Runway Sample Gate
Design teams paste sample review fields and approved tech-pack evidence, and Jev classifies the defect, checks each pass claim against specifications, and scores whether the sample can advance or needs review.
Verify & Escalate· check then hand off
Section · Jev
full primer →The kernel.
Jev checks each claim about Fashion sampling against its evidence; anything unclear goes to a person, so fashion designers never act on a guess.
Why this primitiveTyped, evidence-linked decisions create a repeatable sample gate without replacing designer judgment.
Kernel
a Jev `noul` checks each claim/field against its evidence; low or mid probabilities are escalated to a human review queue instead of auto-acting
Drives the UI as
claim cards marked supported / unsupported / needs review, with a review queue column
Required key.
TYPESAFE_API_KEY
Your TypeSafe key. The mega-prompt asks for it with a secure form and keeps it on the server. Jev returns typed decisions: choice, noul (yes/no probability) and score.
open ↗Add this in your Lovable project under Settings → Secrets before pasting the prompt below.
Appendix · Mega-prompt
The build prompt.
budget · 1 message
Paste into a fresh Lovable project. Make sure the key above is set first. read the build strategy →
Build "Runway Sample Gate" as a ONE-SHOT Lovable build (~5 credits, no follow-ups).
Single-page TanStack Start app, one route, cut scope ruthlessly.
THIS PROMPT IS SELF-CONTAINED
Do not assume the participant knows Jev or has read any other page. TypeSafe Jev is a decision model,
not a text generator. It receives `state` plus a map of typed `questions` and returns JSON that code can
use directly. Use Choice to select exactly one defined option, Noul for a yes/no probability from 0 to 1,
and Score for a probability-weighted position across ordered levels. Keep rules, thresholds, arithmetic,
and actions in code. Use a generative model only if the product separately needs prose.
CONCEPT
Design teams paste sample review fields and approved tech-pack evidence, and Jev classifies the defect, checks each pass claim against specifications, and scores whether the sample can advance or needs review.
Discipline: Fashion & Textile Design (Fashion sampling).
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate (check then hand off) — a Jev `noul` checks each claim/field against its evidence; low or mid probabilities are escalated to a human review queue instead of auto-acting.
Why typed decisions: Typed, evidence-linked decisions create a repeatable sample gate without replacing designer judgment.
ENGINE: TypeSafe Jev (typed decisions, not text)
- Before writing code, ask the participant for `TYPESAFE_API_KEY` with Lovable's secure secret form. Never
ask them to paste it into chat, never prefix it with `VITE_`, and never expose it to browser code.
- Put the callable server function in `src/lib/jev.functions.ts`; do not import a server-only module from UI code.
- Validate the user's input before the handler and read `process.env['TYPESAFE_API_KEY']` inside the handler.
- From the server, call:
POST https://api.typesafe.ai/v1/systemone
Authorization: Bearer <TYPESAFE_API_KEY>, Content-Type: application/json
body: { "model": "jev-latest", "state": <Sample review fields, tech-pack requirements, and inspection notes>, "questions": QUESTIONS }
- Ask all questions in ONE request (they run in parallel and cannot see each other).
- Read Choice from `answers[id].choice`, `.probabilities`, and `.confidence`; Score from `.score`,
`.probabilities`, `.legend`, and `.confidence`; Noul from `.noul` only (it has no separate confidence).
