agentic-scorecard 0.1.0

package/AGENT_PROMPT.md

@@ -0,0 +1,64 @@
+# Ask an AI coding agent to run the benchmark
+
+These prompts are deliberately vendor-neutral. The agent needs terminal access to the repository and
+permission to download the published npm package. The benchmark itself runs locally, invokes no
+model, uploads no source, and makes no network calls after package installation.
+
+## Recommended: first assessment
+
+Copy and paste:
+
+```text
+Assess this repository's readiness for AI-agent pull-request work.
+
+From the repository root, run:
+npx --yes agentic-scorecard@0.1.0 assess . --profile pr-creation --format markdown --output .agentic/reports/agentic-readiness-v0.1.0.md
+
+Do not change product source code, configuration, policies, or tests. Do not create or mark manual
+attestations as met. Read the generated report and tell me:
+1. the score and highest passed readiness profile;
+2. whether the pr-creation target passes;
+3. each target-profile blocker and the evidence that was or was not found;
+4. the five highest-value improvements in dependency order; and
+5. any likely false positive, false negative, or organizational control that repository inspection
+   cannot prove.
+
+Keep tool-verified and self-attested evidence clearly separated. Leave the generated report
+uncommitted unless I explicitly ask you to commit it. If the command cannot run, explain the exact
+blocker without changing the repository to work around it.
+```
+
+## Choose a different authority level
+
+Replace `pr-creation` with exactly one of:
+
+- `read-only-analysis` — inspect approved source and return advice;
+- `planning` — draft plans and specifications;
+- `local-implementation` — edit an isolated checkout and run local checks;
+- `pr-creation` — create a branch and pull request while a human retains merge authority;
+- `limited-autonomous-maintenance` — perform pre-approved low-risk maintenance within strict limits.
+
+No benchmark profile grants production deployment authority.
+
+## Guided remediation
+
+Use this only after reviewing the first report:
+
+```text
+Read .agentic/reports/agentic-readiness-v0.1.0.md and create a remediation proposal for the failed
+target-profile controls. Do not implement changes yet. Group recommendations into quick wins,
+foundational engineering, and organizational evidence. For each recommendation include the ADRB
+control ID, risk reduced, files or systems likely affected, accountable role, verification method,
+dependencies, and an effort estimate. Identify claims requiring a human owner or access to external
+systems; never invent an attestation. End by asking which recommendations I authorize you to
+implement.
+```
+
+## Reassessment after approved improvements
+
+```text
+Re-run the pinned Agentic Development Readiness Benchmark v0.1.0 for the same readiness profile.
+Compare the new report to the previous report control by control. Explain score changes using evidence,
+not assumptions, and identify any regression or expired attestation. Do not overwrite the previous
+report; add the current date to the new report filename.
+```

