arckit-cli 6.1.1__py3-none-any.whl

arckit_cli-6.1.1.data/data/share/arckit/.arckit/templates/gov-code-search-template.md

@@ -0,0 +1,213 @@
+# Government Code Search Report: [PROJECT_NAME]
+
+> **Template Origin**: Official | **ArcKit Version**: [VERSION] | **Command**: `/arckit:gov-code-search`
+
+## 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:gov-code-search` agent | PENDING | PENDING |
+
+---
+
+## Executive Summary
+
+### Search Query
+
+**Original Query**: `[original search query entered by user]`
+
+**Query Variations Used**:
+
+- `[variation 1]`
+- `[variation 2]`
+- `[variation 3]`
+
+**Platforms Searched**: [GitHub (GOV.UK organisations), GitLab, code.gov, Data.gov.uk repositories, etc.]
+
+### Results Found
+
+**Total Repositories Scanned**: [X]
+
+**High Relevance Results**: [X]
+
+**Medium Relevance Results**: [X]
+
+**Low Relevance / Excluded**: [X]
+
+### Top Results
+
+| # | Repository | Organisation | Relevance | Language | Last Active |
+|---|------------|--------------|-----------|----------|-------------|
+| 1 | [repo-name] | [Organisation] | High | [Language] | [YYYY-MM-DD] |
+| 2 | [repo-name] | [Organisation] | High | [Language] | [YYYY-MM-DD] |
+| 3 | [repo-name] | [Organisation] | High | [Language] | [YYYY-MM-DD] |
+| 4 | [repo-name] | [Organisation] | Medium | [Language] | [YYYY-MM-DD] |
+| 5 | [repo-name] | [Organisation] | Medium | [Language] | [YYYY-MM-DD] |
+
+---
+
+## Search Results
+
+### High Relevance Results
+
+#### [REPOSITORY_NAME_1]
+
+| Attribute | Value |
+|-----------|-------|
+| **Organisation** | [Government Organisation] |
+| **Repository URL** | [https://github.com/organisation/repo] |
+| **Description** | [Repository description] |
+| **Language** | [Primary language(s)] |
+| **License** | [MIT / Apache 2.0 / OGL v3.0 / Crown Copyright] |
+| **Last Activity** | [YYYY-MM-DD] |
+| **Stars** | [X] |
+
+**Why Relevant**: [Explain why this repository matches the search query and project needs]
+
+**Key Patterns**:
+
+- [Pattern 1: e.g., Uses GOV.UK Design System components]
+- [Pattern 2: e.g., Implements OWASP Top 10 security controls]
+- [Pattern 3: e.g., Follows GDS Service Manual API design principles]
+
+---
+
+#### [REPOSITORY_NAME_2]
+
+| Attribute | Value |
+|-----------|-------|
+| **Organisation** | [Government Organisation] |
+| **Repository URL** | [https://github.com/organisation/repo] |
+| **Description** | [Repository description] |
+| **Language** | [Primary language(s)] |
+| **License** | [MIT / Apache 2.0 / OGL v3.0 / Crown Copyright] |
+| **Last Activity** | [YYYY-MM-DD] |
+| **Stars** | [X] |
+
+**Why Relevant**: [Explain relevance]
+
+**Key Patterns**:
+
+- [Pattern 1]
+- [Pattern 2]
+
+---
+
+#### [REPOSITORY_NAME_3]
+
+[Repeat repository card structure for additional high relevance results]
+
+---
+
+### Medium Relevance Results
+
+#### [REPOSITORY_NAME_4]
+
+| Attribute | Value |
+|-----------|-------|
+| **Organisation** | [Government Organisation] |
+| **Repository URL** | [https://github.com/organisation/repo] |
+| **Description** | [Repository description] |
+| **Language** | [Primary language(s)] |
+| **License** | [MIT / Apache 2.0 / OGL v3.0 / Crown Copyright] |
+| **Last Activity** | [YYYY-MM-DD] |
+| **Stars** | [X] |
+
+**Why Relevant**: [Explain partial relevance and what aspects match]
+
+**Key Patterns**:
+
+- [Pattern 1]
