The 10-minute Monday check
Three signals to review at the start of each week. If all three are green, no architectural governance action is required. If any are in the red threshold, block time before the week's planning begins.
/changecontrols/dashboard — check DHS trendIs DHS up or down from last sprint? A single data point is less important than the direction. Three consecutive declining sprints is the signal that requires action.
ADRIFT measures the percentage of AI-authored PRs that introduced architectural drift without governance coverage. A rising ADRIFT is not a reason to slow AI adoption — it is a reason to deploy the MCP integration.
UDR is the fraction of structural PRs that had no approved Change Intention at all. Above 20% means one in five structural changes is happening outside governance.
Reading DHS for board reporting
DHS is the number you can take to a board. But the number without context is a liability, not an asset. Here is how to present it honestly.
Always present DHS alongside GD (Governance Depth). DHS without GD context is misleading. A DHS of 94 with GD=2 means only two rules are being checked. The score reflects the governance surface you have actually instrumented, not your full architecture.
Present as a trend, not a point-in-time number. A DHS of 78 rising for four consecutive sprints is a better board story than a DHS of 84 that dropped 12 points last quarter. The direction tells you whether governance is strengthening or eroding.
What to say when DHS is red:
“We have identified a governance gap in our automated design audit coverage. We are addressing it by expanding our Lens coverage and deploying rkito's MCP integration for our AI coding tools.”
Navigate to the org dashboard at /changecontrols/dashboard to export the DHS trend chart for the reporting period. The export includes sprint-over-sprint values suitable for presentation or inclusion in a board pack.
AI adoption governance — what ADRIFT tells you
ADRIFT is the AI coding risk signal that no other tool provides. It is not a reason to restrict AI tools. It is a reason to govern them.
ADRIFT measures the percentage of AI-generated PRs that introduced ungoverned architectural drift — structural changes that violated Lens directives or crossed service boundaries without an approved Change Intention.
A rising ADRIFT is not a reason to restrict AI tools — it is a reason to deploy rkito's MCP module. The agents are generating ungoverned changes because they have no architecture context before they generate code. The fix is context, not restriction.
The conversation with engineering leadership:
“Our agents are generating X ungoverned structural changes per week. The fix is connecting them to our architecture governance context before they generate code, not slowing down AI adoption.”
Navigate to /changecontrols/designaudits, filter by agent-authored PRs, then filter by BLOCKED status. This shows each ungoverned structural change ADRIFT has flagged — with the specific Lens violation that triggered the block.
When to escalate
Three signals that require a conversation with the lead architect — not just monitoring. These are not thresholds that trigger a report. They are thresholds that require a human conversation before the next sprint begins.
The absolute value does not matter here. A DHS of 72 that has risen for four sprints is healthy signal. A DHS of 85 that has dropped for three consecutive sprints is an early warning that requires diagnosis.
AI tools are producing systemic ungoverned drift. At this rate, agents are the leading source of architectural risk in the org. The MCP integration should be deployed immediately.
One in five structural changes is happening outside governance. This is a process breakdown, not a one-off miss. The CHI workflow is either too slow, too unfamiliar, or being actively bypassed.
“Here is the data. Help me understand root cause and what it will take to fix it.”
Architecture health as audit evidence
What rkito produces for regulatory or investor due diligence. Each of these is a structured, exportable record — not a manually assembled document.
Every PR evaluated by the CDA gate produces a record: which Lenses ran, what findings were raised, whether the PR was blocked or passed, who approved any exceptions, and the timestamp of each event.
Sprint-over-sprint DHS data is retained and exportable. This is demonstrable evidence that architecture quality is actively tracked, not just asserted. The trend shows direction, not just a point-in-time claim.
Every approved Change Intention is a formal, timestamped record that a structural change was reviewed before implementation. This is the governance paper trail that regulators and acquirers look for.
Navigate to /changecontrols/designaudits and use the date range filter to scope the export to your required reporting period. The export includes per-PR findings, approval records, and exception justifications in a format suitable for submission to an auditor or inclusion in due diligence documentation.
Your role in Steering
Steering is the governed record of architectural intent. As CTO, you own the organisation's architectural vision and manifesto — the artefacts that everything else derives from.
Your primary Steering task is not authoring — it is reviewing. Confirm that a Vision exists, the Manifesto reflects current architectural direction, and every risk domain has a Pillar. Delegate authoring to the Chief Architect.