Add external adoption trial protocol

kmishra1204 · kmishra1204 · commit 2788ef9d796f · 2026-07-04T21:38:39.000-05:00
diff --git a/.github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/adoption_trial.md b/.github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/adoption_trial.md
@@ -0,0 +1,59 @@
+---
+name: Adoption trial
+about: Run a lightweight external trial before claiming adoption.
+title: "Adoption trial: "
+labels: "feedback-wanted, adoption-trial"
+assignees: ""
+---
+
+## Repository
+
+Link to the repository, branch, or pull request being reviewed.
+
+## Trial Mode
+
+- [ ] read-only review
+- [ ] branch trial
+- [ ] maintainer review
+
+## Repository Context
+
+- [ ] agentic application
+- [ ] MCP server or client
+- [ ] coding agent
+- [ ] workflow agent
+- [ ] support or knowledge agent
+- [ ] identity, policy, or governance tool
+- [ ] other:
+
+## Files Reviewed Or Added
+
+- [ ] `README.md`
+- [ ] `PROFILE.md`
+- [ ] `AGENTS.md`
+- [ ] `docs/AGENTIC_BOUNDARY_MODEL.md`
+- [ ] `agentic-readiness.json`
+- [ ] `templates/AGENTIC_BOUNDARY_MODEL.md`
+- [ ] one or more examples
+
+## Feedback
+
+What was useful?
+
+What was too heavy?
+
+What was missing?
+
+What should change before another repository tries this?
+
+## Listing Preference
+
+- [ ] Do not list this repository in the adoption registry.
+- [ ] Listing as `trial` is acceptable if the evidence link is public.
+- [ ] Listing should wait until a maintainer confirms.
+
+## Anti-Claim Check
+
+- [ ] This trial does not claim AAIF or Linux Foundation endorsement.
+- [ ] This trial does not claim production readiness.
+- [ ] This trial does not claim adoption unless explicitly stated by a maintainer.
diff --git a/README.md b/README.md
@@ -47,6 +47,7 @@ At minimum:
 Use these starter artifacts:
 
 - [Adopter guide](docs/ADOPTER_GUIDE.md)
+- [Adoption trial protocol](docs/ADOPTION_TRIAL_PROTOCOL.md)
 - [Boundary model template](templates/AGENTIC_BOUNDARY_MODEL.md)
 - [Scoring guide](docs/SCORING_GUIDE.md)
 - [Ecosystem alignment brief](docs/ECOSYSTEM_ALIGNMENT_BRIEF.md)
@@ -111,7 +112,7 @@ Bad use:
 
 ## Current Status
 
-Version: `0.5.9`
+Version: `0.5.10`
 
 Status: early OSS profile with public flagship examples, adopter guide, boundary template, scoring guide, ecosystem alignment brief, compatibility policy, adoption registry, external review guide, maintainer review kit, AAIF proposal readiness self-audit, and ecosystem contribution ledger.
 
diff --git a/ROADMAP.md b/ROADMAP.md
@@ -70,6 +70,10 @@
 
 - Add maintainer growth policy, release checklist, and dependency-license inventory for proposal-readiness hardening.
 
+## 0.5.10
+
+- Add adoption trial protocol and issue template for low-friction external review before registry listing.
+
 ## 0.6.0
 
 - Add first external adoption example if a maintainer opts in.
diff --git a/docs/AAIF_PORTFOLIO_RECOGNITION_ROADMAP.md b/docs/AAIF_PORTFOLIO_RECOGNITION_ROADMAP.md
@@ -38,7 +38,7 @@ The portfolio is useful because it tests the profile across different enterprise
 | Profile evidence | readiness JSON, boundary model, governance, security, validation notes | Four flagship examples published |
 | Upstream usefulness | small AAIF/LF-adjacent PRs and issues that solve repository-local needs | Active contribution ledger tracks open work |
 | External review | public discussion, focused review issue, maintainer review kit, review questions | Published but still awaiting independent feedback |
-| External adoption | at least two non-Karuna maintainers try the profile or provide opt-in examples | Missing |
+| External adoption | at least two non-Karuna maintainers try the profile or provide opt-in examples | Trial protocol published; external trial evidence still missing |
 | Recognition candidate | merged upstream contributions, external reviewers, sponsor path, governance clarity | Not ready yet |
 
