Arckit Agent Maturity

You are helping an enterprise architect create an AI Agent Program Maturity Model assessment. This document evaluates the current maturity of the agent program across five key dimensions — Design, Governance, Security, Integration, and Operations — using a 5×5 maturity framework, and produces a prioritised improvement roadmap with benchmarks.

User Input

$ARGUMENTS

Instructions

Note: Before generating, scan projects/ for existing project directories. For each project, list all ARC-*.md artifacts, check external/ for reference documents, and check 000-global/ for cross-project policies. If no external docs exist but they would improve output, ask the user.

1. Read existing artifacts from the project context

RECOMMENDED (read if available, note if missing):

• AAGI (Agent Inventory, recommended) — Extract: agent inventory, capability baseline, ownership, lifecycle state, current architecture state
  • If missing: Note that the guide is unavailable; maturity assessment will rely on available evidence
• AAGR (Agent Architecture Specification, recommended) — Extract: architecture decisions, tool contracts, guardrails, orchestration design, current implementation state
  • If missing: Note that design specifications are unavailable
• maturity-model output from core (recommended) — Extract: existing enterprise maturity assessments, capability baselines, benchmark data
  • If missing: Note that enterprise maturity context is limited

RECOMMENDED (read if available, note if missing):

• PRIN (Architecture Principles, in 000-global) — Extract: AI/agent principles, governance principles, technology standards
• AAOV (Agent Governance Framework) — Extract: oversight tiers, compliance status, audit program, governance maturity
• AASC (Agent Security Architecture) — Extract: security controls, threat model, security maturity
• AAIT (Agent Integration Design) — Extract: integration patterns, API maturity, interoperability
• RISK (Risk Register) — Extract: AI-specific risks, governance gaps, operational risks

OPTIONAL (read if available, skip silently if missing):

• BORD (Board Review) — Extract: board-approved AI strategy, risk appetite, investment commitments
• AIPB (AI Playbook) — Extract: AI ethics principles, model governance standards
• HLDR (High-Level Design Review) — Extract: existing system architecture context
• SECD (Secure by Design) — Extract: security control maturity

2. Identify the target project

• Use the ArcKit Project Context (above) to find the project matching the user's input (by name or number)
• If no match, create a new project:
  1. Use Glob to list projects/*/ directories and find the highest NNN-* number (or start at 001 if none exist)
  2. Calculate the next number (zero-padded to 3 digits, e.g., 002)
  3. Slugify the project name (lowercase, replace non-alphanumeric with hyphens, trim)
  4. Use the Write tool to create projects/{NNN}-{slug}/README.md with the project name, ID, and date — the Write tool will create all parent directories automatically
  5. Also create projects/{NNN}-{slug}/external/README.md with a note to place external reference documents here
  6. Set PROJECT_ID = the 3-digit number, PROJECT_PATH = the new directory path

3. Read the template

Read the template (with user override support):

• First, check if .arckit/templates-custom/agent-maturity-template.md exists in the project root
• If found: Read the user's customized template (user override takes precedence)
• If not found: Read .arckit/templates/agent-maturity-template.md (default)
• Then, read .arckit/templates/_partials/RENDERING.md and resolve the template's <!-- DOC-CONTROL-HEADER --> marker to the Document Control partial it selects, applying the ${organisation_name} and ${default_classification} substitutions. Remove the marker and its comment from the output — a rendered artefact must never contain either.

Tip: Users can customize templates with $arckit-customize agent-maturity

4. Assess Current State — 5×5 Maturity Framework

Evaluate the agent program across five dimensions at five maturity levels:

Dimension assessments

For each dimension, determine the current maturity level based on available evidence:

A. Design Maturity

• Evidence sources: AAGR, design documentation, architecture decision records
• Indicators: Reusable patterns, design standards, tool contract completeness
• Key questions: Are designs documented and reviewed? Are patterns reusable?

B. Governance Maturity

• Evidence sources: AAOV, governance policies, compliance evidence
• Indicators: Oversight model completeness, audit coverage, compliance status
• Key questions: Is there an oversight model? Are decisions auditable?

C. Security Maturity

• Evidence sources: AASC, risk register, security controls, guardrail configurations
• Indicators: Threat model coverage, guardrail comprehensiveness, security testing
• Key questions: Are security controls proactive? Is there automated security testing?

D. Integration Maturity

• Evidence sources: AAIT, API documentation, integration test results
• Indicators: Standardised APIs, interoperability, integration automation
• Key questions: Are integrations standardised? Is there end-to-end testing?

E. Operations Maturity

• Evidence sources: monitoring KPIs, incident response plans, SLA data
• Indicators: Monitoring coverage, incident response readiness, operational metrics
• Key questions: Are operations measured? Is there predictive monitoring?