package/LICENSE

@@ -0,0 +1,201 @@
+                                 Apache License
+                           Version 2.0, January 2004
+                        http://www.apache.org/licenses/
+
+   TERMS AND CONDITIONS FOR USE, REPRODUCTION, AND DISTRIBUTION
+
+   1. Definitions.
+
+      "License" shall mean the terms and conditions for use, reproduction,
+      and distribution as defined by Sections 1 through 9 of this document.
+
+      "Licensor" shall mean the copyright owner or entity authorized by
+      the copyright owner that is granting the License.
+
+      "Legal Entity" shall mean the union of the acting entity and all
+      other entities that control, are controlled by, or are under common
+      control with that entity. For the purposes of this definition,
+      "control" means (i) the power, direct or indirect, to cause the
+      direction or management of such entity, whether by contract or
+      otherwise, or (ii) ownership of fifty percent (50%) or more of the
+      outstanding shares, or (iii) beneficial ownership of such entity.
+
+      "You" (or "Your") shall mean an individual or Legal Entity
+      exercising permissions granted by this License.
+
+      "Source" form shall mean the preferred form for making modifications,
+      including but not limited to software source code, documentation
+      source, and configuration files.
+
+      "Object" form shall mean any form resulting from mechanical
+      transformation or translation of a Source form, including but
+      not limited to compiled object code, generated documentation,
+      and conversions to other media types.
+
+      "Work" shall mean the work of authorship, whether in Source or
+      Object form, made available under the License, as indicated by a
+      copyright notice that is included in or attached to the work
+      (an example is provided in the Appendix below).
+
+      "Derivative Works" shall mean any work, whether in Source or Object
+      form, that is based on (or derived from) the Work and for which the
+      editorial revisions, annotations, elaborations, or other modifications
+      represent, as a whole, an original work of authorship. For the purposes
+      of this License, Derivative Works shall not include works that remain
+      separable from, or merely link (or bind by name) to the interfaces of,
+      the Work and Derivative Works thereof.
+
+      "Contribution" shall mean any work of authorship, including
+      the original version of the Work and any modifications or additions
+      to that Work or Derivative Works thereof, that is intentionally
+      submitted to Licensor for inclusion in the Work by the copyright owner
+      or by an individual or Legal Entity authorized to submit on behalf of
+      the copyright owner. For the purposes of this definition, "submitted"
+      means any form of electronic, verbal, or written communication sent
+      to the Licensor or its representatives, including but not limited to
+      communication on electronic mailing lists, source code control systems,
+      and issue tracking systems that are managed by, or on behalf of, the
+      Licensor for the purpose of discussing and improving the Work, but
+      excluding communication that is conspicuously marked or otherwise
+      designated in writing by the copyright owner as "Not a Contribution."
+
+      "Contributor" shall mean Licensor and any individual or Legal Entity
+      on behalf of whom a Contribution has been received by Licensor and
+      subsequently incorporated within the Work.
+
+   2. Grant of Copyright License. Subject to the terms and conditions of
+      this License, each Contributor hereby grants to You a perpetual,
+      worldwide, non-exclusive, no-charge, royalty-free, irrevocable
+      copyright license to reproduce, prepare Derivative Works of,
+      publicly display, publicly perform, sublicense, and distribute the
+      Work and such Derivative Works in Source or Object form.
+
+   3. Grant of Patent License. Subject to the terms and conditions of
+      this License, each Contributor hereby grants to You a perpetual,
+      worldwide, non-exclusive, no-charge, royalty-free, irrevocable
+      (except as stated in this section) patent license to make, have made,
+      use, offer to sell, sell, import, and otherwise transfer the Work,
+      where such license applies only to those patent claims licensable
+      by such Contributor that are necessarily infringed by their
+      Contribution(s) alone or by combination of their Contribution(s)
+      with the Work to which such Contribution(s) was submitted. If You
+      institute patent litigation against any entity (including a
+      cross-claim or counterclaim in a lawsuit) alleging that the Work
+      or a Contribution incorporated within the Work constitutes direct
+      or contributory patent infringement, then any patent licenses
+      granted to You under this License for that Work shall terminate
+      as of the date such litigation is filed.
+
+   4. Redistribution. You may reproduce and distribute copies of the
+      Work or Derivative Works thereof in any medium, with or without
+      modifications, and in Source or Object form, provided that You
+      meet the following conditions:
+
+      (a) You must give any other recipients of the Work or
+          Derivative Works a copy of this License; and
+
+      (b) You must cause any modified files to carry prominent notices
+          stating that You changed the files; and
+
+      (c) You must retain, in the Source form of any Derivative Works
+          that You distribute, all copyright, patent, trademark, and
+          attribution notices from the Source form of the Work,
+          excluding those notices that do not pertain to any part of
