arckit-cli 6.1.1__py3-none-any.whl

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

@@ -0,0 +1,270 @@
+<!-- markdownlint-disable MD003 -->
+# [PROJECT_NAME] — Architecture Presentation
+
+> **Template Origin**: Official | **ArcKit Version**: [VERSION] | **Command**: `/arckit:presentation`
+
+## 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:presentation` command | [PENDING] | [PENDING] |
+
+---
+
+<!-- MARP presentation begins below -->
+
+---
+
+marp: true
+theme: default
+paginate: true
+header: '[PROJECT_NAME] — Architecture Overview'
+footer: 'ARC-[PROJECT_ID]-PRES-v[VERSION] | [CLASSIFICATION] | [DATE]'
+---
+
+# [PROJECT_NAME]
+
+## Architecture Overview
+
+**[DATE]** | **[CLASSIFICATION]** | **Version [VERSION]**
+
+[PRESENTER_NAME / TEAM_NAME]
+
+---
+
+## Agenda
+
+1. Context & Objectives
+2. Stakeholder Landscape
+3. Architecture Overview
+4. Key Requirements
+5. Risk Summary
+6. Roadmap & Timeline
+7. Recommendations & Next Steps
+
+---
+
+## Context & Objectives
+
+### Business Challenge
+
+[Primary business challenge or opportunity being addressed]
+
+### Strategic Objectives
+
+- [Objective 1]
+- [Objective 2]
+- [Objective 3]
+
+### Success Criteria
+
+| Metric | Target | Measurement |
+|--------|--------|-------------|
+| [Metric 1] | [Target] | [How measured] |
+| [Metric 2] | [Target] | [How measured] |
+
+---
+
+## Stakeholder Landscape
+
+### Key Stakeholders
+
+| Stakeholder | Role | Interest | Influence |
+|-------------|------|----------|-----------|
+| [Name/Role] | [Sponsor / User / Technical] | [High/Medium/Low] | [High/Medium/Low] |
+
+### Stakeholder Priorities
+
+<!-- Mermaid labels: ASCII only, no accents (e→e, i→i), no hyphens in data points, no special chars -->
+```mermaid
+quadrantChart
+    title Stakeholder Influence vs Interest
+    x-axis Low Interest --> High Interest
+    y-axis Low Influence --> High Influence
+    quadrant-1 Manage Closely
+    quadrant-2 Keep Satisfied
+    quadrant-3 Monitor
+    quadrant-4 Keep Informed
+```
+
+---
+
+## Architecture Overview
+
+### Current State
+
+[Summary of current architecture — key pain points, technical debt, constraints]
+
+### Target State
+
+[Summary of target architecture — key changes, benefits, approach]
+
+### Architecture Diagram
+
+```mermaid
+C4Context
+    title System Context Diagram
+    Person(user, "User", "End user of the system")
+    System(system, "[SYSTEM_NAME]", "Target system")
+    System_Ext(ext, "External System", "Integration point")
+    Rel(user, system, "Uses")
+    Rel(system, ext, "Integrates with")
+```
+
+---
+
+## Technology Decisions
+
+| Decision | Choice | Rationale |
+|----------|--------|-----------|
+| [Decision 1] | [Choice] | [Brief rationale] |
+| [Decision 2] | [Choice] | [Brief rationale] |
+| [Decision 3] | [Choice] | [Brief rationale] |
+
+---
+
+## Key Requirements
+
+### Summary
+
+| Category | Count | Priority |
+|----------|-------|----------|
+| Business Requirements (BR) | [N] | [High/Medium/Low] |
+| Functional Requirements (FR) | [N] | [High/Medium/Low] |
+| Non-Functional Requirements (NFR) | [N] | [High/Medium/Low] |
+| Integration Requirements (INT) | [N] | [High/Medium/Low] |
+| Data Requirements (DR) | [N] | [High/Medium/Low] |
+
+### Critical Requirements
+
+- **[REQ-ID]**: [Requirement description]
+- **[REQ-ID]**: [Requirement description]