For each dimension, record:

• Current level: L1 through L5
• Evidence: Concrete examples or artefacts supporting the rating
• Gaps: What is missing to reach the next level

5. Read External Documents and Policies

• Read any external documents listed in the project context (external/ files) — extract existing maturity assessments, capability frameworks, benchmark data
• Read any enterprise standards in projects/000-global/external/ — extract enterprise maturity frameworks, capability baselines, industry benchmarks
• If no external maturity docs found but they would improve the output, ask: "Do you have any existing maturity assessments, capability frameworks, or industry benchmarks? I can read PDFs and images directly. Place them in projects/{project-dir}/external/ and re-run, or skip."
• Citation traceability: When referencing content from external documents, follow the citation instructions in .arckit/references/citation-instructions.md. Place inline citation markers (e.g., [PP-C1]) next to findings informed by source documents and populate the "External References" section in the template.

6. Define Target State

For each dimension, determine a realistic target maturity level:

• Target level: 1–2 levels above current (achievable within 6–12 months)
• Rationale: Business justification for the target
• Gap: Number of levels to progress

Target levels should be ambitious but achievable. Consider:

• Regulatory requirements (may mandate minimum levels)
• Investment commitments and resource availability
• Risk appetite (higher risk = more maturity needed)

7. Create Improvement Roadmap

For each gap identified (current → target), define improvement initiatives:

Minimum 3 initiatives must be defined. Each initiative should include:

• Name: Clear, actionable initiative name
• Dimension: Which maturity dimension it addresses
• Scope: What activities are involved
• Success criteria: How progress will be measured
• Dependencies: Other initiatives or artefacts it depends on
• Owner: Responsible team or role

8. Establish Benchmarks

Compare the agent program against industry benchmarks:

• Industry standards: CMMI, NIST AI RMF maturity, UK AI Centre maturity model
• Peer organisations: Similar programmes in the sector
• Regulatory expectations: Minimum maturity required for compliance

For each benchmark:

• Metric: What is being measured
• Industry average: Typical maturity level in the sector
• Our position: Current maturity level
• Gap: Difference from industry average

9. Detect Version

Before generating the document ID, check if a previous version exists:

1. Look for existing ARC-{PROJECT_ID}-AAMT-v*.md files in the project directory
2. If no existing file: Use VERSION="1.0"
3. If existing file found:
   • Read the existing document to understand its scope
   • Compare against current assessment
   • Minor increment (e.g., 1.0 → 1.1): Same scope — updated assessments, refined targets
   • Major increment (e.g., 1.0 → 2.0): New dimensions added, fundamentally different framework
4. Use the determined version for document ID, filename, Document Control, and Revision History

10. Construct Document Control Metadata

• Document ID: ARC-{PROJECT_ID}-AAMT-v{VERSION} (e.g., ARC-001-AAMT-v1.0)

Populate document control fields:

• document_id: Constructed from format above
• project_id: From Step 2
• project_name: From Step 2
• version: Determined version from Step 9
• author: "ArcKit AI"
• date_created: Current date (YYYY-MM-DD)
• date_updated: Current date (YYYY-MM-DD)
• generation_date: Current date and time
• ai_model: Your model name

11. Generate Agent Program Maturity Model

CRITICAL INSTRUCTIONS FOR QUALITY:

1. This is a LARGE document (maturity assessment + roadmap + benchmarks, 400-800+ lines). You MUST use the Write tool to create the file. DO NOT output the full document to the user (you will exceed token limits).

2. Follow the template structure with all 6 sections:

   Section 1: Maturity Model Framework

   • 5×5 maturity model table (5 dimensions × 5 levels)
   • Level definitions with observable characteristics
   • Evidence criteria for each level per dimension

   Section 2: Current State Assessment

   • Assessment matrix: Dimension × Level × Evidence × Gaps
   • Maturity heatmap (Mermaid quadrant chart)
   • Detailed per-dimension analysis

   Section 3: Target State

   • Target level per dimension with rationale
   • Gap analysis (current vs target)
   • Priority ranking of improvements

   Section 4: Improvement Roadmap

   • Initiative table with ≥3 initiatives
   • Timeline and sequencing
   • Resource allocation and dependencies
   • Success metrics per initiative

   Section 5: Benchmarks

   • Comparison against industry standards
   • Gap analysis vs peers
   • Regulatory alignment assessment

   Section 6: Traceability

   • AAGI → AAGR → AAMT links
   • Cross-references to related artefacts
   • Source document citations

3. Mermaid diagram requirements:

   • Quadrant chart for maturity heatmap
   • Use valid Mermaid syntax
   • Position dimensions correctly based on assessed maturity

12. Quality Checks

Before writing the file, read .arckit/references/quality-checklist.md and verify all Common Checks plus the AAMT per-type checks pass. Fix any failures before proceeding.

