Add maintainer review kit

kmishra1204 · kmishra1204 · commit 863b973959bc · 2026-07-04T21:06:06.000-05:00
diff --git a/README.md b/README.md
@@ -53,6 +53,7 @@ Use these starter artifacts:
 - [Compatibility policy](docs/COMPATIBILITY_POLICY.md)
 - [Adoption registry](docs/ADOPTION_REGISTRY.md)
 - [External review guide](docs/EXTERNAL_REVIEW_GUIDE.md)
+- [Maintainer review kit](docs/MAINTAINER_REVIEW_KIT.md)
 - [AAIF proposal readiness self-audit](docs/AAIF_PROPOSAL_READINESS.md)
 - [Ecosystem contribution ledger](docs/ECOSYSTEM_CONTRIBUTION_LEDGER.md)
 
@@ -96,7 +97,7 @@ Good use:
 - Ask maintainers whether the evidence shape is useful.
 - Open issues or PRs that improve a concrete repo boundary.
 - Compare the profile against AGENTS.md, MCP, agent gateway, identity, audit, and human-review needs.
-- Use the [external review guide](docs/EXTERNAL_REVIEW_GUIDE.md) and [AAIF proposal readiness self-audit](docs/AAIF_PROPOSAL_READINESS.md) before any formal foundation route.
+- Use the [maintainer review kit](docs/MAINTAINER_REVIEW_KIT.md), [external review guide](docs/EXTERNAL_REVIEW_GUIDE.md), and [AAIF proposal readiness self-audit](docs/AAIF_PROPOSAL_READINESS.md) before any formal foundation route.
 
 Bad use:
 
@@ -106,8 +107,8 @@ Bad use:
 
 ## Current Status
 
-Version: `0.5.0`
+Version: `0.5.1`
 
-Status: early OSS profile with public flagship examples, adopter guide, boundary template, scoring guide, ecosystem alignment brief, compatibility policy, adoption registry, external review guide, AAIF proposal readiness self-audit, and ecosystem contribution ledger.
+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.
 
 Next target: external technical feedback from agentic AI maintainers and AAIF/LF-style community forums.
diff --git a/ROADMAP.md b/ROADMAP.md
@@ -33,6 +33,11 @@
 - Add public ecosystem contribution ledger.
 - Track upstream maintainer feedback and recognition gates without over-claiming accepted contribution.
 
+## 0.5.1
+
+- Add maintainer review kit for AGENTS.md, MCP, A2A, agent gateway, enterprise, and OSS maintainer review lanes.
+- Make external review and adoption trial paths easier to use without implying endorsement.
+
 ## 0.6.0
 
 - Add first external adoption example if a maintainer opts in.
diff --git a/docs/ADOPTER_GUIDE.md b/docs/ADOPTER_GUIDE.md
@@ -124,6 +124,10 @@ Ask reviewers:
 - Are OSS fallbacks practical?
 - Is the profile level too high, too low, or justified?
 
+For maintainer-oriented review before adoption, use:
+
+- `docs/MAINTAINER_REVIEW_KIT.md`
+
 ## Good Candidate Repositories
 
 The profile is most useful for repositories that include:
diff --git a/docs/ECOSYSTEM_ALIGNMENT_BRIEF.md b/docs/ECOSYSTEM_ALIGNMENT_BRIEF.md
@@ -94,6 +94,10 @@ Feedback issue:
 
 - https://github.com/kmishra1204/agentic-enterprise-readiness-profile/issues/1
 
+Maintainer review kit:
+
+- docs/MAINTAINER_REVIEW_KIT.md
+
 ## Contribution Path
 
 Near-term contributions should be small:
diff --git a/docs/EXTERNAL_REVIEW_GUIDE.md b/docs/EXTERNAL_REVIEW_GUIDE.md
@@ -21,6 +21,7 @@ Key links:
 - Scoring guide: `docs/SCORING_GUIDE.md`
 - Ecosystem alignment brief: `docs/ECOSYSTEM_ALIGNMENT_BRIEF.md`
 - Adopter guide: `docs/ADOPTER_GUIDE.md`
+- Maintainer review kit: `docs/MAINTAINER_REVIEW_KIT.md`
 - AAIF proposal readiness self-audit: `docs/AAIF_PROPOSAL_READINESS.md`
 - Adoption registry: `docs/ADOPTION_REGISTRY.md`
 - Ecosystem contribution ledger: `docs/ECOSYSTEM_CONTRIBUTION_LEDGER.md`
@@ -77,6 +78,8 @@ Preferred:
 