+- **[REQ-ID]**: [Requirement description]
+
+---
+
+## Risk Summary
+
+### Top Risks
+
+| ID | Risk | Likelihood | Impact | Mitigation |
+|----|------|-----------|--------|------------|
+| [RISK-ID] | [Description] | [H/M/L] | [H/M/L] | [Mitigation] |
+| [RISK-ID] | [Description] | [H/M/L] | [H/M/L] | [Mitigation] |
+| [RISK-ID] | [Description] | [H/M/L] | [H/M/L] | [Mitigation] |
+
+### Risk Distribution
+
+```mermaid
+pie title Risk Distribution by Category
+    "Technical" : [N]
+    "Commercial" : [N]
+    "Operational" : [N]
+    "Security" : [N]
+    "Compliance" : [N]
+```
+
+---
+
+## Roadmap & Timeline
+
+```mermaid
+gantt
+    title Project Roadmap
+    dateFormat YYYY-MM-DD
+    section Discovery
+        Discovery & Analysis    :done, d1, [START], [DURATION]
+    section Alpha
+        Alpha Build             :active, a1, after d1, [DURATION]
+        Alpha Assessment        :milestone, m1, after a1, 0d
+    section Beta
+        Beta Build              :b1, after m1, [DURATION]
+        Beta Assessment         :milestone, m2, after b1, 0d
+    section Live
+        Go Live                 :l1, after m2, [DURATION]
+```
+
+### Key Milestones
+
+| Milestone | Target Date | Status |
+|-----------|------------|--------|
+| [Milestone 1] | [Date] | [On Track / At Risk / Delayed] |
+| [Milestone 2] | [Date] | [On Track / At Risk / Delayed] |
+| [Milestone 3] | [Date] | [On Track / At Risk / Delayed] |
+
+---
+
+## Compliance & Governance
+
+### Standards Compliance
+
+| Standard | Status | Evidence |
+|----------|--------|----------|
+| [Standard 1] | [Compliant / In Progress / Gap] | [Reference] |
+| [Standard 2] | [Compliant / In Progress / Gap] | [Reference] |
+
+---
+
+## Recommendations & Next Steps
+
+### Immediate Actions
+
+1. [Action 1 — owner, deadline]
+2. [Action 2 — owner, deadline]
+3. [Action 3 — owner, deadline]
+
+### Decisions Required
+
+| Decision | Options | Recommendation | By When |
+|----------|---------|---------------|---------|
+| [Decision 1] | [Options] | [Recommendation] | [Date] |
+| [Decision 2] | [Options] | [Recommendation] | [Date] |
+
+---
+
+## Questions & Discussion
+
+**Contact**: [OWNER_NAME_AND_ROLE]
+**Document**: `ARC-[PROJECT_ID]-PRES-v[VERSION].md`
+**Next Review**: [NEXT_REVIEW_DATE]
+
+---
+
+<!-- End of MARP presentation -->
+
+## 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:presentation` command
+**Generated on**: [DATE]
+**ArcKit Version**: [VERSION]
+**Project**: [PROJECT_NAME] (Project [PROJECT_ID])
+**AI Model**: [MODEL_NAME]
+**Generation Context**: [Brief note about source documents used]

arckit_cli-6.1.1.data/data/share/arckit/.arckit/templates/principles-compliance-assessment-template.md

@@ -0,0 +1,389 @@
+# Architecture Principles Compliance Assessment
+
+> **Template Origin**: Official | **ArcKit Version**: [VERSION] | **Command**: `/arckit:principles-compliance`
+
+## 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 assessment from `/arckit:principles-compliance` command | PENDING | PENDING |
+
+---
+
+## Executive Summary
+
+**Purpose**: This document assesses project compliance with enterprise architecture principles defined in `projects/000-global/ARC-000-PRIN-v*.md`. This is a point-in-time assessment for the [PHASE] phase gate review.
+
+**Scope**: Assessment covers all [N] architecture principles against available project artifacts.
