jev.proIndependent unofficial Jev guide

Use cases· Last updated

Routing policy checks with Jev

Not every request deserves the same handler. Jev classifies cheaply; code sends work to a lookup, a specialist LLM, a costlier model, or a human.

This unofficial page is the policy checks slice of the intent and model routing pack. Intent: apply the Jev (TypeSafe System One) decision model to intent and model routing policy checks. Primary search language: Routing 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): Routing glossary + compare vs rules/queues; ranked-route floors. Not a clone of a rival intent-routing glossary page.

Routing use-case context

A policy check is a typed question whose instructions + criteria are your rules about the latest user request. Jev scores compliance; the front-door router 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: Intent routing. Compare, when the other tool is the real job: rules and queues.

Policy Checks inputs

Put policy text and the artifact in structured state (never hope the model memorized last quarter’s PDF):

{
  "user": { "message": "Where is order 8831?", "locale": "en" },
  "session": { "authenticated": true, "plan": "free" },
  "catalog": { "handlers": ["order_status", "product_question", "return_exchange", "complaint", "other"] }
}

Name user.message, session.authenticated.

Decision signals and actions

Id Rule Enforce
auth_wall Unauthenticated users never hit account-data handlers code before Jev
complaint_human High complexity or low confidence → human Score + confidence
cost_cap Careful model only when model_class says so and confidence clears code

Typical primitives on the same request:

Id Type Job
intent Choice order_status / product_question / return_exchange / complaint / other
complexity Score used when the intent is a complaint
model_class Choice optional: cheap / standard / careful (model routing) 
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” intent and model routing 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 opening a refund/complaint LLM path or jumping to a costly model 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 intent and model routing, treat complaint_auto_llm as the high bar (opening a refund/complaint LLM path or jumping to a costly model). 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 Routing pack? Start with Routing decision workflow and Routing human handoff. Cluster hub: Use cases.

Is intent a reserved API field? No. You name the key. See glossary: intent.

When do rules beat Jev? When the route is already in structured data. Compare traditional routing.

What this page does not claim

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.