so the consideration analysis is transparent.
- A passive investment carve-out is typically limited to a small minority holding in a public company or comparable liquid market investment, subject to an express threshold.
- Independent contractor non-solicitation should usually be narrower than employee non-solicitation and tied to material contact, access to confidential information, or a similar relationship-based limiter.
- If termination for cause and without cause change covenant obligations, state that distinction expressly in the operative text.
- Cite the controlling authority for each legal proposition used in the memo, including the governing statute, regulation, or leading case for the relevant jurisdiction.
## 4. Analytical scaffolds
- Identify every restraint that could apply to the founder, including pre-existing covenants, side letters, equity-related restrictions, and any post-closing covenant in the draft package.
- For each restraint, assess: triggering event, duration, activity scope, customer/solicitation scope, geography if any, and whether the drafting is narrower or broader than necessary.
- Compare the governing law clause with the location of services, the founder’s residence, and the deal nexus; if they differ, analyze both potentially applicable regimes and explain the drafting implication.
- Review any garden leave language for an unambiguous trigger, compensation during leave, whether the leave counts toward the restricted period, and whether the memo should recommend express offset language.
- Check for a passive investment exception and confirm it is tied to a defined ownership threshold and market-liquidity limitation.
- Review contractor non-solicitation language for overbreadth; tailor it to contacts, responsibilities, or access rather than a blanket ban.
- Determine whether cause-based termination modifies the restrictive covenants; if so, align the operative clause and the memo so they match.
- For every substantive issue discussed in the memo, state the governing rule, the drafting risk, and the exact revision that should be made.
## 5. Vertical / structural / temporal relationships
- Treat temporal sequencing as central: pre-closing covenants, closing date, post-closing leave, and post-termination restraint periods may interact and should be mapped in order.
- If a pre-existing restriction already runs from a prior departure or prior closing, analyze how the new agreement affects the remaining run time instead of analyzing the new covenant in isolation.
- If the transaction documents contain multiple restrictive regimes for different roles or signing dates, keep them separate and do not average the terms.
- If the founder’s obligations change based on termination reason, preserve that distinction throughout the operative clauses and the memo.
## 6. Output structure conventions
- Produce the restrictive covenant agreement as a complete operative document with defined terms, covenant provisions, carve-outs, governing law, and standard enforcement language suited to the transaction.
- Then produce the drafting memorandum as a separate advisory document that addresses each material covenant issue with controlling authority, enforceability analysis, and a specific drafting recommendation.
- In the agreement, incorporate the recommended limitations and exceptions in the text itself; do not leave key protections only in the memo.
- In the memorandum, end with a concise Recommended Actions section that assigns each action to a role and ties it to the transaction timing.
- Draft both deliverables so they can stand alone in .docx form, with the agreement containing operative clauses rather than narrative summaries.
Is this your skill, or is something wrong with this listing? Request removal or report an issue. Author removals are honored within 72 hours.
No comments yet. Be the first to comment!