Customer support policy checks with Jev
Triage already picked a queue. This pack decides what happens next: is the customer asking for a refund, does a drafted reply violate policy, should a macro fire? Jev judges; macros, agents, or humans act. Jev does not send the reply.
This unofficial page is the policy checks slice of the customer support actions pack. Intent: apply the Jev (TypeSafe System One) decision model to customer support actions policy checks. Primary search language: Customer support 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): Full support-action pack (contracts → thresholds → handoff → audit) beats a single support-triage-choice recipe. This pack is refunds, commitments, and policy replies — not a clone of rival recipe IA, and not a duplicate of the triage routing pack.
Customer support use-case context
A policy check is a typed question whose instructions + criteria are your rules about the ticket thread + drafted reply. Jev scores compliance; the support action 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: Support triage hub. Compare, when the other tool is the real job: ticket queues.
Policy Checks inputs
Put policy text and the artifact in structured state (never hope the model memorized last quarter’s PDF):
{
"ticket": { "id": "T-2201", "latest": "You promised a refund last week. Charge is still there." },
"draft": { "body": "I issued a $400 goodwill credit." },
"account": { "plan": "pro", "refunds_ytd_cents": 0 },
"policy": { "refunds": "Auto-refund language only if amount extracted in code is under cap.", "promises": "Do not invent credits." }
}Name ticket.latest, draft.body, policy.refunds, policy.promises.
Decision signals and actions
| Id | Rule | Enforce |
|---|---|---|
refund_cap |
Amount vs cap | code arithmetic |
no_invented_credit |
Draft must not invent goodwill numbers | Jev Noul |
macro_library |
Only send macros that exist in your helpdesk | code |
Typical primitives on the same request:
| Id | Type | Job |
|---|---|---|
refund_ask |
Noul | Is the latest turn requesting a refund or chargeback help? |
draft_ok |
Noul | Does draft.body invent a credit vs policy.promises? |
disposition |
Choice | send_macro / hold_promise / escalate_specialist / 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” customer support actions 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 a customer reply or issuing a credit flag 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 customer support actions, treat send_customer_reply as the high bar (sending a customer reply or issuing a credit flag). 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 Customer support pack? Start with Customer support decision workflow and Customer support human handoff. Cluster hub: Use cases.
Is this the same as the support-triage recipe rivals publish? No. Triage routes the ticket. This pack gates actions after routing. Cover the intent; do not clone their slug or outline.
Can Jev replace the agent? No. It classifies and scores. See the support triage hub.
What this page does not claim
- Not a helpdesk or payments product.
- No invented CSAT/AHT numbers.
- 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.