Puzzle Fairness Gate
Paste a puzzle solution and its clues and Jev checks for clue sufficiency, rule consistency, and a verifiable solution; code holds the puzzle for review if any check fails.
Noul Check· yes/no probability
Section · Jev
full primer →The kernel.
Jev answers a short checklist of yes/no questions about Puzzle design for game designers, each as a probability, and simple rules turn them into pass, review or fail.
Why this primitiveExplicit yes-or-no tests help teams find fairness risks before playtesting without fabricating puzzle solutions.
Kernel
several independent Jev `noul` questions (one per condition) asked together over the same state, combined by explicit code rules
Drives the UI as
a checklist of conditions, each with a 0-1 probability meter and a pass / review / fail colour from code-owned thresholds
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 "Puzzle Fairness 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
Paste a puzzle solution and its clues and Jev checks for clue sufficiency, rule consistency, and a verifiable solution; code holds the puzzle for review if any check fails.
Discipline: Game Design & Interactive Media (Puzzle design).
Jev pattern: Noul Check (yes/no probability) — several independent Jev `noul` questions (one per condition) asked together over the same state, combined by explicit code rules.
Why typed decisions: Explicit yes-or-no tests help teams find fairness risks before playtesting without fabricating puzzle solutions.
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": <Puzzle rules, clues, and intended solution>, "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)
{
"clue_sufficiency": {
"type": "noul",
"instructions": "Do the supplied clues support the intended solution?",
"criteria": {
"true": "The stated clues provide a reasonable path to the intended solution.",
"false": "The intended solution requires information not supplied by the clues."
}
},
"rule_consistency": {
"type": "noul",
"instructions": "Are the puzzle rules applied consistently throughout?",
"criteria": {
"true": "No stated rule changes or contradicts another rule.",
"false": "At least one rule is ambiguous or inconsistently applied."
}
},
"solution_verifiable": {
"type": "noul",
"instructions": "Can players verify that their solution is correct?",
"criteria": {
"true": "The puzzle provides a clear success condition or confirming feedback.",
"false": "A correct solution has no reliable confirmation."
}
}
}
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
a checklist of conditions, each with a 0-1 probability meter and a pass / review / fail colour from code-owned thresholds. 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
Game development tools: ~$10B
SAM
Puzzle and level design tools: ~$600M
SOM
Puzzle design teams: ~$3M
Indicative figures for hackathon pitches — refine with your own research before raising.
Adjacent entries.
Puzzle design
Puzzle Dependency Mapper
Paste a puzzle description and Jev routes it to a puzzle role while scoring whether its required clues are available before the player needs them.
Game combat designEncounter Rhythm Audit
Paste an encounter brief and Jev checks for simultaneous pressure, meaningful counterplay, and a readable failure state; code flags the encounter only when all three checks pass.
Narrative systems designQuest Branch Gate
Paste a quest branch specification and Jev checks for distinct outcomes, state continuity, and player-visible consequences; code approves the branch only if all checks pass.
UX design for gamesTutorial Friction Scan
Paste a tutorial sequence and Jev checks for concept overload, action-feedback pairing, and a safe practice moment; code flags it when overload is present or either support is absent.