AAMT-specific quality checks:

• Maturity framework: 5 levels defined (L1 Ad-hoc through L5 Optimized)
• Dimensions assessed: All 5 dimensions assessed (Design, Governance, Security, Integration, Operations)
• Evidence provided: Each dimension has concrete evidence supporting its rating
• Gaps identified: Each dimension has at least 1 gap documented
• Heatmap present: Valid Mermaid quadrant chart visualising maturity
• Target state defined: Target level set for each dimension with rationale
• Improvement initiatives: At least 3 initiatives defined in the roadmap
• Benchmarks included: Industry benchmarks with gap analysis
• Traceability links: AAGI and AAGR references present
• No placeholder text: No remaining [Dimension], [Level], [Evidence], or [Gaps] tokens

13. Use Write tool to create the maturity model file

• CRITICAL: Because maturity models are large documents (400-800+ lines), you MUST use the Write tool to create the file
• Do NOT output the full content in your response (this will exceed token limits)
• Use Write tool with the full maturity model content
• Path: projects/{PROJECT_ID}-{project-name}/ARC-{PROJECT_ID}-AAMT-v{VERSION}.md

CRITICAL - Auto-Populate Document Control Fields:

Before completing the document, populate ALL document control fields in the header following the same pattern as other ArcKit commands.

Auto-populated fields (populate these automatically):

• [PROJECT_ID] → Extract from project path (e.g., "001" from "projects/001-project-name")
• [VERSION] → Determined from Step 9
• [DATE] / [YYYY-MM-DD] → Current date in YYYY-MM-DD format
• [DOCUMENT_TYPE_NAME] → "Agent Program Maturity Model"
• ARC-[PROJECT_ID]-AAMT-v[VERSION] → Construct using format above
• [COMMAND] → "arckit.agent-maturity"

User-provided fields (extract from project metadata or user input):

• [PROJECT_NAME] → Full project name from project metadata or user input
• [OWNER_NAME_AND_ROLE] → Document owner (prompt user if not in metadata)
• Classification → comes from the resolved Document Control header, not from a placeholder. _partials/RENDERING.md fixes the ladder from the artefact's own regime; ${default_classification} applies only where that regime falls through to user config.

Calculated fields:

• [YYYY-MM-DD] for Next Review → Current date + 90 days (quarterly review cycle)

Pending fields (leave as [PENDING] until manually updated):

• [REVIEWER_NAME] → [PENDING]
• [APPROVER_NAME] → [PENDING]
• [DISTRIBUTION_LIST] → Default to "AI Governance Board, Architecture Team, Compliance Team" or [PENDING]

Populate Revision History:

| 1.0 | {DATE} | ArcKit AI | Initial creation from `$arckit-agent-maturity` command | [PENDING] | [PENDING] |

Populate Generation Metadata Footer:

**Generated by**: ArcKit `$arckit-agent-maturity` command
**Generated on**: {DATE} {TIME} GMT
**ArcKit Version**: {ARCKIT_VERSION}
**Project**: {PROJECT_NAME} (Project {PROJECT_ID})
**AI Model**: [Use actual model name, e.g., "Claude Sonnet 5 (session default)"]
**Generation Context**: [Brief note about source documents used]

14. Show summary to user (NOT full document)

## Agent Program Maturity Model Created

**Document**: projects/{PROJECT_ID}-{project-name}/ARC-{PROJECT_ID}-AAMT-v1.0.md
**Document ID**: ARC-{PROJECT_ID}-AAMT-v1.0

### Maturity Summary

| Dimension | Current | Target | Gap |
|-----------|---------|--------|-----|
| Design | [Level] | [Level] | [Levels] |
| Governance | [Level] | [Level] | [Levels] |
| Security | [Level] | [Level] | [Levels] |
| Integration | [Level] | [Level] | [Levels] |
| Operations | [Level] | [Level] | [Levels] |

### Key Findings

- **Highest priority**: [Dimension with largest gap]
- **Strongest area**: [Dimension with highest maturity]
- **Improvement initiatives**: [N] initiatives defined
- **Benchmarks**: [N] benchmarks assessed

### Next Steps

1. Review assessment with stakeholders
2. Prioritise improvement initiatives
3. Create detailed plans for top priorities: `$arckit-agent-design`
4. Strengthen governance for low-maturity dimensions: `$arckit-agent-governance`

### Files Created

📄 `projects/{PROJECT_ID}-{project-name}/ARC-{PROJECT_ID}-AAMT-v1.0.md` ({line_count} lines)

Important Notes

• Maturity models are living documents — review and update quarterly or after significant program changes
• Be evidence-based — every rating must reference concrete evidence, not impressions
• Target levels must be achievable — maximum 2 levels per improvement cycle (6-12 months)
• Benchmarks provide context — use industry standards and peer comparisons to set realistic targets
• Improvement initiatives drive action — each initiative must be scoped, resourced, and measurable
• Traceability is critical — link back to AAGI, AAGR, and governance artefacts
• The heatmap visualises priorities — use quadrant positioning to show where to focus investment
• Markdown escaping: When writing less-than or greater-than comparisons, always include a space after < or > (e.g., < 5% gap, > 95% coverage) to prevent markdown renderers from interpreting them as HTML tags or emoji
• Template customization: Users can override the template by placing their own agent-maturity-template.md in .arckit/templates-custom/
• Versioning: Always check for existing versions before creating a new file — increment appropriately

Suggested Next Steps

After completing this command, consider running:

• $arckit-agent-design -- Design improvements based on maturity gaps
• $arckit-agent-governance -- Strengthen governance based on maturity assessment