AnyTool
Your files never leave your device. All processing happens locally in your browser.

How do I write a non-compete agreement for free — and are they even enforceable?

Open AnyTool’s Non-Compete Agreement Generator and fill in the employer and worker (employee or contractor) names and addresses, the effective date, and the CONSIDERATION the worker receives (a job, a bonus, training or confidential access). Then describe the RESTRICTED ACTIVITIES the worker may not perform, the GEOGRAPHIC SCOPE, and the post-employment DURATION in months — keeping each as narrow as possible. Optionally bundle a non-solicitation of customers clause, an employee no-poach clause and a confidentiality clause, and pick a governing state. A complete restrictive-covenant template — parties, consideration, a legitimate-business-interest recital, the non-compete covenant, geographic scope and duration, optional non-solicit and confidentiality clauses, a severability / blue-pencil reformation clause, remedies, governing law and employer / worker signature lines — is assembled instantly in Markdown, HTML and plain text with a live preview, entirely in your browser, nothing uploaded. Crucially, this is a template, not legal advice: non-competes are increasingly restricted or unenforceable — California, Minnesota, North Dakota and Oklahoma effectively ban them for employees, many states limit them by salary or role, the FTC’s attempted nationwide ban was struck down in court and abandoned on appeal in 2025, and courts routinely refuse or narrow over-broad ones — so a narrower NDA or non-solicit is often better. Confirm whether non-competes are even valid where you are, and have an employment lawyer review it.

  • Reasonable scope, geography and duration in months — the covenant and recital rewrite to match; a live warning flags durations over 24 months
  • Optional non-solicitation of customers, employee no-poach and confidentiality clauses — each generally narrower and more enforceable than a full non-compete
  • Always includes a legitimate-business-interest recital, a severability / blue-pencil reformation clause and remedies + governing-law clauses
  • Heavily honest about enforceability: banned for employees in CA, MN, ND and OK, restricted by salary or role elsewhere, FTC ban struck down in 2025, courts narrow over-broad covenants
  • 100% client-side — employer, worker, activities, scope and duration never leave your browser; copy or download .md / .html / .txt

What is

Non-Compete Agreement

A non-compete agreement (a restrictive covenant) is a contract in which an employee or contractor promises, in exchange for consideration such as a job, pay, a bonus or training, not to engage in competing activities for a limited time after the engagement ends, within a defined geographic area, to protect the employer’s legitimate business interests — trade secrets, confidential information and customer goodwill. To stand a chance of being enforced where they are allowed at all, the restriction must be reasonable: narrow in the activities it bars, limited to where the employer actually competes, and short in duration (most courts uphold roughly 6–24 months). Enforceability varies enormously by jurisdiction — California, Minnesota, North Dakota and Oklahoma effectively void employee non-competes, and many other states restrict them by salary or role — and the FTC’s 2024 rule banning most non-competes nationwide was struck down in court and abandoned on appeal in 2025. Courts often refuse to enforce, or use a “blue-pencil” doctrine to narrow, a covenant broader than necessary. A narrower non-solicitation or confidentiality (NDA) clause is frequently a better, more enforceable choice. A generated non-compete is a template that must be checked against the law of the relevant state, not legal advice.

Generators

Related terms

Restrictive covenantNon-solicitation clauseNo-poach clauseConfidentiality / NDALegitimate business interestConsiderationBlue-pencil doctrineReasonable scope and durationFTC non-compete ruleTrade secret

Frequently Asked Questions

It depends heavily on where you are. California, Minnesota, North Dakota and Oklahoma effectively ban non-competes for employees, and many other states limit them by salary or role. Even where allowed, courts only enforce restrictions that are reasonable in activities, geography and duration, and often narrow or refuse over-broad ones.

Enforceability of non-competes varies dramatically by jurisdiction. California, Minnesota, North Dakota and Oklahoma effectively void or ban employee non-competes outright, and a growing list of states — including Colorado, Illinois, Maryland, Washington, Oregon and Florida — restrict them by salary threshold, role or required notice. At the federal level, the FTC issued a rule in 2024 that would have banned most non-competes nationwide, but a federal court struck it down and the FTC abandoned its appeal in 2025, so there is no nationwide ban — though the agency still challenges overly broad covenants through targeted enforcement. Even in states that permit them, a non-compete is only enforced to the extent it is reasonable: narrow in the activities barred, limited to the area where the employer actually competes, short in duration (courts most often uphold roughly 6 to 24 months), and supported by a legitimate business interest and real consideration. Courts frequently refuse to enforce, or use a blue-pencil doctrine to narrow, a covenant broader than necessary. Because the rules are in flux and differ by state, confirm the law where you are and have an employment lawyer review any non-compete before relying on it.