 ## 90-Day Operating Plan
diff --git a/docs/AAIF_PROPOSAL_READINESS.md b/docs/AAIF_PROPOSAL_READINESS.md
@@ -55,7 +55,7 @@ The correct current route is external technical feedback, small upstream contrib
 | Project description and history | README, PROFILE, releases `v0.1.0` through `v0.5.0` | Partial | Add a short history section after first external review. |
 | Alignment with AAIF mission | Ecosystem alignment brief, proposal readiness self-audit | Partial | Ask AAIF-adjacent reviewers whether this should align with AGENTS.md, MCP, agentgateway, or remain independent. |
 | Relation to existing AAIF projects | Ecosystem alignment brief maps AGENTS.md, MCP, and agent gateway governance use cases | Partial | Add concrete examples from accepted upstream feedback. |
-| Use cases and adoption evidence | 16-repo testbed, four flagship examples, ecosystem contribution ledger | Partial | Secure at least two external opt-in adoption examples. |
+| Use cases and adoption evidence | 16-repo testbed, four flagship examples, ecosystem contribution ledger, adoption trial protocol | Partial | Secure at least two external opt-in adoption examples. |
 | Production deployments in two organizations | None claimed | Missing | Do not claim production readiness until verified. |
 | Technical Committee sponsor | None identified | Missing | Seek only after useful technical engagement. |
 | Repository URL | Public GitHub repository | Ready | Keep repository public and release-tagged. |
diff --git a/docs/ADOPTER_GUIDE.md b/docs/ADOPTER_GUIDE.md
@@ -6,6 +6,8 @@ This guide helps maintainers try the Agentic Enterprise Readiness Profile in the
 
 The profile is not a certification. It is a way to expose evidence for agentic AI repositories that need clearer review around agent instructions, tool/action boundaries, human approval, identity, auditability, OSS fallbacks, and validation.
 
+If you want to review the profile before adding files, start with the [adoption trial protocol](ADOPTION_TRIAL_PROTOCOL.md).
+
 ## Minimal Adoption Path
 
 Start with three files:
@@ -112,6 +114,10 @@ Rules:
 
 ## Step 5: Ask For Review
 
+For a lightweight first pass, open a public issue using:
+
+- `.github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/adoption_trial.md`
+
 Open a public issue using:
 
 - `.github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/adoption_review.md`
diff --git a/docs/ADOPTION_REGISTRY.md b/docs/ADOPTION_REGISTRY.md
@@ -33,12 +33,16 @@ No external adopters are listed yet.
 
 To request listing:
 
-1. Open an adoption review issue.
+1. Open an adoption trial or adoption review issue.
 2. Link the repository or branch.
 3. Show the profile artifacts added.
 4. Confirm no affiliation or endorsement claim is being made.
 5. Confirm the maintainer wants the project listed.
 
+Adoption trial template:
+
+- https://github.com/kmishra1204/agentic-enterprise-readiness-profile/issues/new?template=adoption_trial.md
+
 Adoption review template:
 