+          the Derivative Works; and
+
+      (d) If the Work includes a "NOTICE" text file as part of its
+          distribution, then any Derivative Works that You distribute must
+          include a readable copy of the attribution notices contained
+          within such NOTICE file, excluding those notices that do not
+          pertain to any part of the Derivative Works, in at least one
+          of the following places: within a NOTICE text file distributed
+          as part of the Derivative Works; within the Source form or
+          documentation, if provided along with the Derivative Works; or,
+          within a display generated by the Derivative Works, if and
+          wherever such third-party notices normally appear. The contents
+          of the NOTICE file are for informational purposes only and
+          do not modify the License. You may add Your own attribution
+          notices within Derivative Works that You distribute, alongside
+          or as an addendum to the NOTICE text from the Work, provided
+          that such additional attribution notices cannot be construed
+          as modifying the License.
+
+      You may add Your own copyright statement to Your modifications and
+      may provide additional or different license terms and conditions
+      for use, reproduction, or distribution of Your modifications, or
+      for any such Derivative Works as a whole, provided Your use,
+      reproduction, and distribution of the Work otherwise complies with
+      the conditions stated in this License.
+
+   5. Submission of Contributions. Unless You explicitly state otherwise,
+      any Contribution intentionally submitted for inclusion in the Work
+      by You to the Licensor shall be under the terms and conditions of
+      this License, without any additional terms or conditions.
+      Notwithstanding the above, nothing herein shall supersede or modify
+      the terms of any separate license agreement you may have executed
+      with Licensor regarding such Contributions.
+
+   6. Trademarks. This License does not grant permission to use the trade
+      names, trademarks, service marks, or product names of the Licensor,
+      except as required for reasonable and customary use in describing the
+      origin of the Work and reproducing the content of the NOTICE file.
+
+   7. Disclaimer of Warranty. Unless required by applicable law or
+      agreed to in writing, Licensor provides the Work (and each
+      Contributor provides its Contributions) on an "AS IS" BASIS,
+      WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY KIND, either express or
+      implied, including, without limitation, any warranties or conditions
+      of TITLE, NON-INFRINGEMENT, MERCHANTABILITY, or FITNESS FOR A
+      PARTICULAR PURPOSE. You are solely responsible for determining the
+      appropriateness of using or redistributing the Work and assume any
+      risks associated with Your exercise of permissions under this License.
+
+   8. Limitation of Liability. In no event and under no legal theory,
+      whether in tort (including negligence), contract, or otherwise,
+      unless required by applicable law (such as deliberate and grossly
+      negligent acts) or agreed to in writing, shall any Contributor be
+      liable to You for damages, including any direct, indirect, special,
+      incidental, or consequential damages of any character arising as a
+      result of this License or out of the use or inability to use the
+      Work (including but not limited to damages for loss of goodwill,
+      work stoppage, computer failure or malfunction, or any and all
+      other commercial damages or losses), even if such Contributor
+      has been advised of the possibility of such damages.
+
+   9. Accepting Warranty or Additional Liability. While redistributing
+      the Work or Derivative Works thereof, You may choose to offer,
+      and charge a fee for, acceptance of support, warranty, indemnity,
+      or other liability obligations and/or rights consistent with this
+      License. However, in accepting such obligations, You may act only
+      on Your own behalf and on Your sole responsibility, not on behalf
+      of any other Contributor, and only if You agree to indemnify,
+      defend, and hold each Contributor harmless for any liability
+      incurred by, or claims asserted against, such Contributor by reason
+      of your accepting any such warranty or additional liability.
+
+   END OF TERMS AND CONDITIONS
+
+   APPENDIX: How to apply the Apache License to your work.
+
+      To apply the Apache License to your work, attach the following
+      boilerplate notice, with the fields enclosed by brackets "[]"
+      replaced with your own identifying information. (Don't include
+      the brackets!)  The text should be enclosed in the appropriate
+      comment syntax for the file format. We also recommend that a
+      file or class name and description of purpose be included on the
+      same "printed page" as the copyright notice for easier
+      identification within third-party archives.
+
+   Copyright [yyyy] [name of copyright owner]
+
+   Licensed under the Apache License, Version 2.0 (the "License");
+   you may not use this file except in compliance with the License.
+   You may obtain a copy of the License at
+
+       http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0
+
+   Unless required by applicable law or agreed to in writing, software
+   distributed under the License is distributed on an "AS IS" BASIS,
+   WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY KIND, either express or implied.
+   See the License for the specific language governing permissions and
+   limitations under the License.