+- [Pattern 2]
+
+---
+
+#### [REPOSITORY_NAME_5]
+
+[Repeat repository card structure for additional medium relevance results]
+
+---
+
+## Code Patterns Identified
+
+| Pattern | Repositories Using It | Description |
+|---------|----------------------|-------------|
+| [Pattern Name 1] | [Repo A, Repo B, Repo C] | [What this pattern does and why it is common across government] |
+| [Pattern Name 2] | [Repo A, Repo D] | [Description] |
+| [Pattern Name 3] | [Repo B, Repo E] | [Description] |
+| [Pattern Name 4] | [Repo C] | [Description] |
+
+**Observations**: [Narrative on common patterns found — e.g., GOV.UK Frontend adoption, use of 12-factor app methodology, cloud-native patterns on GCP/AWS, common authentication approaches]
+
+---
+
+## Implementation Approaches Compared
+
+| Approach | Used By | Pros | Cons |
+|----------|---------|------|------|
+| [Approach 1, e.g., Monolithic Rails app] | [Repo A, Repo B] | Simple to deploy, well understood | Scaling limitations, harder to test in isolation |
+| [Approach 2, e.g., Microservices + API gateway] | [Repo C, Repo D] | Independent scaling, clear boundaries | Operational complexity, distributed tracing needed |
+| [Approach 3, e.g., Serverless functions] | [Repo E] | Low cost at low volume, no infra management | Cold starts, vendor lock-in, harder to test locally |
+
+**Recommended Approach for This Project**: [Name] — [Brief rationale based on project requirements and team capabilities]
+
+---
+
+## Recommendations
+
+### Immediate Next Steps
+
+1. **Clone and Review**: [Repo Name] — [Specific aspects to examine]
+2. **License Verification**: Confirm [Repo Name] license permits [intended use]
+3. **Tech Stack Spike**: Prototype integration of [Repo Name] with project stack
+4. **Community Contact**: Reach out to [Organisation] team regarding [Repo Name] reuse intentions
+
+### Search Refinements
+
+If further searching is needed, consider these refined queries:
+
+- `[Refined query 1]` — [What this would surface]
+- `[Refined query 2]` — [What this would surface]
+
+### Related ArcKit Commands
+
+- Run `/arckit:gov-reuse` for a full reusability assessment of shortlisted repositories
+- Run `/arckit:gov-landscape` for a broader landscape analysis of [domain] across government
+
+---
+
+## 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:gov-code-search` agent
+**Generated on**: [DATE]
+**ArcKit Version**: [VERSION]
+**Project**: [PROJECT_NAME]
+**Model**: [AI_MODEL]

arckit_cli-6.1.1.data/data/share/arckit/.arckit/templates/gov-landscape-template.md

@@ -0,0 +1,271 @@
+# Government Landscape Analysis: [PROJECT_NAME]
+
+> **Template Origin**: Official | **ArcKit Version**: [VERSION] | **Command**: `/arckit:gov-landscape`
+
+## 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:gov-landscape` agent | PENDING | PENDING |
+
+---
+
+## Executive Summary
+
+### Domain Overview
+
+[2-3 paragraph overview of the domain being analysed — e.g., appointment booking systems across NHS and local government, data platform approaches in central government, AI/ML adoption in public sector — including why this landscape matters to the project.]
+
+**Domain**: [Domain Name, e.g., Appointment Booking / Data Platforms / Identity & Access Management]
+
+**Analysis Date**: [YYYY-MM-DD]
+
+**Platforms Searched**: [GitHub (GOV.UK organisations), GitLab, public sector catalogues, etc.]
