Email policy checks with Jev
A draft exists (human or LLM). Jev judges policy, tone, and whether a promise is unsupported. Code sends, holds, or requests a rewrite. Jev does not deliver mail.
This unofficial page is the policy checks slice of the outbound email decisions pack. Intent: apply the Jev (TypeSafe System One) decision model to outbound email decisions policy checks. Primary search language: Email 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): Send/hold/rewrite as typed decisions + policy excerpts — not a clone of email-automation IA or a drip-builder page.
Email use-case context
A policy check is a typed question whose instructions + criteria are your rules about the email draft + recipient context. Jev scores compliance; the send gate 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: email automation.
Policy Checks inputs
Put policy text and the artifact in structured state (never hope the model memorized last quarter’s PDF):
{
"draft": { "subject": "Your Q4 discount", "body": "Locked 40% off if you reply today." },
"recipient": { "segment": "trial", "consent_email": true },
"policy": { "promises": "Do not invent discounts not in offer_table.", "tone": "No urgency dark patterns." },
"offer_table": { "trial_discount_pct": 20 }
}Name draft.subject, draft.body, policy.promises, offer_table.trial_discount_pct.
Decision signals and actions
| Id | Rule | Enforce |
|---|---|---|
consent |
No send without CRM/ESP consent | code first |
offer_truth |
Percents and dates must match offer_table (compare numbers in code when you can) | code + Jev remainder |
can_spam |
Unsubscribe / identity rules stay in the ESP | ESP |
Typical primitives on the same request:
| Id | Type | Job |
|---|---|---|
policy_ok |
Noul | Does the draft violate policy.* given offer_table? |
tone |
Score | calm helpful → aggressive urgency |
disposition |
Choice | send / hold / rewrite / 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” outbound email decisions 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 sending to a real recipient 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 outbound email decisions, treat send as the high bar (sending to a real recipient). 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 Email pack? Start with Email decision workflow and Email human handoff. Cluster hub: Use cases.
Does this page sell email infrastructure? No. It is an unofficial decision-layer pattern. We do not sell keys or ESP access.
Can Jev write the email? Not in this workflow. Generate elsewhere; Jev gates. That keeps cite/send decisions inspectable.
What this page does not claim
- Not an ESP or CDP.
- No deliverability benchmarks.
- 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.