package/NOTICE

@@ -0,0 +1,4 @@
+Agentic Development Readiness Benchmark
+Copyright 2026 Planet B2B Inc.
+
+This product includes software and documentation developed by Planet B2B Inc. and contributors.

package/README.md

@@ -0,0 +1,191 @@
+# Agentic Development Readiness Benchmark
+
+A vendor-neutral, evidence-backed benchmark for the engineering harness around AI coding agents.
+It helps an organization answer a practical question:
+
+> What work may our agents safely perform today, what evidence supports that decision, and what
+> should we improve next?
+
+The benchmark measures the harness, not the model brand. It assesses ten dimensions across four
+maturity levels and applies non-compensating floors to five autonomy profiles. A high total score
+cannot hide a critical security, testing, governance, or recovery gap.
+
+This repository is an early **v0.1 reference implementation** intended for public review and
+piloting. It is not a certification standard.
+
+## Ask your coding agent
+
+You do not need to install or learn the CLI yourself. Paste this prompt into Codex, Claude Code,
+GitHub Copilot, Cursor, or another coding agent that has terminal access to your repository:
+
+> Assess this repository's readiness for AI-agent pull-request work. From the repository root, run
+> `npx --yes agentic-scorecard@0.1.0 assess . --profile pr-creation --format markdown --output .agentic/reports/agentic-readiness-v0.1.0.md`.
+> Do not change product source code or invent attestations. Read the resulting report and summarize
+> the score, highest passed profile, whether `pr-creation` passes, target-profile blockers, and the
+> five highest-value improvements. Clearly separate tool-verified evidence from self-attested
+> evidence and flag likely false positives or missing organizational evidence. Leave the report
+> uncommitted unless I ask you to commit it.
+
+That is the recommended first assessment. The agent downloads the pinned benchmark package, runs the
+read-only local collector, and explains the results. For alternate authority levels or a guided
+remediation session, use the prompts in [AGENT_PROMPT.md](AGENT_PROMPT.md).
+
+## Quick start
+
+### Installation and prerequisites
+
+A supported Node.js LTS release (20.19+, 22.13+, or 24+) is required. Assessment is local,
+read-only, and offline by default.
+
+```bash
+npx agentic-scorecard@0.1.0 assess /path/to/repository \
+  --profile pr-creation \
+  --format markdown \
+  --output agentic-readiness.md
+```
+
+To record controls that repository inspection cannot prove:
+
+```bash
+npx agentic-scorecard@0.1.0 init /path/to/repository
+```
+
+Complete `.agentic/attestations.yaml` with owners and links to durable evidence, then assess again.
+Attested evidence remains visibly distinct from tool-verified evidence in every report.
+
+For development from this checkout:
+
+```bash
+npm ci
+npm run check
+npm run dev -- assess tests/fixtures/mature --profile pr-creation
+```
+
+## What it assesses
+
+| Dimension                          | Core question                                                   |
+| ---------------------------------- | --------------------------------------------------------------- |
+| Context and knowledge              | Can an agent discover the right rules and architecture?         |
+| Reproducible environment           | Can it establish a faithful, clean development environment?     |
+| Specification and planning         | Is the requested outcome explicit and testable?                 |
+| Tooling and interfaces             | Are tools scoped, validated, observable, and fail-safe?         |
+| Security and data governance       | Are data, credentials, untrusted content, and autonomy bounded? |
+| Verification and testing           | Can changes be verified with trustworthy signals?               |
+| Review and change governance       | Are accountability, review, and merge authority explicit?       |
+| Learning and knowledge maintenance | Do corrections become durable, maintained guidance?             |
+| Outcome observability              | Can runs be evaluated by task, risk, quality, time, and cost?   |
+| Failure containment and recovery   | Can work stop safely and changes be reversed?                   |
+
+Each dimension receives the highest **consecutive** maturity level whose controls are satisfied:
+
+0. Absent
+1. Ad hoc
+2. Documented
+3. Enforced
+4. Measured and improving
+
+Level 4 requires outcome evidence over time. A dashboard, policy, or tool merely existing cannot
+earn measured maturity.
+
+## Readiness profiles
+
+Profiles describe increasing authority. They are safety floors, not labels of organizational
+prestige.
+
+| Profile                          | Intended authority                                               |
+| -------------------------------- | ---------------------------------------------------------------- |