+
+### Organisations Identified
+
+**Total Organisations**: [X]
+
+**Central Government**: [X]
+
+**Arms Length Bodies / NDPBs**: [X]
+
+**Local Government**: [X]
+
+**NHS / Health**: [X]
+
+**International Equivalents**: [X]
+
+### Repositories Analysed
+
+**Total Repositories Found**: [X]
+
+**Active (commits < 6 months)**: [X]
+
+**Maintained (commits 6–18 months)**: [X]
+
+**Stale (commits > 18 months)**: [X]
+
+**Archived / Abandoned**: [X]
+
+### Key Findings
+
+- **Most Active Organisations**: [Organisation A], [Organisation B], [Organisation C]
+- **Dominant Tech Stack**: [e.g., Python / Django, Node.js / Express, Ruby / Rails, Java / Spring Boot]
+- **Common Standards**: [e.g., GOV.UK Design System, GDS API Design, OpenAPI 3.0, WCAG 2.2 AA]
+- **Maturity Level**: [e.g., Nascent — most repos are early-stage prototypes / Maturing — several production-grade implementations / Mature — well-established patterns with active communities]
+
+---
+
+## Domain Landscape Map
+
+### Organisations Overview
+
+| Organisation | Repos | Primary Language | Focus Area | Activity Level |
+|-------------|-------|-----------------|------------|----------------|
+| [Organisation 1] | [X] | [Language] | [Focus description] | 🟢 Active |
+| [Organisation 2] | [X] | [Language] | [Focus description] | 🟢 Active |
+| [Organisation 3] | [X] | [Language] | [Focus description] | 🟡 Maintained |
+| [Organisation 4] | [X] | [Language] | [Focus description] | 🟡 Maintained |
+| [Organisation 5] | [X] | [Language] | [Focus description] | 🔴 Stale |
+
+**Legend**: 🟢 Active (commits < 6 months) &nbsp;|&nbsp; 🟡 Maintained (6–18 months) &nbsp;|&nbsp; 🔴 Stale (> 18 months)
+
+---
+
+### [ORGANISATION_NAME_1]
+
+**GitHub / GitLab**: [https://github.com/organisation]
+
+**Focus**: [Brief description of organisation's digital focus and mandate]
+
+**Notable Repositories**:
+
+| Repository | Description | Language | Stars | Last Active |
+|------------|-------------|----------|-------|-------------|
+| [repo-name] | [Description] | [Language] | [X] | [YYYY-MM-DD] |
+| [repo-name] | [Description] | [Language] | [X] | [YYYY-MM-DD] |
+| [repo-name] | [Description] | [Language] | [X] | [YYYY-MM-DD] |
+
+**Architectural Approach**: [How this organisation tends to build — e.g., microservices on AWS EKS, serverless on GCP, monolithic Rails apps]
+
+**Standards Followed**: [e.g., GDS Service Standard, GOV.UK Design System, NHS Service Standard]
+
+---
+
+### [ORGANISATION_NAME_2]
+
+[Repeat organisation section structure]
+
+---
+
+### [ORGANISATION_NAME_3]
+
+[Repeat organisation section structure]
+
+---
+
+## Technology Stack Analysis
+
+### Languages
+
+| Language | Repo Count | Percentage | Notable Projects |
+|----------|------------|------------|-----------------|
+| [Language 1, e.g., Python] | [X] | [X]% | [Repo A, Repo B] |
+| [Language 2, e.g., Ruby] | [X] | [X]% | [Repo C, Repo D] |
+| [Language 3, e.g., JavaScript/TypeScript] | [X] | [X]% | [Repo E, Repo F] |
+| [Language 4, e.g., Java] | [X] | [X]% | [Repo G] |
+| Other | [X] | [X]% | — |
+
+### Frameworks
+
+| Framework | Language | Repo Count | Percentage | Notes |
+|-----------|----------|------------|------------|-------|
+| [Framework 1, e.g., Django] | Python | [X] | [X]% | [Context] |
+| [Framework 2, e.g., Rails] | Ruby | [X] | [X]% | [Context] |
