Invoice policy checks with Jev
Pixels never go to System One. An OCR or vendor extractor turns the PDF into strings; Jev then asks whether that text packet looks like a duplicate, a PO mismatch, or a complete AP file. Code posts to the ERP. Jev does not key invoices.
This unofficial page is the policy checks slice of the invoice AP decisions pack. Intent: apply the Jev (TypeSafe System One) decision model to invoice AP decisions policy checks. Primary search language: Invoice 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): OCR extracts; Jev judges already-extracted text (duplicate/vendor/PO language). Amounts and dates stay in code — not a clone of invoice-OCR IA or a rival AP-recipe page.
Invoice use-case context
A policy check is a typed question whose instructions + criteria are your rules about the extracted invoice packet + PO text. Jev scores compliance; the AP 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: Use cases. Compare, when the other tool is the real job: invoice OCR.
Policy Checks inputs
Put policy text and the artifact in structured state (never hope the model memorized last quarter’s PDF):
{
"invoice": { "id": "INV-1044", "vendor_name": "Northwind Paper LLC", "memo": "Q3 copier paper — matches PO 88." },
"po": { "id": "PO-88", "vendor_name": "Northwind Paper" },
"extract": { "amount_cents": 128500, "invoice_date": "2026-03-12" },
"policy": { "duplicate": "Same vendor + same amount_cents within 14 days is a duplicate suspect." }
}Name invoice.memo, invoice.vendor_name, po.vendor_name, policy.duplicate.
Decision signals and actions
| Id | Rule | Enforce |
|---|---|---|
amount_match |
invoice cents vs PO remaining — compare in code | code arithmetic |
vendor_entity |
Name-similarity leftover after normalization | Jev Noul |
sod |
Poster ≠ approver — never a Jev Choice | ERP / SoD |
Typical primitives on the same request:
| Id | Type | Job |
|---|---|---|
same_vendor |
Noul | Do invoice.vendor_name and po.vendor_name look like the same entity? |
packet_complete |
Score | How complete is the AP narrative vs policy (missing PO / missing memo)? |
disposition |
Choice | route_match / hold_mismatch / duplicate_suspect / 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” invoice AP 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 posting an invoice to the ERP 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 invoice AP decisions, treat post_to_erp as the high bar (posting an invoice to the ERP). 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 Invoice pack? Start with Invoice decision workflow and Invoice human handoff. Cluster hub: Use cases.
Can we skip OCR and send the PDF? No. Official models page: no image input. Extract first. See Jev vs invoice OCR.
Should Jev decide if $1,285.00 matches the PO? No. Compare cents in code. Jev judges leftover language (vendor strings, memos).
What this page does not claim
- Not an OCR, ERP, or AP product.
- No invented extraction F1 or cycle-time lifts.
- 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.