+| `read-only-analysis`             | Inspect approved source and return advice; no mutation.          |
+| `planning`                       | Draft plans and specifications for human review.                 |
+| `local-implementation`           | Edit an isolated checkout and run approved local checks.         |
+| `pr-creation`                    | Create a branch and PR; a human retains merge authority.         |
+| `limited-autonomous-maintenance` | Perform pre-approved, low-risk maintenance within strict limits. |
+
+No profile grants production deployment authority. Organizations should evaluate production access
+through a separate, system-specific safety case.
+
+The exact floors live in
+[`benchmark/v0.1/benchmark.yaml`](benchmark/v0.1/benchmark.yaml) and their rationale in
+[`benchmark/v0.1/scoring-policy.md`](benchmark/v0.1/scoring-policy.md).
+
+## Evidence and trust labels
+
+- **Verified:** a deterministic local collector found the configured repository evidence.
+- **Attested:** an accountable owner supplied an evidence link or explanation. This may satisfy a
+  control, but it never becomes verified evidence.
+- **Unmet/unknown:** evidence is absent, expired, contradictory, or still requires review.
+- **Independently reviewed:** reserved for a future external review protocol; the CLI does not issue
+  this label.
+
+Repository heuristics are intentionally explainable and conservative. They prove that an artifact
+or term exists—not that a team consistently follows it. Manual claims make organizational controls
+portable across GitHub, GitLab, Azure DevOps, internal systems, and different agent harnesses while
+preserving provenance.
+
+## Reports and CI
+
+The CLI emits Markdown for people and stable JSON for automation:
+
+```bash
+agentic-scorecard assess . --format json --output .agentic/report.json
+agentic-scorecard assess . --profile pr-creation --enforce
+agentic-scorecard explain ADRB-SEC-003
+agentic-scorecard validate
+```
+
+`--enforce` exits with code 2 when the target profile fails. Start by publishing a non-blocking
+baseline; gate only after owners have reviewed false positives, accepted the versioned policy, and
+funded the remediation plan. See
+[`examples/github-actions-consumer.yml`](examples/github-actions-consumer.yml).
+
+## Privacy and security
+
+The default collector:
+
+- makes no network calls and invokes no model;
+- reads only the target checkout;
+- ignores `.git`, dependency, build, and coverage directories;
+- caps content-scanned files at 512 KB;
+- reports file paths and match counts, never matching source snippets;
+- writes nothing unless `--output` or `init` is explicitly requested.
+
+Do not place credentials, private prompts, source excerpts, or personal data in attestations. Link to
+access-controlled evidence instead. Report suspected vulnerabilities through [SECURITY.md](SECURITY.md).
+
+## Repository structure
+
+```text
+benchmark/v0.1/       immutable benchmark definition and controls
+benchmark/mappings/   informative mappings to external frameworks
+src/                  reference CLI and local evidence collectors
+templates/            adoption, preflight, attestation, and remediation templates
+tests/fixtures/       transparent benchmark fixtures
+rfcs/                 proposed normative changes
+```
+
+Normative changes use an RFC and create a new benchmark version; published versions remain
+immutable. See [GOVERNANCE.md](GOVERNANCE.md) and [CONTRIBUTING.md](CONTRIBUTING.md).
+Maintainers should follow [NPM_PUBLISHING.md](NPM_PUBLISHING.md) for the one-time bootstrap and
+OIDC-provenance release process.
+
+## Recommended adoption sequence
+
+1. Run a local baseline for the least-authoritative profile you actually need.
+2. Review every result with security, platform, and representative delivery teams.
+3. Supply owned attestations for controls that cannot be mechanically verified.
+4. Publish the report internally with explicit limitations and benchmark version.
+5. Fund the smallest improvements that close target-profile blockers.
+6. Reassess on material harness changes and at least quarterly.
+7. Add a non-blocking CI report; enforce only the agreed target profile after a pilot.
+
+Never optimize to the number alone. Use the control evidence and outcome metrics to improve the
+system, and keep exceptions narrow, owned, expiring, and visible.
+
+## Status and roadmap
+
+v0.1 includes the normative control catalog, local collectors, attestations, JSON/Markdown reports,
+fixtures, and a CI example. Candidate next steps include SARIF/HTML reports, signed reports, a stable
+adapter SDK, organization-level aggregation, statistically designed benchmark tasks, and an
+independent-review protocol. These require public design review before becoming normative.
+
+Apache-2.0 licensed. The benchmark is a community engineering tool, not legal, compliance, or
+security advice.