+
+**Overall Compliance**: [N] principles assessed
+
+| Status | Count | Percentage | Description |
+|--------|-------|------------|-------------|
+| 🟢 GREEN | [N] | [%] | Fully compliant with strong evidence |
+| 🟠 AMBER | [N] | [%] | Partial compliance, gaps with remediation plan |
+| 🔴 RED | [N] | [%] | Non-compliant or principle violated |
+| ⚪ NOT ASSESSED | [N] | [%] | Insufficient artifacts to assess |
+
+**Critical Issues**: [[N] RED-status principles requiring immediate attention / None identified]
+
+**Recommendation**: [❌ BLOCK / ⚠️ CONDITIONAL APPROVAL / ✅ PROCEED]
+
+**Next Assessment**: [Phase name + target date]
+
+---
+
+## Compliance Scorecard
+
+| # | Principle Name | Status | Evidence Count | Key Gaps | Next Action |
+|---|----------------|--------|----------------|----------|-------------|
+| 1 | [Principle Name] | [🔴🟠🟢⚪] | [N] artifacts | [Gap summary] | [Action summary] |
+| 2 | [Principle Name] | [🔴🟠🟢⚪] | [N] artifacts | [Gap summary] | [Action summary] |
+
+**Legend**:
+
+- 🔴 RED: Non-compliant, principle violated or no compliance plan
+- 🟠 AMBER: Partial compliance, gaps identified with remediation plan
+- 🟢 GREEN: Fully compliant with strong evidence
+- ⚪ NOT ASSESSED: Insufficient artifacts or too early in project lifecycle
+
+---
+
+## Detailed Principle Assessment
+
+### [#]. [Principle Name] - Status: [🔴🟠🟢⚪]
+
+**Principle Statement** (from ARC-000-PRIN-v*.md):
+> [Quote the principle statement verbatim]
+
+**Rationale** (why this principle exists):
+> [Quote the rationale]
+
+---
+
+#### Evidence Analysis
+
+**Evidence Found**:
+
+**Requirements Coverage**:
+
+- ✅ [N] requirements address this principle:
+  - [REQ-ID]: "[Requirement text]" (line [N])
+  - [List relevant requirements with file:line references]
+- [OR]
+- ❌ No requirements found addressing this principle
+
+**Design Evidence**:
+
+- ✅ **HLD Section [N] "[Section Title]"** (lines [N-M]):
+  - [Brief description of how design addresses principle]
+  - [Quote key design decisions]
+- [OR]
+- ❌ No design evidence found in HLD
+
+**Implementation Evidence**:
+
+- ✅ Infrastructure as Code: `[file path]` (lines [N-M])
+- ✅ CI/CD pipeline: `[file path]`
+- ✅ Test results: `[file path]` - [pass/fail status]
+- [OR]
+- ⚪ Implementation not yet started (project in [phase])
+
+**Compliance Assessment Evidence**:
+
+- ✅ **TCoP Point [N]**: [Assessment result]
+- ✅ **Secure by Design - [Control]**: [Assessment result]
+- [OR]
+- ⚪ Compliance assessments not yet performed
+
+**Validation Evidence**:
+
+- ✅ Load test results: [summary]
+- ✅ Penetration test: [summary]
+- ✅ Monitoring dashboard: [link/description]
+- [OR]
+- ❌ No validation evidence found
+
+---
+
+#### Validation Gates Status
+
+- [x] **"[Validation gate text]"**
+  - **Status**: [✅ PASS / ❌ FAIL / ⚪ N/A / 🔄 IN PROGRESS]
+  - **Evidence**: [Specific file:section:line reference OR gap description]
+
+[Repeat for each validation gate]
+
+---
+
+#### Assessment: [🔴🟠🟢⚪]
+
+**Status Justification**:
+
+[Explain why this RAG status was assigned with specific evidence]
+
+---
+
+#### Gaps Identified
+
+[IF AMBER OR RED - LIST ALL GAPS]
+
+**Gap [#]: [Gap Title]**
+
+- **Description**: [What is missing or wrong]
+- **Impact**: [Business/technical risk this gap creates]
+- **Evidence Missing**: [What artifact/proof is absent]
+- **Severity**: [CRITICAL / HIGH / MEDIUM / LOW]
