Read a Data Processing Agreement before you sign it β sub-processors, transfer mechanism, breach-notice window, deletion, audit rights β in plain language with π΄π‘π’ risk. Use when asked to review a DPA, check a data processing agreement, is this DPA safe to sign, or what am I agreeing to on data. Produces the plain-English summary, the risk-ranked findings, the missing-clause checklist, and the questions to send back before signature.
Start a fresh conversation. Replace the highlighted placeholders.
Use dpa-review to review [DPA text] for our role as [controller or processor] handling [data and applicable regimes], and provide a plain-English summary, risk-ranked findings, missing protections, and vendor questions; this is not legal advice.
Required inputs
[DPA text]
[controller or processor]
[data and applicable regimes]
User-approved starter prompt based on a pinned source version; check current skill requirements before running. Task evidence β
SKILL.md
name: dpa-reviewdescription: "Read a Data Processing Agreement before you sign it β sub-processors, transfer mechanism, breach-notice window, deletion, audit rights β in plain language with π΄π‘π’ risk. Use when asked to review a DPA, check a data processing agreement, is this DPA safe to sign, or what am I agreeing to on data. Produces the plain-English summary, the risk-ranked findings, the missing-clause checklist, and the questions to send back before signature."
DPA Review
Every SaaS contract now drags a Data Processing Agreement behind it, and most get signed unread β which is how you inherit a vendor's sub-processors, a 30-day breach-notice window, and no deletion guarantee. This reads the DPA the way a privacy counsel skims it: what data is processed, who else touches it, where it goes, what happens on a breach, and what's missing β ranked by how much it can hurt.
Not legal advice. Flags issues for review; have privacy counsel sign off on a material agreement.
What This Skill Produces
The plain-English summary β what this DPA actually commits each side to
Risk-ranked findings β π΄ sign-blockers, π‘ negotiate, π’ standard β each with the clause and why it matters
The missing-clause checklist β the protections a good DPA has that this one lacks
The redline questions β what to send back to the vendor before signing
Required Inputs
Ask for these if not provided:
The DPA text β the document, or its key clauses pasted
Your role β are you the controller (your data) or the processor (you're the vendor)? The risks flip
The data β what personal/sensitive data is involved, and any regime that applies (GDPR, CCPA, HIPAA)
Deal context β how critical the vendor is; leverage shapes what's worth fighting
Framework: What a DPA Must Get Right
Scope & roles β controller vs processor, and the processing purpose; a mismatch here voids the rest.
Sub-processors β who else gets the data, notice of new ones, and a right to object.
International transfers β the mechanism (SCCs, adequacy, DPF) for data leaving its region.
Security & breach β the standard, and the breach-notification window (72 hours is the GDPR bar; "reasonable" is a red flag).
Deletion & return β what happens to your data at termination, and by when.
Audit & liability β your right to verify, and whether liability is capped below the data risk.
Output Format
DPA Review β [vendor] Β· you are the [controller/processor]
Verdict: Safe to sign / Negotiate first / Do not sign β one line why
Risk-ranked findings
Risk
Clause
What it says
Why it matters
π΄
β¦
β¦
β¦
Missing protections
[clause a good DPA has that this lacks]
Send back before signing
[redline question / requested change]
Quality Checks
Controller/processor role identified β findings framed from your side
Sub-processor, transfer, breach-window, and deletion terms each assessed (or flagged absent)
The breach-notification window is stated in hours/days, not left as "reasonable"
Every π΄ names the exact clause and the concrete exposure
Missing-clause list distinguishes "unusual gap" from "standard omission"
Flagged for counsel review on anything material
Anti-Patterns
Summarising without ranking β a wall of clauses helps no one; rank by damage.
Ignoring who you are β a processor and a controller face opposite risks in the same document.
Treating "reasonable security" as fine β undefined standards are the finding.
Inventing a clause number or requirement not in the text β quote what's there.
Example Trigger Phrases
"Review this DPA before we sign the vendor contract."
"Is this data processing agreement safe to sign?"
"What am I agreeing to on data in this DPA?"
"Check this DPA β we're the controller, it's a GDPR deal."