package/benchmark/mappings/nist-ai-rmf.md

@@ -0,0 +1,22 @@
+# Informative mapping: NIST AI RMF
+
+This non-normative mapping helps organizations reuse governance evidence. It does not imply NIST
+endorsement or AI RMF conformity. Review against the current official publications before use:
+[NIST AI Risk Management Framework](https://www.nist.gov/itl/ai-risk-management-framework) and
+[NIST AI 600-1, Generative AI Profile](https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.AI.600-1).
+
+| ADRB dimension | Closest AI RMF functions     | Relationship                                                                   |
+| -------------- | ---------------------------- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ |
+| Context        | Map, Govern                  | Local context establishes intended use, constraints, ownership, and knowledge. |
+| Environment    | Map, Measure                 | Reproducibility supports faithful evaluation and lifecycle control.            |
+| Specification  | Map, Govern                  | Objectives, affected actors, requirements, and non-goals define the use case.  |
+| Tooling        | Govern, Measure, Manage      | Tool authority and validation are risk controls around the AI system.          |
+| Security       | Govern, Map, Measure, Manage | Data, access, misuse, third-party, and adversarial risks span all functions.   |
+| Testing        | Measure, Manage              | Verification produces evidence and drives response to identified risk.         |
+| Governance     | Govern, Manage               | Accountability, review, policy, and exception handling govern change.          |
+| Learning       | Govern, Manage               | Corrections and incidents update organizational knowledge and controls.        |
+| Observability  | Measure, Govern              | Outcome records support monitoring, transparency, and accountable decisions.   |
+| Resilience     | Manage, Measure              | Containment, recovery, and exercises reduce and evaluate impact.               |
+
+ADRB is repository- and harness-focused. It does not replace broader organizational, human-rights,
+legal, societal, or model-risk work required by the AI RMF.

package/benchmark/mappings/openssf-scorecard.md

@@ -0,0 +1,13 @@
+# Informative mapping: OpenSSF Scorecard
+
+[OpenSSF Scorecard](https://scorecard.dev/) assesses open-source software supply-chain practices.
+ADRB assesses readiness to delegate engineering work to agents. The projects are complementary, not
+substitutable.
+
+Scorecard evidence around branch protection, code review, dangerous workflows, pinned dependencies,
+token permissions, vulnerabilities, and security policy may support ADRB environment, tooling,
+security, testing, governance, and resilience controls. ADRB additionally needs agent-specific
+context, authority boundaries, specifications, run outcomes, learning loops, and stop/recovery design.
+
+Future adapters should consume Scorecard's versioned machine output rather than recreate its checks,
+while preserving source version, collection time, and confidence.

package/benchmark/mappings/owasp-agentic.md

@@ -0,0 +1,16 @@
+# Informative mapping: OWASP agentic security work
+
+This mapping is non-normative and does not imply OWASP endorsement. Agentic threat catalogs evolve;
+review the current [OWASP GenAI Security Project](https://genai.owasp.org/) material before use.
+
+| ADRB area     | Threat themes addressed                                              | Important residual work                                                         |
+| ------------- | -------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |
+| Context       | Instruction provenance, conflicting guidance, poisoned knowledge     | Content trust and provenance need system-specific analysis.                     |
+| Tooling       | Excessive agency, unsafe tool use, confused-deputy behavior          | Every tool and downstream system needs threat modeling and authorization tests. |
+| Security      | Prompt injection, data leakage, credential abuse, supply chain       | ADRB presence checks are not penetration tests or secure-design review.         |
+| Governance    | Unapproved actions, unclear accountability, policy bypass            | Organization-specific approval and legal obligations remain.                    |
+| Observability | Repudiation, hidden behavior, undetected misuse                      | Logs require integrity, access, retention, privacy, and alerting design.        |
+| Resilience    | Cascading failures, loops, resource exhaustion, irreversible actions | Runtime circuit breakers and recovery must be tested in the real harness.       |
+
+Use ADRB to identify whether controls are present and improving, then use threat modeling to evaluate
+whether those controls address the actual agents, tools, identities, data, and impact paths.

package/benchmark/v0.1/adapter-contract.md

@@ -0,0 +1,22 @@
+# Evidence adapter contract
+
+v0.1 ships only local, deterministic collectors. This document defines the boundary for future
+vendor or organization adapters without making those systems normative.
+
+An adapter should return a claim for one control containing:
+
+- benchmark version and control ID;
+- `met`, `not_met`, `unknown`, or an allowed `not_applicable` status;
+- collector name and version;
+- collection timestamp and evidence freshness or expiry;
+- privacy-safe references, never credentials or raw sensitive content;
+- a deterministic summary of how the claim was derived;
+- an error state distinguishable from a negative result.
+
+Adapters must be read-only by default, use least-privileged credentials, time out, fail closed, and
+make no unrelated mutations. Networked evidence is untrusted input. Its content cannot change tool
+authority or benchmark policy.
+
+Adapter claims remain `attested` until a future signed adapter protocol defines identity,
+authorization, schema validation, freshness, and independent conformance tests. Tool names and
+vendor paths belong in adapters and examples, not normative control outcomes.

