arckit-cli 6.1.1__py3-none-any.whl

arckit_cli-6.1.1.data/data/share/arckit/.arckit/templates/backlog-template.md

@@ -0,0 +1,465 @@
+# Product Backlog: [Project Name]
+
+> **Template Origin**: Official | **ArcKit Version**: [VERSION] | **Command**: `/arckit:backlog`
+
+## Document Control
+
+<!-- DOC-CONTROL-HEADER -->
+<!-- Resolved at command-execution time to _partials/document-control-uk.md or _partials/document-control-uae.md based on plugin userConfig classification_scheme + governance_framework. See _partials/RENDERING.md (when present). -->
+
+## Revision History
+
+| Version | Date | Author | Changes | Approved By | Approval Date |
+|---------|------|--------|---------|-------------|---------------|
+| [VERSION] | [DATE] | ArcKit AI | Initial creation from `/arckit:backlog` command | PENDING | PENDING |
+
+---
+
+## Executive Summary
+
+**Total Stories**: [N]
+**Total Epics**: [N]
+**Total Story Points**: [N]
+**Estimated Duration**: [N] sprints ([N] weeks)
+
+### Priority Breakdown
+
+- Must Have: [N] stories ([N] points) - [X]%
+- Should Have: [N] stories ([N] points) - [X]%
+- Could Have: [N] stories ([N] points) - [X]%
+
+### Epic Breakdown
+
+1. [Epic Name] ([N] points, [N] stories)
+2. [Epic Name] ([N] points, [N] stories)
+[... all epics listed ...]
+
+---
+
+## How to Use This Backlog
+
+### For Product Owners
+
+1. Review epic priorities - adjust based on business needs
+2. Refine story acceptance criteria before sprint planning
+3. Validate user stories with actual users
+4. Adjust sprint sequence based on stakeholder priorities
+
+### For Development Teams
+
+1. Review stories in upcoming sprint (Sprint Planning)
+2. Break down stories into tasks if needed
+3. Estimate effort using team velocity
+4. Identify technical blockers early
+5. Update story status as work progresses
+
+### For Scrum Masters
+
+1. Track velocity after each sprint
+2. Adjust future sprint loading based on actual velocity
+3. Monitor dependency chains
+4. Escalate blockers early
+5. Facilitate backlog refinement sessions
+
+### Backlog Refinement Schedule
+
+- **Weekly**: Review and refine next 2 sprints
+- **Bi-weekly**: Groom backlog beyond 2 sprints
+- **Monthly**: Reassess epic priorities
+- **Per sprint**: Update based on completed work and learnings
+
+---
+
+## Epics
+
+### Epic 1: [Epic Name] ([BR-ID])
+
+**Business Requirement**: [BR-ID]
+**Priority**: [Must Have | Should Have | Could Have]
+**Business Value**: [High | Medium | Low] - [description]
+**Risk**: [Critical | High | Medium | Low] - [from risk register]
+**Dependencies**: [Other epic IDs]
+**Total Story Points**: [N]
+**Estimated Duration**: [N] sprints
+
+**Description**:
+[Epic description from BR]
+
+**Success Criteria**:
+
+- [Criterion 1]
+- [Criterion 2]
+- [Criterion 3]
+
+**Stories in this Epic**:
+
+1. Story-[ID]: [Title] ([N] points) - Sprint [N]
+2. Story-[ID]: [Title] ([N] points) - Sprint [N]
+[... all stories in epic ...]
+
+---
+
+## Prioritized Backlog
+
+### Story-001: [Story Title]
+
+**As a** [persona]
+**I want** [capability]
+**So that** [goal]
+
+**Acceptance Criteria**:
+
+- It's done when [measurable outcome 1]
+- It's done when [measurable outcome 2]
+- It's done when [measurable outcome 3]
+- It's done when [measurable outcome 4]
+
+**Technical Tasks**:
+
+- Task-001-A: [task description] ([N] points)
+- Task-001-B: [task description] ([N] points)
+- Task-001-C: [task description] ([N] points)
+
+**Requirements Traceability**: [FR-xxx, NFR-xxx, etc.]
