| name | arckit-agent-maturity |
| description | Assess AI agent program maturity across design, governance, security, integration, and operations |
You are helping an enterprise architect create an AI Agent Program Maturity Model assessment. This document evaluates the current maturity of the agent program across five key dimensions — Design, Governance, Security, Integration, and Operations — using a 5×5 maturity framework, and produces a prioritised improvement roadmap with benchmarks.
User Input
$ARGUMENTS
Instructions
Note: Before generating, scan projects/ for existing project directories. For each project, list all ARC-*.md artifacts, check external/ for reference documents, and check 000-global/ for cross-project policies. If no external docs exist but they would improve output, ask the user.
1. Read existing artifacts from the project context
RECOMMENDED (read if available, note if missing):
- AAGI (Agent Inventory, recommended) — Extract: agent inventory, capability baseline, ownership, lifecycle state, current architecture state
- If missing: Note that the guide is unavailable; maturity assessment will rely on available evidence
- AAGR (Agent Architecture Specification, recommended) — Extract: architecture decisions, tool contracts, guardrails, orchestration design, current implementation state
- If missing: Note that design specifications are unavailable
- maturity-model output from core (recommended) — Extract: existing enterprise maturity assessments, capability baselines, benchmark data
- If missing: Note that enterprise maturity context is limited
RECOMMENDED (read if available, note if missing):
- PRIN (Architecture Principles, in 000-global) — Extract: AI/agent principles, governance principles, technology standards
- AAOV (Agent Governance Framework) — Extract: oversight tiers, compliance status, audit program, governance maturity
- AASC (Agent Security Architecture) — Extract: security controls, threat model, security maturity
- AAIT (Agent Integration Design) — Extract: integration patterns, API maturity, interoperability
- RISK (Risk Register) — Extract: AI-specific risks, governance gaps, operational risks
OPTIONAL (read if available, skip silently if missing):
- BORD (Board Review) — Extract: board-approved AI strategy, risk appetite, investment commitments
- AIPB (AI Playbook) — Extract: AI ethics principles, model governance standards
- HLDR (High-Level Design Review) — Extract: existing system architecture context
- SECD (Secure by Design) — Extract: security control maturity
2. Identify the target project
- Use the ArcKit Project Context (above) to find the project matching the user's input (by name or number)
- If no match, create a new project:
- Use Glob to list
projects/*/ directories and find the highest NNN-* number (or start at 001 if none exist)
- Calculate the next number (zero-padded to 3 digits, e.g.,
002)
- Slugify the project name (lowercase, replace non-alphanumeric with hyphens, trim)
- Use the Write tool to create
projects/{NNN}-{slug}/README.md with the project name, ID, and date — the Write tool will create all parent directories automatically
- Also create
projects/{NNN}-{slug}/external/README.md with a note to place external reference documents here
- Set
PROJECT_ID = the 3-digit number, PROJECT_PATH = the new directory path
3. Read the template
Read the template (with user override support):
- First, check if
.arckit/templates-custom/agent-maturity-template.md exists in the project root
- If found: Read the user's customized template (user override takes precedence)
- If not found: Read
.arckit/templates/agent-maturity-template.md (default)
Tip: Users can customize templates with $arckit-customize agent-maturity
4. Assess Current State — 5×5 Maturity Framework
Evaluate the agent program across five dimensions at five maturity levels:
| Level | Name | Description |
|---|
| L1 | Ad-hoc | No formal processes, reactive, undocumented |
| L2 | Reactive | Processes defined post-incident, some documentation |
| L3 | Defined | Standard processes documented, proactive management |
| L4 | Managed | Metrics-driven, data-led decisions, continuous improvement |
| L5 | Optimized | Continuous improvement, predictive, industry-leading |
Dimension assessments
For each dimension, determine the current maturity level based on available evidence:
A. Design Maturity
- Evidence sources: AAGR, design documentation, architecture decision records
- Indicators: Reusable patterns, design standards, tool contract completeness
- Key questions: Are designs documented and reviewed? Are patterns reusable?
B. Governance Maturity
- Evidence sources: AAOV, governance policies, compliance evidence
- Indicators: Oversight model completeness, audit coverage, compliance status
- Key questions: Is there an oversight model? Are decisions auditable?
C. Security Maturity
- Evidence sources: AASC, risk register, security controls, guardrail configurations
- Indicators: Threat model coverage, guardrail comprehensiveness, security testing
- Key questions: Are security controls proactive? Is there automated security testing?
D. Integration Maturity
- Evidence sources: AAIT, API documentation, integration test results
- Indicators: Standardised APIs, interoperability, integration automation
- Key questions: Are integrations standardised? Is there end-to-end testing?
E. Operations Maturity
- Evidence sources: monitoring KPIs, incident response plans, SLA data
- Indicators: Monitoring coverage, incident response readiness, operational metrics
- Key questions: Are operations measured? Is there predictive monitoring?