package/benchmark/v0.1/benchmark.yaml

@@ -0,0 +1,126 @@
+id: agentic-development-readiness
+version: 0.1.0
+title: Agentic Development Readiness Benchmark
+description: >-
+  A vendor-neutral, evidence-backed assessment of the engineering harness that surrounds AI agents.
+  It measures whether a repository can safely support increasing levels of delegated software work.
+
+maturity_levels:
+  0: Absent
+  1: Ad hoc
+  2: Documented
+  3: Enforced
+  4: Measured and improving
+
+dimensions:
+  - id: context
+    title: Context and knowledge
+    description: Agents can discover authoritative, scoped, current instructions without guesswork.
+  - id: environment
+    title: Reproducible environment
+    description: Agents can establish and verify a faithful development environment.
+  - id: specification
+    title: Specification and planning
+    description: Work starts from testable outcomes, constraints, and explicit acceptance criteria.
+  - id: tooling
+    title: Tooling and interfaces
+    description: Agent tools are discoverable, least-privileged, observable, and fail safely.
+  - id: security
+    title: Security and data governance
+    description: Credentials, data, autonomy, and untrusted content have explicit boundaries.
+  - id: testing
+    title: Verification and testing
+    description: Changes are checked at the right layers with trustworthy, reproducible signals.
+  - id: governance
+    title: Review and change governance
+    description: Human accountability, change scope, and merge authority remain explicit.
+  - id: learning
+    title: Learning and knowledge maintenance
+    description: Corrections compound into maintained instructions instead of being repeatedly rediscovered.
+  - id: observability
+    title: Outcome observability
+    description: Runs and outcomes can be evaluated by task class, risk, cost, and quality.
+  - id: resilience
+    title: Failure containment and recovery
+    description: Agent failures are bounded, reversible, diagnosed, and rehearsed.
+
+readiness_profiles:
+  - id: read-only-analysis
+    title: Read-only analysis
+    description: Agent may inspect approved repository content and return advice, without mutations.
+    floors:
+      context: 1
+      environment: 0
+      specification: 0
+      tooling: 0
+      security: 1
+      testing: 0
+      governance: 0
+      learning: 0
+      observability: 0
+      resilience: 0
+  - id: planning
+    title: Planning and specification
+    description: Agent may draft plans, specifications, and proposed changes for human review.
+    floors:
+      context: 2
+      environment: 0
+      specification: 1
+      tooling: 1
+      security: 1
+      testing: 0
+      governance: 1
+      learning: 0
+      observability: 0
+      resilience: 0
+  - id: local-implementation
+    title: Local implementation
+    description: Agent may edit an isolated checkout and run approved local verification.
+    floors:
+      context: 2
+      environment: 2
+      specification: 2
+      tooling: 2
+      security: 2
+      testing: 2
+      governance: 1
+      learning: 1
+      observability: 1
+      resilience: 1
+  - id: pr-creation
+    title: Pull request creation
+    description: Agent may create a branch and propose a pull request; a human retains merge authority.
+    floors:
+      context: 2
+      environment: 2
+      specification: 2
+      tooling: 2
+      security: 2
+      testing: 2
+      governance: 2
+      learning: 1
+      observability: 1
+      resilience: 2
+  - id: limited-autonomous-maintenance
+    title: Limited autonomous maintenance
+    description: >-
+      Agent may complete pre-approved, low-risk maintenance within strict scope, budget, and stop
+      conditions. This profile never grants production deployment authority.
+    floors:
+      context: 3
+      environment: 3
+      specification: 3
+      tooling: 3
+      security: 3
+      testing: 3
+      governance: 3
+      learning: 3
+      observability: 3
+      resilience: 3
+
+scoring:
+  dimension_method: consecutive-levels
+  overall_method: sum
+  maximum_score: 40
+  readiness_method: non-compensating-floors
+  attestation_counts_as_verified: false