 - https://github.com/kmishra1204/agentic-enterprise-readiness-profile/issues/new?template=adoption_review.md
diff --git a/docs/ADOPTION_TRIAL_PROTOCOL.md b/docs/ADOPTION_TRIAL_PROTOCOL.md
@@ -0,0 +1,102 @@
+# Adoption Trial Protocol
+
+## Purpose
+
+This protocol gives external maintainers a low-friction way to test the Agentic Enterprise Readiness Profile without claiming adoption, endorsement, certification, or foundation affiliation.
+
+Use it when a maintainer wants to answer a narrow question:
+
+> Does this profile help us expose the evidence an enterprise reviewer would need before trusting or extending our agentic AI repository?
+
+## Trial Modes
+
+| Mode | Timebox | Output |
+| --- | --- | --- |
+| `read-only review` | 30-60 minutes | issue comment or checklist feedback |
+| `branch trial` | 1-3 hours | branch with draft `AGENTS.md`, boundary model, or readiness JSON |
+| `maintainer review` | 1-2 review cycles | maintainer feedback on whether the profile is useful, too heavy, or misaligned |
+
+A trial is not adoption. Adoption should be listed only after the maintainer explicitly asks to be listed in `docs/ADOPTION_REGISTRY.md`.
+
+## Minimal Read-Only Trial
+
+Review these files:
+
+- `README.md`
+- `PROFILE.md`
+- `docs/ADOPTER_GUIDE.md`
+- `templates/AGENTIC_BOUNDARY_MODEL.md`
+- one flagship example in `examples/`
+
+Answer:
+
+1. Which evidence categories already exist in your repository?
+2. Which evidence categories would be too heavy?
+3. Which missing category would be most useful to add first?
+4. Would a maintainer accept a small PR adding a boundary model or readiness JSON?
+5. Does any wording imply endorsement or certification too strongly?
+
+## Branch Trial
+
+Create a non-default branch in your repository and add one or more draft artifacts:
+
+- `AGENTS.md`
+- `docs/AGENTIC_BOUNDARY_MODEL.md`
+- `agentic-readiness.json`
+
+Keep the branch scoped. Do not rename the project, change runtime behavior, or add production claims.
+
+Recommended branch name:
+
+```text
+trial/agentic-readiness-profile
+```
+
+## Trial Evidence To Share
+
+When opening an issue in this repository, include:
+
+- repository link
+- branch or PR link, if any
+- which trial mode you used
+- which profile files you reviewed or added
+- what was useful
+- what was too heavy
+- what was missing
+- whether the maintainer wants to be listed as trial evidence
+
+## Listing Rules
+
+The adoption registry can list a trial only when:
+
+1. A public maintainer or contributor provides a link.
+2. The repository or branch is public.
+3. The listing does not claim production readiness.
+4. The listing does not claim AAIF or Linux Foundation endorsement.
+5. The maintainer agrees to being listed, or the evidence is clearly a public review request.
+
+## Trial Closure States
+
+| State | Meaning |
+| --- | --- |
+| `useful` | The reviewer found a clear use case or adoption path. |
+| `too-heavy` | The profile is useful but too large for the repository today. |
+| `misaligned` | The profile does not fit the repository type. |
+| `needs-change` | The profile needs changes before another trial. |
+| `adoption-requested` | Maintainer wants registry listing or follow-up PR. |
+
+## Anti-Claim Language
+
+Use this wording when publishing a trial:
+
+```text
+This is an independent trial of the Agentic Enterprise Readiness Profile. It does not imply AAIF, Linux Foundation, or maintainer endorsement, and it does not certify production readiness.
+```
+
+## Maintainer Ask
+
+The best request is narrow:
+
+> Would this profile make your repository easier or harder for enterprise developers to review?
+
+That keeps the trial grounded in repository usefulness rather than promotion.
diff --git a/package.json b/package.json
@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 {
   "name": "agentic-enterprise-readiness-profile",
-  "version": "0.5.9",
+  "version": "0.5.10",
   "private": false,
   "type": "module",
   "description": "Evidence-first readiness profile for agentic AI repositories.",
diff --git a/scripts/validate-readiness.mjs b/scripts/validate-readiness.mjs
@@ -7,6 +7,7 @@ const requiredDocs = [
   "README.md",
   "PROFILE.md",
   "docs/ADOPTER_GUIDE.md",
+  "docs/ADOPTION_TRIAL_PROTOCOL.md",
   "docs/ADOPTION_REGISTRY.md",
   "docs/AAIF_PROPOSAL_READINESS.md",
   "docs/COMPATIBILITY_POLICY.md",
@@ -19,6 +20,7 @@ const requiredDocs = [
   "docs/DEPENDENCY_LICENSE_INVENTORY.md",
   "docs/SCORING_GUIDE.md",
   ".github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/adoption_review.md",
+  ".github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/adoption_trial.md",
   ".github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/external_review.md",
   "templates/AGENTIC_BOUNDARY_MODEL.md",
   "schema/agentic-readiness.schema.json"

Original file line number	Diff line number	Diff line change
`@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@`
`1`	`1`	`{`
`2`	`2`	`"name": "agentic-enterprise-readiness-profile",`
`3`		`- "version": "0.5.9",`
	`3`	`+ "version": "0.5.10",`
`4`	`4`	`"private": false,`
`5`	`5`	`"type": "module",`
`6`	`6`	`"description": "Evidence-first readiness profile for agentic AI repositories.",`