+| [Framework 3, e.g., Next.js] | TypeScript | [X] | [X]% | [Context] |
+| [Framework 4, e.g., Spring Boot] | Java | [X] | [X]% | [Context] |
+
+### Databases and Storage
+
+| Technology | Type | Repo Count | Common Use |
+|-----------|------|------------|------------|
+| [e.g., PostgreSQL] | Relational | [X] | [Use case] |
+| [e.g., Redis] | Cache / Queue | [X] | [Use case] |
+| [e.g., Elasticsearch] | Search | [X] | [Use case] |
+| [e.g., S3 / GCS] | Object Storage | [X] | [Use case] |
+
+---
+
+## Standards and Patterns
+
+| Standard / Pattern | Adoption | Description | Repos |
+|-------------------|----------|-------------|-------|
+| [e.g., GOV.UK Design System] | [X] repos ([X]%) | [Brief description] | [Repo A, Repo B] |
+| [e.g., GDS API Design Guidance] | [X] repos ([X]%) | [Brief description] | [Repo C, Repo D] |
+| [e.g., OpenAPI 3.0] | [X] repos ([X]%) | [Brief description] | [Repo E, Repo F] |
+| [e.g., 12-Factor App] | [X] repos ([X]%) | [Brief description] | [Repo A, Repo G] |
+| [e.g., WCAG 2.2 AA] | [X] repos ([X]%) | [Brief description] | [Repo B, Repo H] |
+| [e.g., OWASP Top 10] | [X] repos ([X]%) | [Brief description] | [Repo A, Repo C] |
+
+---
+
+## Maturity Assessment
+
+| Repository | Activity | Documentation | Tests | CI/CD | Community | Overall |
+|------------|----------|---------------|-------|-------|-----------|---------|
+| [Repo 1] | 5 | 4 | 5 | 5 | 3 | **4.4** |
+| [Repo 2] | 4 | 3 | 4 | 4 | 2 | **3.4** |
+| [Repo 3] | 3 | 4 | 3 | 3 | 2 | **3.0** |
+| [Repo 4] | 2 | 2 | 2 | 3 | 1 | **2.0** |
+| [Repo 5] | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | **1.0** |
+
+**Scale**: 1 = Poor &nbsp;|&nbsp; 2 = Below average &nbsp;|&nbsp; 3 = Adequate &nbsp;|&nbsp; 4 = Good &nbsp;|&nbsp; 5 = Excellent
+
+**Criteria Definitions**:
+
+- **Activity**: Frequency of commits, issue responses, PR reviews in past 12 months
+- **Documentation**: README quality, API docs, deployment/contribution guides
+- **Tests**: Unit, integration, and end-to-end test coverage
+- **CI/CD**: Automated build, test, and deployment pipelines present
+- **Community**: Stars, forks, contributor count, response time to issues
+
+---
+
+## Supply-Chain & Vulnerability Exposure
+
+Known-CVE exposure across the domain, derived from the govreposcrape SBOM graph and live [OSV.dev](https://osv.dev) data via `vulnerability_exposure`. This is a landscape-level signal of estate health, not a per-repo security audit — run `/arckit:secure` or `/arckit:risk` on any repository the project intends to adopt.
+
+### Exposure by Organisation
+
+| Organisation | Repos Scanned | Repos with Known-Vulnerable Deps | Highest-Impact CVE | Affected Repos | Citation |
+|--------------|---------------|----------------------------------|--------------------|----------------|----------|
+| [org] | [N] | [N] | [CVE-XXXX-NNNNN] | [N] | [CITATION] |
+
+### Exposure by Dominant Package
+
+| Package | Ecosystem | Vulnerable Versions | Blast-Radius (repos) | End-of-Life? | Citation |
+|---------|-----------|---------------------|----------------------|--------------|----------|
+| [e.g. log4j-core] | [maven] | [19] | [N repos across domain] | [Yes/No] | [CITATION] |
+
+**Notes**: [Summarise the highest-impact advisories and any end-of-life dependencies in widespread use. If a scope returned no indexed SBOM data, record it as a coverage gap — not as "no vulnerabilities".]