For each dimension, record:
- Current level: L1 through L5
- Evidence: Concrete examples or artefacts supporting the rating
- Gaps: What is missing to reach the next level
5. Read External Documents and Policies
- Read any external documents listed in the project context (
external/ files) — extract existing maturity assessments, capability frameworks, benchmark data
- Read any enterprise standards in
projects/000-global/external/ — extract enterprise maturity frameworks, capability baselines, industry benchmarks
- If no external maturity docs found but they would improve the output, ask: "Do you have any existing maturity assessments, capability frameworks, or industry benchmarks? I can read PDFs and images directly. Place them in
projects/{project-dir}/external/ and re-run, or skip."
- Citation traceability: When referencing content from external documents, follow the citation instructions in
.arckit/references/citation-instructions.md. Place inline citation markers (e.g., [PP-C1]) next to findings informed by source documents and populate the "External References" section in the template.
6. Define Target State
For each dimension, determine a realistic target maturity level:
- Target level: 1–2 levels above current (achievable within 6–12 months)
- Rationale: Business justification for the target
- Gap: Number of levels to progress
Target levels should be ambitious but achievable. Consider:
- Regulatory requirements (may mandate minimum levels)
- Investment commitments and resource availability
- Risk appetite (higher risk = more maturity needed)
7. Create Improvement Roadmap
For each gap identified (current → target), define improvement initiatives:
| Initiative | Dimension | From | To | Timeline | Investment |
|---|
| [Name] | [Dimension] | [Current L] | [Target L] | [Q1/Q2/etc] | [£X / FTE] |
Minimum 3 initiatives must be defined. Each initiative should include:
- Name: Clear, actionable initiative name
- Dimension: Which maturity dimension it addresses
- Scope: What activities are involved
- Success criteria: How progress will be measured
- Dependencies: Other initiatives or artefacts it depends on
- Owner: Responsible team or role
8. Establish Benchmarks
Compare the agent program against industry benchmarks:
- Industry standards: CMMI, NIST AI RMF maturity, UK AI Centre maturity model
- Peer organisations: Similar programmes in the sector
- Regulatory expectations: Minimum maturity required for compliance
For each benchmark:
- Metric: What is being measured
- Industry average: Typical maturity level in the sector
- Our position: Current maturity level
- Gap: Difference from industry average
9. Detect Version
Before generating the document ID, check if a previous version exists:
- Look for existing
ARC-{PROJECT_ID}-AAMT-v*.md files in the project directory
- If no existing file: Use VERSION="1.0"
- If existing file found:
- Read the existing document to understand its scope
- Compare against current assessment
- Minor increment (e.g., 1.0 → 1.1): Same scope — updated assessments, refined targets
- Major increment (e.g., 1.0 → 2.0): New dimensions added, fundamentally different framework
- Use the determined version for document ID, filename, Document Control, and Revision History
10. Construct Document Control Metadata
- Document ID:
ARC-{PROJECT_ID}-AAMT-v{VERSION} (e.g., ARC-001-AAMT-v1.0)
Populate document control fields:
document_id: Constructed from format above
project_id: From Step 2
project_name: From Step 2
version: Determined version from Step 9
author: "ArcKit AI"
date_created: Current date (YYYY-MM-DD)
date_updated: Current date (YYYY-MM-DD)
generation_date: Current date and time
ai_model: Your model name
11. Generate Agent Program Maturity Model
CRITICAL INSTRUCTIONS FOR QUALITY:
-
This is a LARGE document (maturity assessment + roadmap + benchmarks, 400-800+ lines). You MUST use the Write tool to create the file. DO NOT output the full document to the user (you will exceed token limits).
-
Follow the template structure with all 6 sections:
Section 1: Maturity Model Framework
- 5×5 maturity model table (5 dimensions × 5 levels)
- Level definitions with observable characteristics
- Evidence criteria for each level per dimension
Section 2: Current State Assessment
- Assessment matrix: Dimension × Level × Evidence × Gaps
- Maturity heatmap (Mermaid quadrant chart)
- Detailed per-dimension analysis
Section 3: Target State
- Target level per dimension with rationale
- Gap analysis (current vs target)
- Priority ranking of improvements
Section 4: Improvement Roadmap
- Initiative table with ≥3 initiatives
- Timeline and sequencing
- Resource allocation and dependencies
- Success metrics per initiative
Section 5: Benchmarks
- Comparison against industry standards
- Gap analysis vs peers
- Regulatory alignment assessment
Section 6: Traceability
- AAGI → AAGR → AAMT links
- Cross-references to related artefacts
- Source document citations
-
Mermaid diagram requirements:
- Quadrant chart for maturity heatmap
- Use valid Mermaid syntax
- Position dimensions correctly based on assessed maturity
12. Quality Checks
Before writing the file, read .arckit/references/quality-checklist.md and verify all Common Checks plus the AAMT per-type checks pass. Fix any failures before proceeding.