+**Component**: [from HLD]
+**Story Points**: [N]
+**Priority**: [Must Have | Should Have | Could Have]
+**Sprint**: [N]
+**Dependencies**: [Story IDs that must be done first]
+
+---
+
+[... repeat for all stories ...]
+
+---
+
+## Sprint Plan
+
+### Sprint 1: Foundation (Weeks 1-2)
+
+**Velocity**: 20 story points
+**Theme**: Technical foundation and core infrastructure
+
+#### Must Have Stories (12 points)
+
+- Story-001: [Title] ([N] points) [Epic: [Name]]
+- Story-002: [Title] ([N] points) [Epic: [Name]]
+
+#### Technical Tasks (4 points)
+
+- Task-DB-001: [Title] ([N] points) [Epic: Infrastructure]
+- Task-CI-001: [Title] ([N] points) [Epic: DevOps]
+
+#### Testing Tasks (3 points)
+
+- Task-TEST-001: [Title] ([N] points) [Epic: Testing]
+
+#### Buffer (1 point)
+
+- [Could Have story for buffer]
+
+**Total Allocated**: 20 points
+
+### Sprint Goals
+
+- [Goal 1]
+- [Goal 2]
+- [Goal 3]
+
+### Dependencies Satisfied
+
+✅ [Dependency description or "None" for Sprint 1]
+
+### Dependencies Created for Sprint 2
+
+→ [Dependency 1]
+→ [Dependency 2]
+
+### Risks
+
+⚠️ [Risk 1]
+⚠️ [Risk 2]
+
+### Definition of Done
+
+- [ ] Code reviewed and approved
+- [ ] Unit tests written (80% coverage minimum)
+- [ ] Integration tests written for critical paths
+- [ ] Security scan passed (no critical/high issues)
+- [ ] Deployed to dev environment
+- [ ] Demo-able to stakeholders
+- [ ] Documentation updated
+
+---
+
+### Sprint 2: [Theme] (Weeks 3-4)
+
+[... repeat sprint structure ...]
+
+---
+
+[... all sprints ...]
+
+---
+
+## Appendices
+
+### A. Requirements Traceability Matrix
+
+| Requirement | Type | User Stories | Sprint | Status | Notes |
+|-------------|------|-------------|--------|--------|-------|
+| BR-001 | Business | Story-001, Story-002, ... | 1-2 | Planned | [Epic name] |
+| FR-001 | Functional | Story-001 | 1 | Planned | [Description] |
+| NFR-005 | Non-Functional | Task-NFR-005 | 2 | Planned | [Description] |
+| ... | ... | ... | ... | ... | ... |
+
+**Coverage Summary**:
+
+- Total Requirements: [N]
+- Mapped to Stories: [N] (100%)
+- Scheduled in Sprints 1-[N]: [N] ([X]%)
+- Remaining for Future Sprints: [N] ([X]%)
+
+---
+
+### B. Dependency Graph
+
+```mermaid
+flowchart TD
+    subgraph S1[Sprint 1 - Foundation]
+        S001[Story-001: Title]
+        TDB[Task-DB-001: Database Setup]
+        TCI[Task-CI-001: CI/CD Pipeline]
+    end
+
+    subgraph S2[Sprint 2]
+        S002[Story-ID: Needs dependency]
+        SDB[Stories needing database]
+    end
+
+    subgraph Future[All Future Work]
+        FW[Deploy mechanism required]
+    end
+
+    S001 -->|blocks| S002
+    TDB -->|blocks| SDB
+    TCI -->|blocks| FW
+
+    style S1 fill:#E3F2FD
+    style S2 fill:#FFF3E0
+    style Future fill:#E8F5E9
+```
+
+---
+
+### C. Epic Overview
+
+| Epic ID | Epic Name | Priority | Stories | Points | Sprints | Status | Dependencies |
+|---------|-----------|----------|---------|--------|---------|--------|--------------|
+| EPIC-001 | [Name] | Must Have | [N] | [N] | 1-2 | Planned | None |
+| EPIC-002 | [Name] | Must Have | [N] | [N] | 2-4 | Planned | EPIC-001 |
+| ... | ... | ... | ... | ... | ... | ... | ... |
+
+**Total**: [N] epics, [N] stories, [N] story points
+
+---
+
+### D. Story Points Distribution
+
+```mermaid
+xychart-beta
+    title "Story Points per Sprint"
+    x-axis [S1, S2, S3, S4, S5, S6, S7, S8]
+    y-axis "Story Points" 0 --> 25
+    bar [20, 20, 20, 20, 20, 20, 20, 20]
+```
+
+**Summary**:
+
+- Total: [N] points allocated / [N] points total
+- Remaining: [N] points ([N] more sprints needed)
+
+---
+
+### E. Risk-Based Prioritization
+
+**High Risk Items (Addressed Early)**:
+
