Install any skill in seconds. Free to start, no credit card required.
Get Started Free →[COMMUNITY] Generate Austrian public procurement documentation aligned with Bundesvergabegesetz 2018 — Oberschwellen/Unterschwellen determination, ANKÖ publication, BVergGVS secondary rules, and BVwG review pathway
.claude/skills/thomasmoreai-arckit-at-bvergg/SKILL.md| Test case | Without → With | Effect | Δ tokens | Δ turns |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| case-10 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | 315% | 0% |
| case-06 | ✓→✗ | ▼ Worse | 127% | 0% |
| case-15 | ✓→✗ | ▼ Worse | 130% | 0% |
| case-16 | ✓→✗ | ▼ Worse | 39% | 0% |
| case-11 | ✓→✓ | = Same ✓ | 239% | 0% |
> ⚠️ Community-contributed command — not part of the officially-maintained ArcKit baseline. Output should be reviewed by qualified Vergabejurist / Rechtsabteilung before reliance. Citations to Bundesvergabegesetz 2018 (BVergG 2018) / EU directive transpositions may lag the current text — verify against the source. Items marked [NEEDS VERIFICATION] must be confirmed against the current BVergG 2018 text and the latest EU threshold regulation before external use — thresholds are updated every two years.
You are helping an enterprise architect generate Austrian public procurement documentation aligned with the Bundesvergabegesetz 2018 (BVergG 2018, BGBl. I Nr. 65/2018 as amended) and relevant secondary rules (BVergGVS, sectoral instruments).
text$ARGUMENTS
> 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.
MANDATORY (warn if missing):
RECOMMENDED (read if available, note if missing):
OPTIONAL (read if available, skip silently):
external/ — extract previous procurement files (Ausschreibungsunterlagen), ANKÖ publication records, BBG framework references, budget documents, existing supplier contracts000-global/policies/ — extract procurement policy, open source policy, data classification policyIdentify the target project from the hook context. If the project doesn't exist:
projects/*/ directories and find the highest NNN-* numberprojects/{NNN}-{slug}/README.md and projects/{NNN}-{slug}/vendors/README.mdPROJECT_ID and PROJECT_PATHRead all documents from Step 0. Extract key information for the procurement file:
Read the template (with user override support):
.arckit/templates-custom/at-bvergg-template.md exists in the project root.arckit/templates/at-bvergg-template.mdBefore generating the document, determine the applicable procedure. EU thresholds are updated every 2 years — verify against the latest Delegierte Verordnung (currently VO 2023/2495 for 2024-2025; check for 2026-2027 update) and the §12 BVergG 2018 transposition.
| Threshold Tier | Indicative Auftragswert (excl. VAT) | Procedure | Publication | |----------------|--------------------------------------|-----------|-------------| | Direktvergabe | < €100,000 | Direct award (no formal procedure) | Informal | | Direktvergabe mit Bekanntmachung | €100,000 — €130,000 | Direct award with notice | ANKÖ | | Unterschwellenbereich (non-open) | Up to EU threshold | Verhandlungsverfahren / nicht-offen | ANKÖ | | Oberschwellenbereich — classical (supplies/services, sub-central) | ≥ €221,000 | Offenes / Nicht-offenes Verfahren / Verhandlungsverfahren | ANKÖ + TED | | Oberschwellenbereich — Sektorenauftraggeber (supplies/services) | ≥ €443,000 | Sektor rules | ANKÖ + TED | | Bauaufträge (Works) — Oberschwellenbereich | ≥ €5,538,000 | Same as supplies/services | ANKÖ + TED |
Show threshold determination to the user before generating the full document. Confirm:
CRITICAL: Use the Write tool to create the procurement document.
ARC-{PROJECT_ID}-BVERGG-v*.md files:ARC-{PROJECT_ID}-BVERGG-v{VERSION}Before writing the file, read .arckit/references/quality-checklist.md and verify all Common Checks pass.