+- **Remediation**: [Specific actions to close gap]
+- **Responsible**: [Suggested role]
+- **Target Date**: [Next gate date or specific date]
+- **Dependencies**: [What else needs to happen first]
+
+[IF NO GAPS:]
+✅ No gaps identified - principle fully satisfied
+
+---
+
+#### Recommendations
+
+**Immediate Actions** [IF RED]:
+
+1. [Action] - Owner: [Role] - Deadline: [Date]
+2. [List critical remediations]
+
+**OR**
+
+**Exception Request** [IF RED AND compliance impossible]:
+
+- If compliance is not feasible, submit formal exception request including:
+  - Justification for non-compliance
+  - Compensating controls (if any)
+  - Business impact of enforcing compliance
+  - Time-bound expiry date
+  - Remediation plan for future compliance
+
+**Before Next Gate** [IF AMBER]:
+
+1. [Action] - Owner: [Role] - Deadline: [Next gate date]
+2. [List actions to achieve GREEN status]
+
+**Continuous Monitoring** [IF GREEN]:
+
+- Maintain compliance through [monitoring approach]
+- Reassess at [next gate or quarterly]
+- Key metrics to track: [metric list]
+
+**Next Assessment Trigger** [IF NOT ASSESSED]:
+
+- Reassess during [phase] gate after [artifacts] are created
+- Expected assessment date: [date]
+
+---
+
+[REPEAT ABOVE SECTION FOR ALL PRINCIPLES]
+
+---
+
+## Exception Register
+
+[IF ANY EXCEPTIONS EXIST OR ARE RECOMMENDED]
+
+| Exception ID | Principle | Status | Justification | Approved By | Approval Date | Expiry Date | Remediation Plan |
+|--------------|-----------|--------|---------------|-------------|---------------|-------------|------------------|
+| EXC-[NNN] | [Principle Name] | [REQUESTED / APPROVED / EXPIRED / REMEDIATED] | [Why exception needed] | [Name + Role] | [YYYY-MM-DD] | [YYYY-MM-DD] | [How/when achieve compliance] |
+
+**Exception Process**:
+
+1. **Request**: Document justification in this assessment
+2. **Approval**: Requires CTO/CIO sign-off for all architecture principle exceptions
+3. **Expiry**: All exceptions are time-bound (typically 3-6 months max)
+4. **Review**: Exceptions reviewed quarterly, expired exceptions escalated automatically
+5. **Remediation**: Must include plan to achieve compliance before expiry
+
+[IF NO EXCEPTIONS:]
+✅ No exceptions requested or approved - all principles assessed as GREEN, AMBER, or NOT ASSESSED with remediation plans.
+
+---
+
+## Summary & Recommendations
+
+### Critical Findings
+
+[IF RED PRINCIPLES EXIST:]
+
+**❌ BLOCKING ISSUES** - The following principles are violated or non-compliant:
+
+1. **[Principle Name]** - [Brief description]
+   - **Impact**: [Risk description]
+   - **Action Required**: [Immediate remediation or exception request]
+   - **Owner**: [Role]
+   - **Deadline**: [Date]
+
+**Gate Decision**: ❌ **RECOMMEND BLOCKING** progression to [next phase] until RED principles remediated OR formal exceptions approved by CTO/CIO.
+
+### Gaps Requiring Remediation
+
+[IF AMBER PRINCIPLES EXIST:]
+
+**⚠️ REMEDIATION REQUIRED** - The following principles have gaps:
+
+1. **[Principle Name]** - [Brief gap description]
+   - **Current Status**: AMBER
+   - **Target Status**: GREEN by [next gate]
+   - **Key Actions**: [Action summary]
+   - **Owner**: [Role]
+
+**Gate Decision**: ⚠️ **CONDITIONAL APPROVAL** - May proceed to [next phase] with tracked remediation. Review progress at [next gate].