AAMT-specific quality checks:
- Maturity framework: 5 levels defined (L1 Ad-hoc through L5 Optimized)
- Dimensions assessed: All 5 dimensions assessed (Design, Governance, Security, Integration, Operations)
- Evidence provided: Each dimension has concrete evidence supporting its rating
- Gaps identified: Each dimension has at least 1 gap documented
- Heatmap present: Valid Mermaid quadrant chart visualising maturity
- Target state defined: Target level set for each dimension with rationale
- Improvement initiatives: At least 3 initiatives defined in the roadmap
- Benchmarks included: Industry benchmarks with gap analysis
- Traceability links: AAGI and AAGR references present
- No placeholder text: No remaining
[Dimension], [Level], [Evidence], or [Gaps] tokens
13. Use Write tool to create the maturity model file
- CRITICAL: Because maturity models are large documents (400-800+ lines), you MUST use the Write tool to create the file
- Do NOT output the full content in your response (this will exceed token limits)
- Use Write tool with the full maturity model content
- Path:
projects/{PROJECT_ID}-{project-name}/ARC-{PROJECT_ID}-AAMT-v{VERSION}.md
CRITICAL - Auto-Populate Document Control Fields:
Before completing the document, populate ALL document control fields in the header following the same pattern as other ArcKit commands.
Auto-populated fields (populate these automatically):
[PROJECT_ID] → Extract from project path (e.g., "001" from "projects/001-project-name")
[VERSION] → Determined from Step 9
[DATE] / [YYYY-MM-DD] → Current date in YYYY-MM-DD format
[DOCUMENT_TYPE_NAME] → "Agent Program Maturity Model"
ARC-[PROJECT_ID]-AAMT-v[VERSION] → Construct using format above
[COMMAND] → "arckit.agent-maturity"
User-provided fields (extract from project metadata or user input):
[PROJECT_NAME] → Full project name from project metadata or user input
[OWNER_NAME_AND_ROLE] → Document owner (prompt user if not in metadata)
[CLASSIFICATION] → Default to ${default_classification}; if unavailable, use "OFFICIAL" for UK Gov, "PUBLIC" otherwise (or prompt user)
Calculated fields:
[YYYY-MM-DD] for Next Review → Current date + 90 days (quarterly review cycle)
Pending fields (leave as [PENDING] until manually updated):
[REVIEWER_NAME] → [PENDING]
[APPROVER_NAME] → [PENDING]
[DISTRIBUTION_LIST] → Default to "AI Governance Board, Architecture Team, Compliance Team" or [PENDING]
Populate Revision History:
| 1.0 | {DATE} | ArcKit AI | Initial creation from `$arckit-agent-maturity` command | [PENDING] | [PENDING] |
Populate Generation Metadata Footer:
**Generated by**: ArcKit `$arckit-agent-maturity` command
**Generated on**: {DATE} {TIME} GMT
**ArcKit Version**: {ARCKIT_VERSION}
**Project**: {PROJECT_NAME} (Project {PROJECT_ID})
**AI Model**: [Use actual model name, e.g., "Claude Sonnet 5 (session default)"]
**Generation Context**: [Brief note about source documents used]
14. Show summary to user (NOT full document)
## Agent Program Maturity Model Created
**Document**: projects/{PROJECT_ID}-{project-name}/ARC-{PROJECT_ID}-AAMT-v1.0.md
**Document ID**: ARC-{PROJECT_ID}-AAMT-v1.0
### Maturity Summary
| Dimension | Current | Target | Gap |
|-----------|---------|--------|-----|
| Design | [Level] | [Level] | [Levels] |
| Governance | [Level] | [Level] | [Levels] |
| Security | [Level] | [Level] | [Levels] |
| Integration | [Level] | [Level] | [Levels] |
| Operations | [Level] | [Level] | [Levels] |
### Key Findings
- **Highest priority**: [Dimension with largest gap]
- **Strongest area**: [Dimension with highest maturity]
- **Improvement initiatives**: [N] initiatives defined
- **Benchmarks**: [N] benchmarks assessed
### Next Steps
1. Review assessment with stakeholders
2. Prioritise improvement initiatives
3. Create detailed plans for top priorities: `$arckit-agent-design`
4. Strengthen governance for low-maturity dimensions: `$arckit-agent-governance`
### Files Created
📄 `projects/{PROJECT_ID}-{project-name}/ARC-{PROJECT_ID}-AAMT-v1.0.md` ({line_count} lines)
Important Notes
- Maturity models are living documents — review and update quarterly or after significant program changes
- Be evidence-based — every rating must reference concrete evidence, not impressions
- Target levels must be achievable — maximum 2 levels per improvement cycle (6-12 months)
- Benchmarks provide context — use industry standards and peer comparisons to set realistic targets
- Improvement initiatives drive action — each initiative must be scoped, resourced, and measurable
- Traceability is critical — link back to AAGI, AAGR, and governance artefacts
- The heatmap visualises priorities — use quadrant positioning to show where to focus investment
- Markdown escaping: When writing less-than or greater-than comparisons, always include a space after
< or > (e.g., < 5% gap, > 95% coverage) to prevent markdown renderers from interpreting them as HTML tags or emoji
- Template customization: Users can override the template by placing their own
agent-maturity-template.md in .arckit/templates-custom/
- Versioning: Always check for existing versions before creating a new file — increment appropriately
Suggested Next Steps
After completing this command, consider running:
$arckit-agent-design -- Design improvements based on maturity gaps
$arckit-agent-governance -- Strengthen governance based on maturity assessment