PTENES

Before you automate, understand the decision.

Ten practical cases for asking questions, exploring alternatives, and preparing your integration with Jev.

Public educational examples. Real inference is available through the local client with a TypeSafe credential.

Documents arranged in different trays on a work desk

A structured decision lab

Jev evaluates a context based on questions and options. This project helps you design the workflow around that response.

Explore ten scenarios

Support, documents, agents, and more. Each example includes alternatives, a simulated response, and a next step.

Prepare the integration

Edit the context, download the JSON, and use the CLI or local server. The key stays in the server environment.

Compare before adopting

Run local rules on a fictional dataset and review correct results, errors, and the confusion matrix.

The model suggests. The workflow stays in control.

Valid output doesn’t guarantee correct interpretation. Reviews, limits, and permissions belong to the software.

Context→Question and options→Validation→Suggestion or review

The lab does not send messages, make payments, or control external agents. Clinical, contractual, and financial cases are supervised fictional exercises.

What you need

To explore now

A modern browser. The public version works without an account, key, or payment.

To run locally

Python 3.10 or later and Git. The core uses only the standard library. Real queries require access to TypeSafe.

python3 --version
git --version

From the first example to a local test

1

Explore in your browser

Choose one of the twenty cases. The response is authored and simulated; changing the text requires a real request to get a new decision.

https://inematds.github.io/jev/app/
2

Install and open locally

The server is restricted to your computer. Open the address shown in the terminal.

git clone https://github.com/inematds/jev.git
cd jev
python3 -m jev_lab serve
3

Validate before submitting

Contract validation does not use the API. Replace the path with the JSON file you exported.

python3 -m jev_lab validate exemplos/triagem-request.json
4

Check with the provider when you have access

Configure TYPESAFE_API_KEY in the process environment or in the authorized files openpcbotv2/.env or wifi/.env. The client reads it at runtime without copying the key. The OpenRouter integration was measured across the original ten packages; this is not an independent benchmark.

python3 -m jev_lab ask exemplos/triagem-request.json
5

Run the rule-based reference

Generates metrics JSON and predictions CSV. The data is fictional, and the results measure lexical rules, not Jev.

python3 -m jev_lab batch data/tickets-sinteticos.jsonl --out reports/baseline
6

Check the installation

The tests cover contracts, policies, provider errors, and batch duplicates. No key is needed.

python3 -m unittest discover -s tests -v

The ten cases and their limitations

1. Claim checking

Check a claim against the available evidence.

Review the wording; keep the evidence link. Don’t claim it’s universally true.

2. Support triage

Suggest the team responsible for a request.

Suggest a reversible queue and record human corrections.

3. Contract checklist

Identify points that require expert review.

Refer to a professional; no automatic legal approval.

4. Changes in emails

Distinguish a proposed change from confirmation.

Highlight the message. Calendar and time zones must be handled in code.

5. Model routing

Choose the required capability before generating.

The policy resolves the specific model name and measures final quality.

6. Step verification

Evaluate an explicit criterion for an agent's output.

Correct once or escalate. Do not replace test execution with judgment.

7. Agent routing

Route to a specialist without expanding permissions.

Refer to the catalog; permissions remain determined by the system.

8. Browser elements

Select a candidate from the page text.

Validate the ID in the current DOM and confirm the action is allowed before clicking.

9. Clinical review queue

Fictional organizational study, always supervised.

Human review is required; there is no diagnosis or clinical guidance.

10. Financial alerts

Organize a fictional queue according to an explicit policy.

Supervised organization; no financial orders are executed.

More decisions, the same simple approach

Explore 20 cases now: the original ten plus new practices for skills, comments, evidence, composite triage, intents, dates, logs, personal data, support intent, and diff review.

The editor supports Choice, Noul, and Score, JSON state, and multiple questions. Import a request, export the result with provenance, and open CLI reports.

python3 -m jev_lab experiment data/tickets-sinteticos.jsonl --out runs/regras

Experiment guide · Exaggerations and questions · Official models and pricing

18 packages to incorporate into your work

The original ten packages are joined by inbox, YouTube comments, communities, meetings, transcript-based clips, notes, curation, and travel. The travel package evaluates each listing once and matches the answers against twelve fictional profiles using rules. The seven new examples are fictional and use combined questions.

python3 -m pacotes.executar reunioes
python3 -m pacotes.qualidade reunioes
python3 -m pacotes.lote reunioes data/reunioes-eventos.jsonl

The first two commands demonstrate the fixture and its simulated metrics; the third validates a batch without calling an API. Live mode requires --live and a key in the backend. Concurrency is limited and resumption is supported; platform data collection and external actions remain outside the executor.

Batches, per-question evaluation, and limitations · Choose a package

Price per token is not the cost of the process

At the quoted rate of US$ 0.042 per million input tokens, 10,000 tokens cost US$ 0.00042. Ten thousand identical calls add up to US$ 4.20. Add a fallback model, human review, infrastructure, and rework.

Try the calculator · Check official pricing

Laya: a local alternative for evaluation

The project brings together an analysis of Laya and references for comparing local structured decisions with Jev. The Laya adapter in Jev and the bot integration are still proposals.

In the local analysis, 14 application tests passed, and 16 previously saved responses were accepted by the Jev structural validator. The educational report shows 13 correct answers out of 16 synthetic examples; some errors have high confidence. This does not prove superiority or production quality.

The next step is to evaluate the same cases and criteria, measure total cost and latency, and maintain human review. Confidence fields should not share thresholds without validation.

Read the pilot analysis and plan · Laya INEMA · Original code · Models and model card · Laya at Eventos

What works already and what still needs evidence

Available
Educational lab and local clientTwenty cases, three primitives, combined questions, JSON, full cost, experiments, and reports.
To validate
Real inference and quality in PortugueseThere are real queries from the ten original packages and controlled tests. Quality and calibration on independent data still need to be evaluated.
Next
Pilot with reviewed dataCollect human references, calibrate policies, and observe before connecting an operation.