A reasonable non-compete is no broader than needed to protect a legitimate business interest. It limits the specific competing activities, covers only the geographic area where the employer actually does business, and lasts a short time — most enforceable non-competes run about 6 to 24 months.

Where non-competes are allowed, courts judge them by reasonableness across three dimensions: the activities restricted, the geographic scope, and the duration. The restriction must be tied to a legitimate business interest — protecting trade secrets, confidential information or substantial customer relationships and goodwill — and must be no broader than necessary to protect that interest, so it should not simply stop the worker from earning a living. The activities barred should be specific and narrow (for example, a defined competing line of business rather than an entire industry). The geographic area should match where the employer actually competes, not the whole country by default. The duration should be short: post-employment restrictions of roughly 6 to 24 months are most often upheld, while longer terms are frequently struck down or shortened. Adequate, often new and independent, consideration is also required — in many states continued at-will employment alone is not enough for a non-compete signed after the job starts. This generator nudges you toward narrow activities, scope and duration, flags durations over 24 months, and adds a severability / blue-pencil clause asking a court to narrow rather than void an over-broad term.

Often a non-solicitation or confidentiality (NDA) clause is the better choice. They are generally narrower and far more likely to be enforced than a full non-compete, and in states that ban non-competes they may still be valid. This tool lets you bundle customer non-solicit, employee no-poach and confidentiality clauses.

A full non-compete is the most aggressive restrictive covenant and the most likely to be unenforceable. In many cases a narrower tool protects the real business interest just as well and survives legal scrutiny far better. A non-solicitation of customers clause stops a departing worker from poaching clients they had contact with, without barring them from the field entirely. An employee non-solicitation (no-poach) clause stops them from recruiting your staff. A confidentiality or NDA clause protects trade secrets and confidential information during and after the engagement — often the most defensible protection of all. These clauses are generally narrower, more clearly tied to a legitimate interest, and more likely to be enforced than a blanket non-compete, and in states that ban non-competes outright a non-solicit or NDA may still be valid. This generator lets you toggle each of these clauses on or off, so you can build a narrower agreement — or skip the non-compete covenant’s reach in favour of the more enforceable protections — while still keeping a clear, consistent document.

No. The non-compete agreement is assembled entirely in your browser. Nothing you type — the employer and worker names and addresses, the consideration, the restricted activities, the geographic scope, the duration or the governing state — is sent to a server, logged or stored.

AnyTool’s Non-Compete Agreement Generator runs completely client-side. Every keystroke and toggle updates the Markdown, HTML, plain text and the live preview locally, with no server round-trip, so the employer and worker details, the consideration, the restricted activities, the geographic scope, the duration and the governing state never leave your device. Because a non-compete names real people and describes a business, keeping the draft local matters. The page works offline once cached, and closing the tab discards your draft.

Detailed Explanation

Methodology

How the Non-Compete Agreement Generator Builds the Document

AnyTool’s Non-Compete Agreement Generator maps a short form to a structured restrictive-covenant template entirely in the browser. It reuses the same clock-free engine as the Privacy Policy, Terms of Service, NDA, DMCA, Freelance Contract, Lease Agreement, Power of Attorney, Bill of Sale and Promissory Note generators (legalDocEngine), which models a document as a title, an effective date, an intro and an ordered list of { heading, body } sections and renders that single model into Markdown, ready-to-paste HTML and plain text. A dedicated nonCompeteDoc builder assembles the agreement from your inputs — the employer and worker (employee or contractor) names and addresses, the effective date, the consideration, the restricted activities, the geographic scope, the post-employment duration in months, optional non-solicitation-of-customers, employee no-poach and confidentiality toggles, and the governing state — and assembles only the clauses your choices require. The covenant rewrites itself to state the restricted activities, the geographic area and the duration; a customer non-solicitation clause and/or an employee no-poach clause are added only when their toggles are set; a confidentiality / trade-secret clause is added only when its toggle is set; a legitimate-business-interest recital frames the restriction as protecting trade secrets, confidential information and customer goodwill and no broader than necessary; a severability / blue-pencil reformation clause asks a court to narrow rather than void an over-broad restriction; and remedies, governing-law and employer / worker signature clauses round out the document. The interface nudges the user toward narrow activities, scope and a short duration, and shows a live warning when the duration exceeds 24 months.