+- Sprint [N]: [Risk description and story]
+- Sprint [N]: [Risk description and story]
+
+**Medium Risk Items**:
+
+- Sprint [N]: [Risk description and story]
+
+**Low Risk Items**:
+
+- Sprint [N]: [Risk description and story]
+
+---
+
+### F. Definition of Done (from Architecture Principles)
+
+Every story must meet these criteria before marking "Done":
+
+#### Code Quality
+
+- [ ] Code reviewed by 2+ team members
+- [ ] No merge conflicts
+- [ ] Follows coding standards (linting passed)
+- [ ] No code smells or technical debt introduced
+
+#### Testing
+
+- [ ] Unit tests written (minimum 80% coverage)
+- [ ] Integration tests written for API endpoints
+- [ ] Manual testing completed
+- [ ] Acceptance criteria verified and signed off
+
+#### Security
+
+- [ ] Security scan passed (no critical/high vulnerabilities)
+- [ ] OWASP Top 10 checks completed
+- [ ] Secrets not hardcoded (use environment variables)
+- [ ] Authentication and authorization tested
+
+#### Performance
+
+- [ ] Performance tested (meets NFR thresholds)
+- [ ] No N+1 query issues
+- [ ] Caching implemented where appropriate
+- [ ] Response times within acceptable limits
+
+#### Compliance
+
+- [ ] GDPR requirements met (if handling user data)
+- [ ] Accessibility tested (WCAG 2.2 AA)
+- [ ] Audit logging in place (if required)
+
+#### Documentation
+
+- [ ] API documentation updated (OpenAPI/Swagger)
+- [ ] Code comments for complex logic
+- [ ] README updated if needed
+- [ ] Runbook updated (if operational changes)
+
+#### Deployment
+
+- [ ] Deployed to dev environment
+- [ ] Deployed to staging environment
+- [ ] Database migrations tested (if applicable)
+- [ ] Configuration updated in all environments
+
+#### Stakeholder
+
+- [ ] Demoed to Product Owner at sprint review
+- [ ] Acceptance criteria validated by PO
+- [ ] User feedback incorporated (if available)
+
+---
+
+## Future Sprints (Beyond Sprint 8)
+
+**Remaining Backlog**: [N] story points
+**Estimated Duration**: [N] sprints (at [velocity] points/sprint)
+
+**High Priority Items for Sprint 9+**:
+
+1. Story-[ID]: [Title] ([N] points) - [Epic name]
+2. Story-[ID]: [Title] ([N] points) - [Epic name]
+[... remaining high-priority items ...]
+
+**Could Have Items (Deferred)**:
+
+- Story-[ID]: [Title] ([N] points) - [Reason for deferral]
+- Story-[ID]: [Title] ([N] points) - [Reason for deferral]
+
+---
+
+## Backlog Maintenance
+
+### Velocity Tracking
+
+After each sprint, update:
+
+- Actual velocity vs planned
+- Velocity trend (improving, stable, declining)
+- Adjust future sprint capacity accordingly
+
+### Backlog Grooming Sessions
+
+- **Weekly**: Refine next 2 sprints (add details, update estimates)
+- **Bi-weekly**: Groom backlog beyond 2 sprints (reprioritize)
+- **Monthly**: Review epic priorities (business changes)
+
+### When to Re-Generate Backlog
+
+- Requirements significantly changed
+- New epics added
+- Business priorities shifted
+- Architecture redesigned
+
+---
+
+## Integration with Other ArcKit Commands
+
+**This backlog was generated from**:
+
+- `/arckit:requirements` - Source of all stories
+- `/arckit:hld` - Component mapping
+- `/arckit:stakeholders` - User personas
+- `/arckit:risk-register` - Risk priorities
+- `/arckit:business-case` - Value priorities
+
+**Use this backlog with**:
+
+- `/arckit:traceability` - Track requirements through implementation
+- `/arckit:test-strategy` - Generate test cases from acceptance criteria
+- `/arckit:analyze` - Validate backlog completeness
+
+---
+
+**Important Notes**:
+
+⚠️ **Story Points Are Estimates**: AI-generated estimates should be validated by your team based on actual velocity and capacity. Use team poker for consensus estimation.