+
+### Actions Required Before Next Gate
+
+**Priority 1 - CRITICAL** (RED principles - BLOCKING):
+
+1. [Action] - Owner: [Role] - Due: [ASAP date]
+
+**Priority 2 - HIGH** (AMBER principles - required for next gate):
+
+1. [Action] - Owner: [Role] - Due: [Next gate date]
+
+**Priority 3 - MEDIUM** (Enhancements - improve compliance):
+
+1. [Action] - Owner: [Role] - Due: [Future date]
+
+### Next Assessment
+
+**Recommended Next Assessment**: [Phase name] gate review on [target date]
+
+**Reassessment Triggers**:
+
+- Major architecture changes or design revisions
+- New compliance requirements introduced
+- Technology stack changes
+- Quarterly reviews for Live systems
+- Exception expiry approaching
+- Remediation actions completed
+
+**Expected Progress by Next Assessment**:
+
+- RED principles → AMBER or GREEN (with remediation)
+- AMBER principles → GREEN (gaps closed)
+- NOT ASSESSED principles → Assessed (artifacts now available)
+
+---
+
+## Artifacts Reviewed
+
+**Architecture Principles** (source of truth):
+
+- ✅ `projects/000-global/ARC-000-PRIN-v*.md` - [DATE] - [N] principles defined
+
+**Project Artifacts** (evidence sources):
+
+- ✅ `projects/[project-dir]/ARC-*-REQ-v*.md` - [DATE] - [N] requirements
+- ✅ `projects/[project-dir]/vendors/[vendor]/hld-v1.md` - [DATE] - [N] sections
+- ✅ `projects/[project-dir]/vendors/[vendor]/dld-v1.md` - [DATE] - [N] sections
+- ✅ `projects/[project-dir]/ARC-*-TCOP-*.md` - [DATE]
+- ✅ `projects/[project-dir]/ARC-*-SECD-*.md` - [DATE]
+- [List all available artifacts]
+
+**Artifacts Not Available** (limits assessment accuracy):
+
+- ❌ `[artifact]` - [Reason not available]
+- [List artifacts that would improve assessment if present]
+
+**Assessment Limitations**:
+
+- [Phase] phase - [limitation description]
+- [Missing artifact] not available - [impact on assessment]
+
+---
+
+## Appendix: Assessment Methodology
+
+### RAG Status Criteria
+
+**🟢 GREEN (Fully Compliant)**:
+
+- Evidence in multiple artifact types (requirements + design + implementation/validation)
+- Most or all validation gates satisfied
+- No significant gaps identified
+- Principle demonstrably satisfied with proof
+
+**🟠 AMBER (Partial Compliance)**:
+
+- Some evidence exists (typically requirements or design)
+- Clear gaps identified but remediation plan exists
+- Work in progress with target completion dates
+- Path to GREEN status clear and achievable
+
+**🔴 RED (Non-Compliant)**:
+
+- Principle directly violated by design decisions
+- No evidence of compliance and no plan to comply
+- Critical gaps with no remediation plan
+- Requires immediate attention or exception approval
+
+**⚪ NOT ASSESSED (Insufficient Evidence)**:
+
+- Project phase too early for meaningful assessment
+- Required artifacts don't exist yet (by design)
+- Assessment deferred to appropriate later gate
+- No concern - timing appropriate for project phase
+
+### Evidence Types
+
+**Primary Evidence** (strongest):
+
+- Requirements with acceptance criteria
+- Design documentation with specific technical decisions
+- Implementation artifacts (IaC code, configs, CI/CD pipelines)
+- Test results (load tests, pen tests, security scans)
+- Operational metrics (monitoring dashboards, SLA reports)
+
+**Secondary Evidence** (supporting):
+
+- Compliance assessments (TCoP, Secure by Design, AI Playbook)
+- Architecture diagrams showing principle implementation
+- Traceability matrices linking requirements to design
+- Stakeholder requirements driving principle adherence
+
+**Weak Evidence** (insufficient alone):
+
+- Aspirational statements without implementation details
+- "We plan to..." without concrete requirements or design
+- Vague references without file:section:line specificity
+
+## 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:principles-compliance` command
+**Generated on**: [DATE]
+**ArcKit Version**: [VERSION]
+**Project**: [PROJECT_NAME]
+**Model**: [AI_MODEL]