  • Clauses cover parties, consideration, legitimate business interest, the non-compete covenant (activities, geography, duration), optional customer non-solicit, employee no-poach and confidentiality, severability / blue-pencil reformation, remedies, governing law, and signatures
  • Conditional non-solicitation (customers) and no-poach (employees) clauses plus a confidentiality clause are added only when their toggles are set
  • Reasonable-by-design: nudges toward narrow activities, geography tied to where the employer competes, and a short duration; flags durations over 24 months
  • A severability / blue-pencil clause asks a court to narrow an over-broad restriction rather than void it; employee or contractor mode adjusts the wording
  • All assembly is pure client-side JavaScript — no server call, no CDN, no upload
Privacy & Security

Client-Side Processing and the Live Preview

Every input — the employer and worker names and addresses, the consideration, the restricted activities, the geographic scope, the duration, the optional clause toggles and the governing state — is processed locally. The Markdown, HTML, plain text and a rendered HTML preview (produced with the marked library in the browser) all update on each keystroke with no network round-trip, so the details used to build the non-compete agreement never leave the device. Because a non-compete names real people and describes a business, keeping the draft local matters. The page works offline once cached, and the draft is discarded when the tab is closed. Users can copy any format or download non-compete-agreement.md, .html or .txt, each ending in employer and worker signature lines.

  • No upload, logging or storage — inputs stay in the browser
  • Live HTML preview rendered locally via the marked library
  • Three export formats: Markdown, HTML and plain text, each with employer and worker signature lines
  • Works offline once cached; closing the tab discards the draft
Limitations

A Template, Not Legal Advice — Non-Competes Are Unenforceable or Banned in Many Places

The generated non-compete is a starting template based on common practice, not legal advice, and the tool does not guarantee that it is valid or enforceable. Non-compete agreements are increasingly restricted or unenforceable. California, Minnesota, North Dakota and Oklahoma effectively void or ban them for employees, and many other states — including Colorado, Illinois, Maryland, Washington, Oregon and Florida — limit them by salary threshold, role or required notice. At the federal level, the FTC issued a rule in 2024 that would have banned most non-competes nationwide, but a federal court struck it down and the FTC abandoned its appeal in 2025, so there is no nationwide ban — though the agency still challenges overly broad covenants. Even where they are permitted, courts only enforce restrictions that are reasonable in activities, geography and duration, are supported by a legitimate business interest and adequate (often new and independent) consideration, and they frequently refuse to enforce or use a blue-pencil doctrine to narrow a covenant broader than necessary. A reasonable post-employment term is usually 6 to 24 months and tied to where the employer actually competes. In many cases a narrower non-solicitation or confidentiality (NDA) clause protects the real interest just as well and is far more likely to be enforced. The interface states this prominently at the top and again next to the output, leaves bracketed placeholders for details the author must supply, includes signature lines, and recommends that the user confirm whether non-competes are even valid where they are and have a qualified employment attorney review the document before anyone signs or relies on it.

  • Output is a template, explicitly not legal advice, and creates no lawyer-client relationship
  • Employee non-competes are effectively banned in California, Minnesota, North Dakota and Oklahoma, and restricted by salary or role in many other states
  • The FTC’s 2024 rule banning most non-competes nationwide was struck down in court and abandoned on appeal in 2025; there is no nationwide ban, but the FTC still targets overly broad covenants
  • Even where allowed, courts only enforce reasonable restrictions and often narrow (blue-pencil) or refuse over-broad ones; a reasonable term is usually 6–24 months
  • A narrower non-solicitation or confidentiality (NDA) clause is often more enforceable; confirm local validity and have an employment attorney review it
Non-compete generation: in-browser (AnyTool) vs typical online generators
CapabilityAnyToolTypical online generators
ProcessingRuns entirely in your browserOften server-side, account-gated
Your inputsNever uploaded, works offlineUsually sent to and stored on a server
ReasonablenessNudges toward narrow activities, geography and a short duration; flags durations over 24 monthsOften lets you set any term with no guidance
Non-solicit / confidentialityOptional customer non-solicit, employee no-poach and confidentiality clauses you can toggleOften fixed or omitted
Severability / blue-pencilBuilt-in blue-pencil reformation clause asking a court to narrow, not voidVaries; sometimes missing
Worker typeEmployee or contractor mode adjusts the wordingOften employee-only
Output formatsMarkdown, HTML and plain textOften HTML/PDF only or a hosted page
PreviewLive local HTML preview (marked)Varies
Honesty about enforceabilityProminent banned-in-CA/MN/ND/OK + FTC + courts-narrow-over-broad + template-not-legal-advice warningOften implies enforceability or buries the caveat
Cost / signupFree, no signupOften gated, upsold or ad-heavy

AnyTool assembles the non-compete locally and uploads nothing. The output is a template, not legal advice; non-competes are increasingly restricted or unenforceable — banned for employees in California, Minnesota, North Dakota and Oklahoma, limited by salary or role in many states, with the FTC’s nationwide ban struck down in court and abandoned on appeal in 2025 — and courts often refuse or narrow over-broad covenants, so a narrower NDA or non-solicit is frequently better. Confirm whether non-competes are even valid where you are and have an employment attorney review it before you rely on it.