+
+⚠️ **Velocity Will Vary**: Initial velocity (20 points) is assumed. Track actual velocity after Sprint 1 and adjust future sprints accordingly.
+
+⚠️ **Dependencies May Change**: Technical dependencies are identified automatically but may need adjustment based on your team's approach and constraints.
+
+⚠️ **Regular Refinement Required**: This backlog is a starting point. Teams should refine weekly and adapt based on learnings.
+
+## External References
+
+> This section provides traceability from generated content back to source documents.
+> Follow citation instructions in the project's citation reference guide.
+
+### Document Register
+
+| Doc ID | Filename | Type | Source Location | Description |
+|--------|----------|------|-----------------|-------------|
+| *None provided* | — | — | — | — |
+
+### Citations
+
+| Citation ID | Doc ID | Page/Section | Category | Quoted Passage |
+|-------------|--------|--------------|----------|----------------|
+| — | — | — | — | — |
+
+### Unreferenced Documents
+
+| Filename | Source Location | Reason |
+|----------|-----------------|--------|
+| — | — | — |
+
+---
+
+**Generated by**: ArcKit `/arckit:backlog` command
+**Generated on**: [DATE]
+**ArcKit Version**: [VERSION]
+**Project**: [PROJECT_NAME]
+**Model**: [AI_MODEL]
+
+---
+
+**End of Backlog**

arckit_cli-6.1.1.data/data/share/arckit/.arckit/templates/ca-aia-template.md

@@ -0,0 +1,206 @@
+# Canada Algorithmic Impact Assessment
+
+> **Template Origin**: Community | **ArcKit Version**: [VERSION] | **Command**: `/arckit:ca-aia`
+
+## Document Control
+
+<!-- DOC-CONTROL-HEADER -->
+<!-- Resolved at command-execution time per _partials/RENDERING.md. -->
+<!-- Classification line MUST be: -->
+<!-- | Classification | UNCLASSIFIED / Protected A / Protected B / Protected C / CONFIDENTIAL / SECRET / TOP SECRET | -->
+
+## Revision History
+
+| Version | Date | Author | Changes | Approved By | Approval Date |
+|---------|------|--------|---------|-------------|---------------|
+| [VERSION] | [YYYY-MM-DD] | ArcKit AI | Initial creation from `/arckit:ca-aia` | [PENDING] | [PENDING] |
+
+## Executive Summary
+
+[Two to three paragraphs describing the automated decision-making system, the decisions automated or assisted, the computed Impact Level (I, II, III, or IV), the headline mitigations triggered by that level (peer review tier, transparency notice, recourse), and the residual algorithmic-risk posture. Note any open peer-review nominations or pending reassessment items.]
+
+## System Description
+
+| Item | Value |
+|------|-------|
+| Department / agency | [name] |
+| System / service name | [name] |
+| Purpose | [what the system does in plain language; what outcome it is intended to produce] |
+| Decisions automated | [the specific decisions automated or assisted — eligibility / triage / scoring / classification / routing / etc.] |
+| Affected populations | [Canadian residents / federal employees / clients of programme X / etc.] |
+| Training data lineage | [sources, vintage, licensing — high-level summary; full detail in Training-Data Provenance section] |
+| Vendor / model provenance | [supplier, model family, open-source vs proprietary, hosting jurisdiction] |
+| Owner | [accountable role] |
+| Operator | [internal team / contractor / processor running the model] |
+| Accountable executive | [ADM / DG / equivalent] |
+| Lifecycle stage | [Concept / Design / Build / Pilot / Live / Modification] |
+
+## Levels I–IV Questionnaire Scoring
+
+The Impact Level is determined by score across the six dimensions of the TBS *Algorithmic Impact Assessment Tool*. Each dimension is scored with evidence cited; the overall Impact Level (I, II, III, or IV) is computed from the totals per the Directive's threshold matrix.