+
+---
+
+## Collaboration Opportunities
+
+| Opportunity | Organisations | Description | Potential Value |
+|-------------|--------------|-------------|-----------------|
+| [Opportunity 1, e.g., Shared component library] | [Org A, Org B] | [Description of collaboration] | [e.g., Reduce duplication, 50+ person-days saved across HMG] |
+| [Opportunity 2, e.g., Common API standard] | [Org B, Org C, Org D] | [Description] | [Value description] |
+| [Opportunity 3, e.g., Cross-gov working group] | [Multiple orgs] | [Description] | [Value description] |
+
+---
+
+## Gaps and Opportunities
+
+| Gap / Opportunity | Current State | Impact | Recommended Action |
+|------------------|---------------|--------|--------------------|
+| [Gap 1, e.g., No common authentication pattern] | Each org builds own auth | High duplication | Cross-gov auth standard working group |
+| [Gap 2, e.g., Limited automated testing in older repos] | Manual QA only | Quality risk | Testing guidance and starter templates |
+| [Gap 3, e.g., Inconsistent API versioning] | Ad-hoc approaches | Integration friction | Adopt GDS API versioning standard |
+| [Opportunity 1, e.g., Emerging ML/AI pattern] | 2 orgs experimenting | Innovation potential | Share learnings via cross-gov community |
+
+---
+
+## Recommendations
+
+### Strategic Recommendations
+
+1. **Engage [Organisation Name]**: [Rationale — they are the most active in this domain and open to collaboration]
+2. **Adopt [Standard/Pattern]**: [Most widely used pattern across government — reduces risk and improves interoperability]
+3. **Avoid Reinventing [Component]**: [X organisations have solved this problem — reuse recommended]
+4. **Monitor [Repository/Organisation]**: [Emerging work that may become the de facto standard in 12 months]
+
+### For This Project Specifically
+
+[2-3 paragraphs connecting landscape findings to the specific project's decisions — e.g., which tech stack to adopt, which organisations to engage with, which patterns to follow, and which gaps the project could help fill for the wider government community.]
+
+### Related ArcKit Commands
+
+- Run `/arckit:gov-reuse` to perform a detailed reusability assessment of the top candidates identified
+- Run `/arckit:gov-code-search` to search for specific code patterns within the identified organisations
+- Run `/arckit:research` for broader market and vendor research beyond government open source
+
+---
+
+## 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:gov-landscape` agent
+**Generated on**: [DATE]
+**ArcKit Version**: [VERSION]
+**Project**: [PROJECT_NAME]
+**Model**: [AI_MODEL]

arckit_cli-6.1.1.data/data/share/arckit/.arckit/templates/gov-reuse-template.md

@@ -0,0 +1,214 @@
+# Government Reuse Assessment: [PROJECT_NAME]
+
+> **Template Origin**: Official | **ArcKit Version**: [VERSION] | **Command**: `/arckit:gov-reuse`
+
+## 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:gov-reuse` agent | PENDING | PENDING |
+
+---
+
+## Executive Summary
+
+### Search Scope
+
+[Describe the capabilities searched for across government repositories, including search platforms used (GOV.UK GitHub organisations, code.gov equivalents, GitLab, etc.) and the project context driving the search.]