 - Public discussion: https://github.com/kmishra1204/agentic-enterprise-readiness-profile/discussions/3
 - Broad ecosystem-fit issue: https://github.com/kmishra1204/agentic-enterprise-readiness-profile/issues/1
+- Maintainer review issue: https://github.com/kmishra1204/agentic-enterprise-readiness-profile/issues/new?template=external_review.md
+- Adoption review issue: https://github.com/kmishra1204/agentic-enterprise-readiness-profile/issues/new?template=adoption_review.md
 
 For a focused review, open an issue with:
 
diff --git a/docs/MAINTAINER_REVIEW_KIT.md b/docs/MAINTAINER_REVIEW_KIT.md
@@ -0,0 +1,137 @@
+# Maintainer Review Kit
+
+## Purpose
+
+This kit helps AAIF/LF-adjacent maintainers, AGENTS.md users, MCP/tooling maintainers, A2A contributors, gateway/platform teams, and enterprise reviewers evaluate the Agentic Enterprise Readiness Profile without adopting it or endorsing it.
+
+The expected outcome is a clear technical signal:
+
+- useful as-is
+- useful after changes
+- useful only for a specific ecosystem lane
+- not useful in its current form
+
+## Ground Rules
+
+- Reviewing this profile is not endorsement.
+- Trying this profile in a branch is not adoption.
+- Opening feedback is not a claim that AAIF or the Linux Foundation supports this project.
+- Open PRs and issues remain work under review until maintainers merge, accept, or explicitly adopt them.
+
+## 15-Minute Review Path
+
+1. Read the README purpose and anti-claim language.
+2. Read the level model in `PROFILE.md`.
+3. Skim `templates/AGENTIC_BOUNDARY_MODEL.md`.
+4. Inspect one flagship example in `examples/`.
+5. Compare the profile to your ecosystem lane below.
+6. Leave one issue or discussion comment with the smallest useful correction.
+
+## Ecosystem Review Lanes
+
+| Lane | Review Focus | Useful Signal |
+| --- | --- | --- |
+| AGENTS.md | Whether repo-local agent instructions, validation commands, and human review expectations are practical. | "This should be an example pattern", "too heavy", or "missing AI-assistance disclosure details". |
+| MCP or tool servers | Whether tool/action boundaries, side effects, identity, approval, and audit evidence are clear. | "This maps to server readiness", "needs auth metadata", or "should stay outside MCP". |
+| A2A and agent interoperability | Whether conformance fixtures, SDK compatibility, and cross-agent behavior need similar evidence. | "Useful for contribution fixtures", "needs protocol-specific fields", or "not relevant". |
+| Agent gateway or platform governance | Whether policy, authorization, routing, observability, and approval examples are concrete enough. | "Useful gateway use case", "needs enforcement model", or "should remain repository-level". |
+| Enterprise engineering | Whether a reviewer can see setup, risk, security, fallback, and runtime proof without private context. | "Good diligence shape", "missing production evidence", or "too documentation-heavy". |
+| OSS maintainership | Whether templates and registry rules avoid burden, false claims, and project confusion. | "Adoption path is acceptable", "issue templates need simplification", or "do not list external repos yet". |
+
+## Review Outputs
+
+Choose one output and make it public:
+
+1. **Comment:** leave feedback in the public discussion.
+2. **Issue:** open a focused external review issue.
+3. **Patch:** send a narrow PR improving wording, schema, examples, or reviewer ergonomics.
+4. **Trial:** add the profile to a branch in another repo and open an adoption review issue.
+5. **No-fit note:** document why this should not align with your ecosystem.
+
+Preferred public surfaces:
+
+- Discussion: https://github.com/kmishra1204/agentic-enterprise-readiness-profile/discussions/3