+
+### Dimension 1 — Project
+
+| Question | Score | Evidence |
+|----------|-------|----------|
+| [project-scope question — e.g. is the project line-of-business or experimental?] | [0–N] | [reference / cite] |
+| [project-scope question] | [0–N] | [reference / cite] |
+| **Sub-total** | **[N]** | |
+
+### Dimension 2 — System
+
+| Question | Score | Evidence |
+|----------|-------|----------|
+| [system-design question — e.g. degree of autonomy, integration with downstream systems] | [0–N] | [reference / cite] |
+| [system-design question] | [0–N] | [reference / cite] |
+| **Sub-total** | **[N]** | |
+
+### Dimension 3 — Algorithm
+
+| Question | Score | Evidence |
+|----------|-------|----------|
+| [algorithm question — model family, explainability, transparency] | [0–N] | [reference / cite] |
+| [algorithm question] | [0–N] | [reference / cite] |
+| **Sub-total** | **[N]** | |
+
+### Dimension 4 — Decision
+
+| Question | Score | Evidence |
+|----------|-------|----------|
+| [decision question — reversibility, stakes, frequency] | [0–N] | [reference / cite] |
+| [decision question] | [0–N] | [reference / cite] |
+| **Sub-total** | **[N]** | |
+
+### Dimension 5 — Impact
+
+| Question | Score | Evidence |
+|----------|-------|----------|
+| [impact question — affected population size, vulnerability, severity] | [0–N] | [reference / cite] |
+| [impact question] | [0–N] | [reference / cite] |
+| **Sub-total** | **[N]** | |
+
+### Dimension 6 — Data
+
+| Question | Score | Evidence |
+|----------|-------|----------|
+| [data question — sensitivity, provenance, consent posture] | [0–N] | [reference / cite] |
+| [data question] | [0–N] | [reference / cite] |
+| **Sub-total** | **[N]** | |
+
+### Computed Level
+
+| Item | Value |
+|------|-------|
+| Raw score (sum of sub-totals) | [N] |
+| Mitigation score (controls applied) | [N] |
+| Net score | [N] |
+| **Computed Impact Level** | **[I / II / III / IV]** |
+| Threshold matrix reference | TBS Directive on ADM, current version |
+
+> The questionnaire output is the source of truth. Self-declaring a lower level to avoid peer-review obligations is a Directive breach.
+
+## Per-Level Mitigation Requirements
+
+Mitigations below reflect the Directive's mandated requirements for the computed Level. Mark items not required at the computed Level as `N/A`; do not omit rows — reviewers expect to see the full schedule.