Write the document to:
textprojects/{project_id}/ARC-{PROJECT_ID}-BVERGG-v{VERSION}.md
text━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━ ✅ AT BVergG Procurement Documentation Generated ━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━ 📄 Document: projects/{project_id}/ARC-{PROJECT_ID}-BVERGG-v{VERSION}.md 📋 Document ID: {document_id} 📅 Planned Publication Date: {date} ━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━ 📋 Procedure Decision ━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━ Auftragswert: €{value} (excl. VAT) Tier: {Direktvergabe / Unterschwellen / Oberschwellen — classical / Sektor} Procedure: {Offen / Nicht-offen / Verhandlung / etc.} Publication: {ANKÖ only / ANKÖ + TED} Minimum Angebotsfrist: {days} ━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━ ⚡ Critical Actions ━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━ {List ⚠️ Items requiring Vergabejurist review before publication} Next steps: 1. {If personal data: Include DPA from $arckit-at-dsgvo} 2. {If Essential/Important: Include NISG supply clauses from $arckit-at-nisg} 3. Legal review before ANKÖ publication ━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
projects/{project_id}/ARC-{PROJECT_ID}-BVERGG-v{VERSION}.mdtext$arckit-at-bvergg Austrian procurement for 001 — federal digital identity platform, Auftragswert €1.8M, classical sector, Oberschwellenbereich, processes personal data, Essential entity under NISG $arckit-at-bvergg BVergG 2018 procurement pack for a municipal water utility SCADA upgrade — Sektorenauftraggeber, Oberschwellenbereich, €3.2M, Essential entity $arckit-at-bvergg Direct award for a €60K proof-of-concept integration, classical sector, no personal data
After completing this command, consider running:
$arckit-evaluate -- Score vendor responses against the award criteria defined in this document (when Tenders received and ready for evaluation)$arckit-traceability -- Link procurement requirements back to functional and non-functional requirements$arckit-at-dsgvo -- Include GDPR/DPA obligations in procurement documentation where personal data processed (when Procurement involves processors of personal data)$arckit-at-nisg -- Reflect NISG supply chain obligations in vendor security clauses (when Contracting entity is Essential or Important under NISG)| Case | Status | Duration (ms) | Turns | Tokens | Tool calls | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Without | With | Δ | Without | With | Δ | Without | With | Δ | Without | With | Δ | ||
case-11 | pass→pass | 8,045 | 8,375 | +4% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,557 | 5,280 | +239% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-01 | fail→fail | 31,086 | 39,885 | +28% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 6,233 | 3,919 | -37% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-02 | fail→fail | 32,350 | 6,178 | -81% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 6,220 | 4,237 | -32% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-03 | fail→fail | 16,252 | 19,551 | +20% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,715 | 7,214 | +166% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-04 | fail→fail | 17,418 | 3,743 | -79% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 4,111 | 3,898 | -5% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-05 | fail→fail | 27,890 | 6,415 | -77% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 3,211 | 3,922 | +22% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-06 | pass→fail | 9,384 | 4,863 | -48% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,753 | 3,976 | +127% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-07 | pass→pass | 3,020 | 2,388 | -21% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 609 | 4,047 | +565% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-08 | pass→pass | 2,320 | 1,903 | -18% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 554 | 4,016 | +625% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-09 | pass→pass | 15,122 | 9,902 | -35% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 3,123 | 5,543 | +77% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-10 | fail→pass | 5,739 | 6,052 | +5% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,176 | 4,883 | +315% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-12 | pass→pass | 5,179 | 6,741 | +30% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 965 | 4,883 | +406% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-13 | pass→pass | 5,116 | 6,108 | +19% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 985 | 4,787 | +386% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-14 | pass→pass | 3,356 | 2,404 | -28% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 563 | 4,065 | +622% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-15 | pass→fail | 9,545 | 6,355 | -33% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,794 | 4,129 | +130% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-16 | pass→fail | 14,755 | 4,812 | -67% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,801 | 3,892 | +39% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-17 | pass→pass | 12,542 | 8,263 | -34% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,244 | 5,141 | +129% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-18 | pass→pass | 6,883 | 7,783 | +13% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,381 | 5,078 | +268% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-19 | fail→fail | 10,923 | 5,438 | -50% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,280 | 3,971 | +74% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-20 | fail→fail | 22,727 | 5,323 | -77% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 4,700 | 3,920 | -17% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-21 | fail→fail | 23,138 | 4,595 | -80% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 4,668 | 3,905 | -16% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-22 | pass→pass | 4,951 | 4,855 | -2% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 941 | 4,611 | +390% | 0 | 0 | — |
DecimalAI ran this skill against gemini-3.6-flash twice over the same eval suite — once with the skill loaded and once without — and compared the two runs case by case. 22 cases were attempted, and 11 counted toward the lift figure. The other 11 produced results that are not comparable between the two arms, so they are excluded from the headline rather than averaged into it. The headline lift of -9 percentage points is the difference between those two pass rates over the 11 comparable cases. 6 cases got worse with the skill loaded, and they are included in that figure.
Without the skill loaded, the model failed this case. With it loaded, the same prompt on the same model passed. This is one improved case from the latest verified run; every case, including any that regressed, is in the table above.
Other measured skills in the registry, with their headline benchmark lift.