+
+**Capabilities Assessed**: [X] capability areas across [Y] government organisations
+
+**Repositories Evaluated**: [Z] repositories reviewed, [W] shortlisted for detailed assessment
+
+### Key Findings
+
+| Capability | Best Candidate | Organisation | Reuse Strategy | Effort Saved |
+|------------|---------------|--------------|----------------|--------------|
+| [Capability 1] | [Repo Name] | [Organisation] | [Direct reuse / Fork / Adapt] | [X person-days] |
+| [Capability 2] | [Repo Name] | [Organisation] | [Direct reuse / Fork / Adapt] | [X person-days] |
+| [Capability 3] | [Repo Name] | [Organisation] | [Direct reuse / Fork / Adapt] | [X person-days] |
+| [Capability 4] | None found | — | Build new | — |
+
+### Reuse Summary
+
+**Total Estimated Effort Saved**: [X person-days / X person-months]
+
+**Reuse Coverage**: [X]% of required capabilities have government code candidates
+
+**Recommended Approach**: [Brief narrative on overall reuse strategy]
+
+---
+
+## Capability Analysis
+
+### Capability 1: [CAPABILITY_NAME]
+
+**Requirements Addressed**: [BR-001, FR-005, NFR-SEC-002]
+
+**Search Terms Used**: [search queries used to find candidates]
+
+---
+
+#### Candidate: [REPOSITORY_NAME]
+
+| Attribute | Value |
+|-----------|-------|
+| **Organisation** | [Government Organisation] |
+| **Repository URL** | [https://github.com/organisation/repo] |
+| **Language** | [Primary language(s)] |
+| **License** | [MIT / Apache 2.0 / OGL v3.0 / Crown Copyright] |
+| **Last Activity** | [YYYY-MM-DD] |
+| **Stars** | [X] |
+| **Contributors** | [X] |
+| **Documentation** | [Good / Adequate / Sparse / None] |
+
+**Description**: [What this repository does and why it is relevant]
+
+**Reusability Assessment**:
+
+| Criteria | Score (1-5) | Notes |
+|----------|-------------|-------|
+| **License Compatibility** | [1-5] | [OGL v3.0 / MIT / Apache 2.0 — compatible with project needs?] |
+| **Code Quality** | [1-5] | [Test coverage, code style, maintainability indicators] |
+| **Documentation Quality** | [1-5] | [README, API docs, deployment guides present?] |
+| **Tech Stack Alignment** | [1-5] | [Does it match project tech choices?] |
+| **Activity / Maintenance** | [1-5] | [Recent commits, open issues addressed, active community?] |
+| **Overall** | **[Avg]** | |
+
+**Recommended Strategy**: [Direct reuse / Fork and adapt / Use as reference / Discard]
+
+**Estimated Effort Saved**: [X person-days if reused vs built from scratch]
+
+**Key Considerations**:
+
+- [Consideration 1: e.g., Requires upgrade from Python 3.8 to 3.12]
+- [Consideration 2: e.g., Missing authentication module — must add]
+- [Consideration 3: e.g., Tested in GDS infrastructure, may need adaptation]
+
+---
+
+#### Candidate: [ALTERNATIVE_REPOSITORY_NAME]
+
+[Repeat candidate card structure for additional candidates]
+
+---
+
+### Capability 2: [ANOTHER_CAPABILITY_NAME]
+
+[Repeat capability analysis structure for each capability]
+
+---
+
+## License Compatibility Matrix
+
+| Repository | License | Commercial Use | Modification | Distribution | Attribution | Compatible |
+|------------|---------|---------------|--------------|--------------|-------------|------------|
+| [Repo 1] | MIT | ✅ | ✅ | ✅ | Required | ✅ Yes |
+| [Repo 2] | Apache 2.0 | ✅ | ✅ | ✅ | Required | ✅ Yes |
+| [Repo 3] | OGL v3.0 | ✅ | ✅ | ✅ | Required | ✅ Yes |
+| [Repo 4] | GPL v3 | ⚠️ | ✅ | ⚠️ Copyleft | Required | ⚠️ Review |
+| [Repo 5] | Proprietary | ❌ | ❌ | ❌ | — | ❌ No |
+
+**Notes**: [Any specific licensing guidance for this project, e.g., Crown Copyright considerations]
+
+---
+
+## Tech Stack Alignment
+
+| Repository | Language | Framework | Infrastructure | Aligns With Project | Adaptation Needed |
+|------------|----------|-----------|----------------|---------------------|-------------------|
+| [Repo 1] | Python 3.12 | Django | AWS | ✅ Yes | Minor config changes |
+| [Repo 2] | Node.js 20 | Express | GCP | ⚠️ Partial | Container adaptation |
+| [Repo 3] | Ruby 3.2 | Rails | Heroku | ❌ No | Full rewrite needed |
+
+**Project Tech Stack**: [List the project's chosen languages, frameworks, and infrastructure]
+
+---
+
+## Dependency Overlap Analysis
+
+Pairwise dependency-overlap between candidate repositories (from the govreposcrape SBOM graph via `dependency_compare`). High overlap signals that two candidates are near-duplicates or forks of a common codebase — reuse one, not both, to avoid double-counting effort savings.