+
+| Mitigation | Required at Level | Implementation status | Owner |
+|------------|-------------------|-----------------------|-------|
+| Peer review — internal | II (and above) | [Planned / In-progress / Complete] | [Architecture lead] |
+| Peer review — external (academic / civil society) | III, IV | [Reviewer named / Reviewer pending / N/A at Level I–II] | [Architecture lead] |
+| Transparency notice (bilingual per `ca-ola`) | All Levels | [Published / Drafted / Pending] | [Service owner] |
+| Pre-launch publication (≥30 days before launch) | III, IV | [Date scheduled / Pending / N/A at Level I–II] | [Service owner] |
+| Human-in-the-loop design — override paths | II, III, IV | [Designed / Implemented / N/A at Level I] | [Service designer] |
+| Human-in-the-loop design — escalation thresholds | II, III, IV | [Designed / Implemented / N/A at Level I] | [Service designer] |
+| Quality assurance — training/test data validation | All Levels | [Complete / In-progress] | [Data steward] |
+| Quality assurance — ongoing monitoring & drift detection | All Levels | [Operational / Planned] | [Operator] |
+| Recourse mechanism — appeal to a human decision-maker | All Levels | [Designed / Implemented] | [Service owner] |
+| Recourse mechanism — explanation rights | All Levels | [Designed / Implemented] | [Service owner] |
+| AIA publication on Open Government portal | All Levels (default) | [Published / Pending / Exempt — cross-ref `ca-soia`] | [ATIP coordinator] |
+
+## Algorithmic Risks Register
+
+| Risk | Type | Likelihood | Impact | Mitigation | Residual |
+|------|------|------------|--------|------------|----------|
+| Selection bias from non-representative training data | Bias | [Low / Med / High] | [Low / Med / High] | [data audit; representativeness sampling; targeted top-up data collection] | [Low / Med / High] |
+| Label bias from historical decision patterns | Bias | [Low / Med / High] | [Low / Med / High] | [label audit; relabel sample with diverse reviewers; documented label rubric] | [Low / Med / High] |
+| Concept drift — population shifts over time | Drift | [Low / Med / High] | [Low / Med / High] | [drift-detection metrics; refresh-cadence trigger; rollback plan] | [Low / Med / High] |
+| Data drift — input distribution shift | Drift | [Low / Med / High] | [Low / Med / High] | [input-distribution monitoring; alert thresholds; retraining trigger] | [Low / Med / High] |
+| Proxy variables for protected grounds | Fairness | [Low / Med / High] | [Low / Med / High] | [feature audit; proxy-detection tests; remove or constrain proxies] | [Low / Med / High] |
+| Distributional unfairness across protected grounds | Fairness | [Low / Med / High] | [Low / Med / High] | [disaggregated performance metrics; fairness-constrained training; published fairness report] | [Low / Med / High] |
+| Contestability gap — affected individual cannot challenge a decision | Contestability | [Low / Med / High] | [Low / Med / High] | [recourse mechanism; explanation rights; published appeal SLA] | [Low / Med / High] |
+| Severity — irreversible adverse decision on a vulnerable individual | Severity | [Low / Med / High] | [Low / Med / High] | [human-in-the-loop for high-stakes branches; mandatory review threshold] | [Low / Med / High] |
+
+Cross-reference `risk` for the project-level continuation of these entries.
+
+## Training-Data Provenance
+
+| Dataset | Source | Licence | Refresh cadence | Drift trigger | Steward |
+|---------|--------|---------|-----------------|---------------|---------|
+| [training set name] | [internal programme / partner agency / open data / vendor] | [licence terms — including downstream use restrictions] | [annual / quarterly / event-driven] | [metric and threshold that triggers refresh] | [data steward] |
+| [validation set name] | [source] | [licence] | [cadence] | [drift trigger] | [steward] |
+| [test set name] | [source] | [licence] | [cadence] | [drift trigger] | [steward] |
+| [synthetic data — if used] | [generator / process] | [licence / provenance note] | [cadence] | [drift trigger] | [steward] |
+
+> Where a dataset is sourced from a vendor, capture the contractual data-rights position and exit-portability of the dataset as part of the licence column.
