Compliance policy checks with Jev
SOC 2 / ISO rows have owners, cadence, and pass/fail. Jev can flag “this evidence blob never mentions production.” The control owner still attests. Jev is not the auditor and not the GRC system of record.
This unofficial page is the policy checks slice of the compliance evidence pre-score pack. Intent: apply the Jev (TypeSafe System One) decision model to compliance evidence pre-score policy checks. Primary search language: Compliance Jev policy checks. Confirm patterns on docs.typesafe.ai. This site does not sell, issue, or proxy TypeSafe keys. Use a credential you already have from the console or a documented gateway.
Independent angle (cover ≠ clone): Checklist is the control; Jev pre-scores whether evidence language looks complete. Owner still signs — not a GRC-clone or rival checklist-IA photocopy.
Compliance use-case context
A policy check is a typed question whose instructions + criteria are your rules about the control prompt + evidence blob. Jev scores compliance; the GRC pre-scorer enforces. This is not a certification, and it is not a photocopy of a rival “policy engine” page — we keep rules atomic and ANDed in code.
Hub: Use cases. Compare, when the other tool is the real job: compliance checklists.
Policy Checks inputs
Put policy text and the artifact in structured state (never hope the model memorized last quarter’s PDF):
{
"control": { "id": "CC-6.1", "prompt": "Evidence must describe production access reviews this quarter." },
"evidence": { "title": "Access review export", "text": "We reviewed staging users in January." },
"policy": { "env": "Staging-only language is a gap for production controls." }
}Name control.prompt, evidence.text, policy.env.
Decision signals and actions
| Id | Rule | Enforce |
|---|---|---|
owner_signs |
Attestation is human / GRC | GRC tool |
prod_language |
Production vs staging in the blob | Jev Noul |
cadence |
Due dates and owners | GRC, not Jev |
Typical primitives on the same request:
| Id | Type | Job |
|---|---|---|
mentions_prod |
Noul | Does evidence.text address production as required by control.prompt / policy.env? |
completeness |
Score | How complete does the blob look vs the control prompt? |
next |
Choice | ready_for_owner / gap / owner_review / other |
violations = [name for name, ans in policy_nouls.items() if ans.noul >= T_VIOLATION]
if violations:
return review(violations)Do not treat a Noul of 0.5 as a “medium” compliance evidence pre-score score — it means yes and no are equally likely. Conjunctions stay in your code.
Guardrails and escalation
Policy-in-state can be attacked (“ignore the policy”). High-risk marking a control passed or signing attestation still needs deterministic checks. TypeSafe’s confidence-gated examples use a lower bar for recoverable reads than for irreversible actions. Those numbers are illustrations. For compliance evidence pre-score, treat mark_control_passed as the high bar (marking a control passed or signing attestation). Tune on labels — see offline evaluation.
Evaluation and rollout notes
Gold labels are policy-versioned. A criteria edit without replay is how silent false-allows ship. Pin jev-1.13.0 (the versioned id) after you fit thresholds. jev-latest and the marketing line jev-1.13 can move. Log the response model. TypeSafe’s published list price for jev-1.13 is $0.042 per million input tokens (vendor claim — confirm on the models page); output tokens are free on that same page. Unused distractors still bill as input.
Official Python and JavaScript SDKs read TYPESAFE_API_KEY and retry documented 429/529. This site does not sell, issue, or proxy TypeSafe keys. Use a credential you already have from the console or a documented gateway.
Pack map
| Slice | Page |
|---|---|
| Graph and primitives | decision workflow |
What may enter state |
input contracts |
| What to gather first | evidence collection |
| Atomic rules | you are here |
| Act / review / abstain | confidence thresholds |
| Reviewer payload | human handoff |
| What to persist | audit trail |
| How it breaks | failure modes |
| Labeled replay | evaluation |
| Shadow → canary | production rollout |
FAQ
One Score for “compliant”? No. Atomic Nouls per rule, AND/OR in code. Money and dates: extract in code first (jaggedness).
If a regex can enforce it, should I still call Jev? Skip Jev. Official “how to build” guidance: keep deterministic rules in code when you can.
Where is the rest of the Compliance pack? Start with Compliance decision workflow and Compliance human handoff. Cluster hub: Use cases.
Can Jev be our auditor? No. It pre-scores language. Owners and auditors sign. See governance.
May we send screenshots? Not as images. Transcribe what the screenshot shows, then ask snap questions.
What this page does not claim
- Not an auditor, GRC, or certification.
- No readiness or pass-rate claims.
- Not official TypeSafe.
- Official TypeSafe status, or that jev.pro issues API keys.
- That a schema-constrained answer is automatically factually correct.
Disclaimer
This is an independent unofficial site and is not affiliated with TypeSafe AI; official documentation is available at https://docs.typesafe.ai.
Primary documentation: https://docs.typesafe.ai. Hub: Use cases.
Sources
Public TypeSafe or adjacent documentation only. No private claims.