+- External review issue: https://github.com/kmishra1204/agentic-enterprise-readiness-profile/issues/new?template=external_review.md
+- Adoption review issue: https://github.com/kmishra1204/agentic-enterprise-readiness-profile/issues/new?template=adoption_review.md
+
+## Trial Modes
+
+| Mode | What Changes | Adoption Claim |
+| --- | --- | --- |
+| Review only | No repository changes; reviewer comments on the profile. | No adoption. |
+| Shadow score | Reviewer scores a repo privately or in an issue without committing files. | No adoption unless maintainer says so. |
+| Branch trial | Maintainer adds `AGENTS.md`, boundary model, or `agentic-readiness.json` on a branch. | Trial only. |
+| Listed adoption | Maintainer asks to be listed with public evidence links. | Listed as `trial` or `adopted` in `docs/ADOPTION_REGISTRY.md`. |
+
+## Minimal Trial Bundle
+
+For a low-friction branch trial, add only:
+
+1. `AGENTS.md`
+2. `docs/AGENTIC_BOUNDARY_MODEL.md`
+3. `agentic-readiness.json`
+
+Optional but helpful:
+
+- `CONTRIBUTING.md`
+- `SECURITY.md`
+- `ROADMAP.md`
+- validation command output
+- OSS or self-hosted fallback notes
+
+## Questions To Answer
+
+Use these prompts when reviewing:
+
+- What evidence would make this profile more useful for your ecosystem?
+- Which field or template section is ambiguous?
+- Which requirement is too heavy for normal repositories?
+- Does the level model encourage honest maturity claims?
+- Should the first upstream alignment target be AGENTS.md, MCP/server readiness, A2A/conformance, agent gateway governance, or an independent profile?
+- What would block you from trialing this in one repo?
+
+## Maintainer-Friendly Response Template
+
+```text
+I reviewed the Agentic Enterprise Readiness Profile as a [lane] maintainer/user.
+
+Useful:
+- ...
+
+Unclear or too heavy:
+- ...
+
+Missing:
+- ...
+
+Suggested next step:
+- keep independent / align with AGENTS.md / align with MCP-server readiness / align with A2A conformance evidence / align with gateway governance / no fit right now
+
+This is technical feedback only. It does not imply adoption, endorsement, AAIF status, or Linux Foundation status.
+```
+
+## Anti-Claim Language For Trials
+
+If another repository trials the profile, use wording like:
+
+```text
+This repository is trialing the independent Agentic Enterprise Readiness Profile to document agent/tool boundaries and review evidence. This does not imply AAIF, Linux Foundation, or profile-maintainer endorsement.
+```
+
+Avoid wording like:
+
+- "AAIF-approved"
+- "Linux Foundation-ready"
+- "enterprise-certified"
+- "official readiness score"
+- "adopted by the ecosystem"
+
+## Maintainer Response Rule
+
+Every serious review should result in one of:
+
+- accepted change
+- follow-up issue
+- documented non-goal
+- compatibility-policy note
+- adoption-registry update if a repository explicitly opts in
diff --git a/package.json b/package.json
@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 {
   "name": "agentic-enterprise-readiness-profile",
-  "version": "0.5.0",
+  "version": "0.5.1",
   "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
@@ -13,6 +13,7 @@ const requiredDocs = [
   "docs/ECOSYSTEM_CONTRIBUTION_LEDGER.md",
   "docs/ECOSYSTEM_ALIGNMENT_BRIEF.md",
   "docs/EXTERNAL_REVIEW_GUIDE.md",
+  "docs/MAINTAINER_REVIEW_KIT.md",
   "docs/SCORING_GUIDE.md",
   ".github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/adoption_review.md",
   ".github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/external_review.md",

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": "0.5.0",`
	`3`	`+ "version": "0.5.1",`
`4`	`4`	`"private": false,`
`5`	`5`	`"type": "module",`
`6`	`6`	`"description": "Evidence-first readiness profile for agentic AI repositories.",`