+
+## Disclosure Plan
+
+| Audience | Channel | Cadence | Bilingual? | Notes |
+|----------|---------|---------|------------|-------|
+| Public — affected individuals | Transparency notice on service page | At launch and on material change | Yes — per `ca-ola` | Plain-language explanation of decisions automated and recourse path |
+| Public — open-government audience | Open Government portal — AIA publication | At launch (≥30 days pre-launch for Level III/IV) and on reassessment | Yes — per `ca-ola` | Default is open publication; severance only on specific exemption |
+| Internal — peer reviewers | Direct sharing of AIA + supporting evidence | At assessment and on reassessment | Working language | Peer review tier set by computed Level |
+| Internal — Departmental Security Officer | Security review channel | Pre-launch | Working language | Severance review for Protected B/C content |
+| OPC (where personal information is processed) | OPC notification channel | Pre-launch (≥30 days) | Working language | Cross-reference `ca-pia` |
+| National-security exemption holders (if applicable) | Restricted briefing | As required | Working language | Cross-reference `ca-soia`; document the exemption rationale |
+
+## Reassessment Triggers
+
+| Trigger | Action | SLA |
+|---------|--------|-----|
+| Material change to training data | Re-run questionnaire; update Provenance table; re-publish AIA | Before next deployment |
+| Model retraining or replacement | Re-run questionnaire; re-trigger peer review at the appropriate tier | Before next deployment |
+| Decision-boundary change (new outcomes; widened population) | Re-run questionnaire; re-trigger peer review; update transparency notice | Before next deployment |
+| Operating-environment change (new jurisdiction; new partner agency; new processor) | Re-run questionnaire; reassess cross-border posture (cross-ref `ca-cloud-residency`) | Before change goes live |
+| Incident — bias finding, drift breach, contestability complaint upheld | Targeted reassessment of affected dimensions; mitigation plan | Within 30 days of confirmed incident |
+| Periodic reassessment | Full questionnaire re-run | Annual (default); accelerated for Level III/IV |
+
+## Open Items
+
+| Item | Owner | Due | Status |
+|------|-------|-----|--------|
+| Resolve open questionnaire scores marked `<TBC>` | [Architecture lead] | [YYYY-MM-DD] | [Open / Closed] |
+| Nominate external peer reviewers (Level III/IV) | [Architecture lead] | [YYYY-MM-DD] | [Open / Closed / N/A] |
+| Publish AIA on Open Government portal | [ATIP coordinator] | [YYYY-MM-DD] | [Open / Closed] |
+| Publish bilingual transparency notice | [Service owner] | [YYYY-MM-DD] | [Open / Closed] |
+| Confirm recourse mechanism implementation and SLA | [Service owner] | [YYYY-MM-DD] | [Open / Closed] |
+| Trigger `ca-pia` if personal information is in scope | [ATIP coordinator] | [YYYY-MM-DD] | [Open / Closed] |
+| Trigger `ca-soia` if national-security exemption claimed | [Privacy Counsel] | [YYYY-MM-DD] | [Open / Closed / N/A] |
+
+## External References
+
+### Document Register
+
+| Doc ID | Title | URL | Verified date |
+|--------|-------|-----|---------------|
+| CA-TBS-ADM | TBS Directive on Automated Decision-Making | <https://www.tbs-sct.canada.ca/pol/doc-eng.aspx?id=32592> | [YYYY-MM-DD] |
+| CA-AIA-TOOL | Algorithmic Impact Assessment Tool (TBS questionnaire) | <https://open.canada.ca/en/algorithmic-impact-assessment> | [YYYY-MM-DD] |
+| CA-OLA | Official Languages Act | <https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/O-3.01/> | [YYYY-MM-DD] |
+| CA-PRIV-ACT | Privacy Act (R.S.C., 1985, c. P-21) | <https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/P-21/> | [YYYY-MM-DD] |
+
+### Citations
+
+| Citation | Doc ID | Section | Used in |
+|----------|--------|---------|---------|
+| [ADM-1] | CA-TBS-ADM | Levels I–IV threshold matrix | Levels I–IV Questionnaire Scoring |
+| [ADM-2] | CA-TBS-ADM | Peer review obligations by Level | Per-Level Mitigation Requirements |
+| [ADM-3] | CA-TBS-ADM | Notification requirement (≥30 days pre-launch for Level III/IV) | Per-Level Mitigation Requirements |
+| [ADM-4] | CA-TBS-ADM | Human-in-the-loop and recourse requirements | Per-Level Mitigation Requirements |
+| [ADM-5] | CA-TBS-ADM | Open-publication default | Disclosure Plan |
+| [ADM-6] | CA-TBS-ADM | Reassessment on material change | Reassessment Triggers |
+| [AIA-TOOL-1] | CA-AIA-TOOL | Six-dimension questionnaire | Levels I–IV Questionnaire Scoring |
+| [OLA-1] | CA-OLA | Bilingualism for public-facing services | Disclosure Plan |
+
+### Unreferenced Documents
+
+[List any documents read during generation but not cited, or "None".]