First, a thirty-second refresher, so we're all using the same terminology:

A *parameter* is a declared input variable to a function.
An *argument* is a value passed into a function. (*Arguments* are stored in *parameters.*)

So in the example "def foo(clonk): pass; foo(3)", clonk is a parameter, and 3 is an argument. ++

Keyword-only arguments were conceived of as being unordered. They're stored in a dictionary--by convention called **kwargs--and dictionaries didn't preserve order. But knowing the order of arguments is occasionally very useful. PEP 468 proposed that Python preserve the order of keyword-only arguments in kwargs. This became easy with the order-preserving dictionaries added to Python 3.6. I don't recall the order of events, but in the end PEP 468 was accepted, and as of 3.6 Python guarantees order in **kwargs.

But that's arguments. What about parameters?

Although this isn't as directly impactful, the order of keyword-only parameters *is* visible to the programmer. The best way to see a function's parameters is with inspect.signature, although there's also the deprecated inspect.getfullargspec; in CPython you can also directly examine fn.__code__.co_varnames. Two of these methods present their data in a way that preserves order for all parameters, including keyword-only parameters--and the third one is deprecated.

Python must (and does) guarantee the order of positional and positional-or-keyword parameters, because it uses position to map arguments to parameters when the function is called. But conceptually this isn't necessary for keyword-only parameters because their position is irrelevant. I only see one place in the language & library that addresses the ordering of keyword-only parameters, by way of omission. The PEP for inspect.signature (PEP 362) says that when comparing two signatures for equality, their positional and positional-or-keyword parameters must be in the same order. It makes a point of *not* requiring that the two functions' keyword-only parameters be in the same order.

For every currently supported version of Python 3, inspect.signature and fn.__code__.co_varnames preserve the order of keyword-only parameters. This isn't surprising; it's basically the same code path implementing those as the two types of positional-relevant parameters, so the most straightforward implementation would naturally preserve their order. It's just not guaranteed.

I'd like inspect.signature to guarantee that the order of keyword-only parameters always matches the order they were declared in. Technically this isn't a language feature, it's a library feature. But making this guarantee would require that CPython internally cooperate, so it's kind of a language feature too.

Does this sound reasonable? Would it need a PEP? I'm hoping for "yes" and "no", respectively.

Three final notes:

Yes, I do have a use case. I'm using inspect.signature metadata to mechanically map arguments from an external domain (command-line arguments) to a Python function. Relying on the declaration order of keyword-only parameters would elegantly solve one small problem.
I asked Armin Rigo about PyPy's support for Python 3. He said it should already maintain the order of keyword-only parameters, and if I ever catch it not maintaining them in order I should file a bug. I assert that making this guarantee would be nearly zero effort for any Python implementation--I bet they all already behave this way, all they need is a test case and some documentation.
One can extend this concept to functools.partial and inspect.Signature.bind: should its transformations of keyword-only parameters also maintain order in a consistent way? I suspect the answer there is much the same--there's an obvious way it should behave, it almost certainly already behaves that way, but it doesn't guarantee it. I don't think I need this for my use case.

/arry

++ Yes, that means "Argument Clinic" should really have been called "Parameter Clinic". But the "Parameter Clinic" sketch is nowhere near as funny.