+
+| Repo A | Repo B | Shared Deps | Unique to A | Unique to B | Overlap % | Assessment | Citation |
+|--------|--------|-------------|-------------|-------------|-----------|------------|----------|
+| [org/repo-a] | [org/repo-b] | [931] | [412] | [268] | [51.2%] | [Distinct / ⚠️ Likely fork] | [CITATION] |
+
+**Notes**: [Where two candidates are near-duplicates (≥ 60% overlap), the higher-scored repo is the primary recommendation and the other is noted as "see also". Omit this section's table if fewer than two candidates shared a capability.]
+
+---
+
+## Gap Analysis
+
+| Capability | Status | Notes | Recommended Action |
+|------------|--------|-------|--------------------|
+| [Capability 1] | ✅ Reusable | Strong candidate found — [Repo Name] | Fork and integrate |
+| [Capability 2] | ⚠️ Partial | Candidate covers 60% of requirements | Adapt [Repo Name] + fill gaps |
+| [Capability 3] | ✅ Reusable | Direct reuse possible with minor config | Use [Repo Name] as-is |
+| [Capability 4] | ❌ No match | No suitable government code found | Build new component |
+| [Capability 5] | ⚠️ Partial | Outdated — last commit 18 months ago | Fork and modernise |
+
+**Legend**: ✅ Reusable &nbsp;|&nbsp; ⚠️ Partial &nbsp;|&nbsp; ❌ No match
+
+---
+
+## Recommendations
+
+### Reuse Strategy Summary
+
+[2-3 paragraph narrative summarising the overall recommended approach to reuse, explaining which candidates are most valuable, the level of adaptation required, and how reuse supports the project timeline and budget goals.]
+
+### Implementation Priority
+
+| Priority | Repository | Capability | Action | Estimated Effort | Timeline |
+|----------|------------|------------|--------|-----------------|----------|
+| 1 | [Repo Name] | [Capability] | [Fork / Integrate / Configure] | [X days] | [Sprint X] |
+| 2 | [Repo Name] | [Capability] | [Fork / Integrate / Configure] | [X days] | [Sprint Y] |
+| 3 | [Repo Name] | [Capability] | [Fork / Integrate / Configure] | [X days] | [Sprint Z] |
+| 4 | — | [Capability] | Build new | [X days] | [Sprint W] |
+
+### Risk Considerations
+
+| Risk | Likelihood | Impact | Mitigation |
+|------|------------|--------|------------|
+| Candidate repository abandoned before integration complete | Medium | High | Pin to specific commit; plan for fallback build |
+| License incompatibility discovered post-fork | Low | High | Legal review before deep integration |
+| Tech stack divergence requires significant adaptation | Medium | Medium | Spike/prototype before committing to reuse |
+| Upstream breaking changes after fork | Low | Medium | Evaluate upstream dependency management strategy |
+
+---
+
+## 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:gov-reuse` agent
+**Generated on**: [DATE]
+**ArcKit Version**: [VERSION]
+**Project**: [PROJECT_NAME]
+**Model**: [AI_MODEL]