Many legal documents follow along the same lines as this one, saying:
For purposes of this Agreement, “Confidential Information” means any data or information that is proprietary to the Disclosing Party and not generally known to the public, whether in tangible or intangible form, in whatever medium provided, whether unmodified or modified by Receiving Party or its Representatives (as defined herein), whenever and however disclosed, including, but not limited to: (i) any marketing strategies, plans, financial information, or projections, operations, sales estimates, business plans and performance results relating to the past, present or future business activities of such party, its affiliates, subsidiaries and affiliated companies; (ii) plans for products or services, and customer or supplier lists; (iii) any scientific or technical information, invention, design, process, procedure, formula, improvement, technology or method; (iv) any concepts, reports, data, know-how, works-in-progress, designs, development tools, specifications, computer software, source code, object code, flow charts, databases, inventions, information and trade secrets; (v) any other information that should reasonably be recognized as confidential information of the Disclosing Party; and (vi) any information generated by the Receiving Party or by its Representatives that contains, reflects, or is derived from any of the foregoing.
Phew! That is one long sentence. The key thing is "including, but not limited to". If you are really saying "everything you can possibly imagine", or "the unlimited possibilities of potential things", I don't see why you can't just leave it at that, and leave out all the permutations/examples like "tangible and intangible", etc.. It could be simply shortened to this:
For purposes of this Agreement, “Confidential Information” means all possible information shared by the Disclosing Party.
Wondering what advantage or benefit illustrating all these "permutations" provides over just the simple "all information, period.". Wondering why this shortened version isn't adequate.