SERVER IMPLEMENTATION (adapt the input name and result mapping to this concept)
```ts
import { createServerFn } from "@tanstack/react-start";
import { z } from "zod";
const Input = z.object({ text: z.string().trim().min(1).max(20000) });
export const decide = createServerFn({ method: "POST" })
.inputValidator((input: unknown) => Input.parse(input))
.handler(async ({ data }) => {
const apiKey = process.env['TYPESAFE_API_KEY'];
if (!apiKey) return { ok: false as const, status: 500, message: "TYPESAFE_API_KEY is not configured." };
const requestBody = {
model: "jev-latest",
state: { text: data.text },
questions: QUESTIONS,
};
let response: Response | undefined;
for (let attempt = 0; attempt < 3; attempt += 1) {
response = await fetch("https://api.typesafe.ai/v1/systemone", {
method: "POST",
headers: { Authorization: `Bearer ${apiKey}`, "Content-Type": "application/json" },
body: JSON.stringify(requestBody),
});
if (response.ok || (response.status !== 429 && response.status < 500)) break;
if (attempt < 2) await new Promise((resolve) => setTimeout(resolve, 750 * 2 ** attempt));
}
if (!response) return { ok: false as const, status: 503, message: "Jev did not respond." };
if (!response.ok) {
const message = (await response.text()).slice(0, 500) || `Jev request failed (${response.status}).`;
return { ok: false as const, status: response.status, message };
}
const result = await response.json();
return { ok: true as const, answers: result.answers };
});
```
In the page component, call `decide` with `useServerFn`, preserve the participant's input while loading or
on error, disable duplicate submissions, and render the returned typed values rather than parsing prose.
QUESTIONS (start here, refine wording if needed)
{
"defect_class": {
"type": "choice",
"instructions": "Which sample issue category best fits the evidence?",
"criteria": {
"fit": "Fit, grading, or silhouette",
"construction": "Seams, closures, or workmanship",
"material": "Fabric, trim, or finish",
"none_or_unclear": "No defect established or evidence unclear"
}
},
"pass_supported": {
"type": "noul",
"instructions": "Does the evidence support the sample’s stated pass status against the approved specification?",
"criteria": {
"true": "Relevant inspected fields meet documented requirements",
"false": "A checked field fails, conflicts, or has no evidence"
}
},
"advance_readiness": {
"type": "score",
"instructions": "How ready is the sample to advance?",
"criteria": [
"1: Major failure or missing inspection",
"2: Several unresolved issues",
"3: Minor open issue or limited evidence",
"4: Requirements are evidenced as met"
]
}
}
DECISION RULES (in code, not in the model)
- choice/score: if confidence < 0.6 show a "needs review" badge instead of acting.
- noul: >= 0.75 = yes, <= 0.25 = no, otherwise "review".
- score: normalise with score / (levels - 1) before combining with weights.
- Missing or malformed answers go to review. Show safe HTTP status and message in the UI. Retry only 429/5xx,
at most twice with increasing delay; never retry 400/401/402/403/404 and never invent results.
- If the product needs prose (a summary, a message), use Lovable AI for that text only; Jev makes the decisions.
UI
claim cards marked supported / unsupported / needs review, with a review queue column. Include 2 sample inputs as one-click chips so the demo works instantly.
Tailwind + shadcn, editorial look, footer: "Built during the Creative AI & Quantum Hackathon organised by StreetKode Fam during Indian Krump Festival 14".
NO database, NO auth, NO extra pages, NO tests.
BEFORE YOU FINISH
- Run the app and test both sample inputs through the real server function.
- Confirm the browser receives no API key and no fabricated fallback result.
- Confirm Choice/Score confidence and Noul probability drive the stated review rules.
- Confirm loading, success, review, empty-input, and service-error states are readable on mobile.
Reference only if needed: https://docs.typesafe.ai/api and https://docs.typesafe.ai/primitives
Market sizing.
TAM
Product development software: $2B+
SAM
Fashion sampling and tech design: $250M
SOM
Independent design labels: $4M
Indicative figures for hackathon pitches — refine with your own research before raising.
Adjacent entries.
Sustainable fashion
Fiber Claim Gate
Designers paste a garment’s fiber claims and supplier evidence, and Jev classifies the claim, checks its support, and grades verification strength for human review when confidence is low or middling.
Textile dyeingDye Lot Proof
Textile teams paste dye-lot specifications and lab records, and Jev classifies the colorfastness claim, verifies its evidence, and grades the match for review.
Print designPattern Rights Check
Print designers paste artwork provenance notes and license terms, and Jev sorts the rights status, checks whether evidence supports permitted use, and scores documentation completeness.
Garment productionCare Label Audit
Product teams paste proposed care instructions and fabric test evidence, and Jev categorizes the care issue, checks each instruction against evidence, and grades label readiness.