# Creative Jev — complete catalog

Creative Jev is a hackathon starter pack containing 1,000 self-contained Lovable build prompts across 10 creative disciplines. Every concept uses TypeSafe Jev for typed decisions rather than generated prose.

Canonical site: https://jevprompts.lovable.app
Jev documentation: https://docs.typesafe.ai
Jev API: https://docs.typesafe.ai/api
Jev primitives: https://docs.typesafe.ai/primitives

## Jev in brief

- Choice selects exactly one option from a closed set and returns probabilities plus confidence.
- Noul returns the probability that a yes/no condition is true. It has no separate confidence field.
- Score returns a probability-weighted position across ordered levels, with probabilities, legend, and confidence.
- Product rules, arithmetic, authorization, thresholds, and actions remain deterministic code.
- API keys and Jev requests stay server-side. Missing or uncertain answers must go to review, never a fabricated fallback.

## Participant workflow

1. Choose an idea below.
2. Copy its complete mega-prompt into a fresh Lovable project.
3. Add TYPESAFE_API_KEY through Lovable's secure secret form when requested.
4. Build and test contrasting, uncertain, and service-error cases through the real interface.

## Catalog conventions

Each entry includes its stable ID, discipline, sub-discipline, pitch, Jev pattern, typed-decision rationale, indicative hackathon market notes, and a standalone mega-prompt. Market figures are starting points for a pitch and require independent research before commercial use.

Built during the Creative AI & Quantum Hackathon organised by StreetKode Fam during Indian Krump Festival 14.

---

# Discipline: Dance & Choreography

Audience: choreographers, dancers, dance teachers, movement directors
Market anchor: the global dance industry (~$5B; >2M studios worldwide)

## 0001. Audition Lane Desk

ID: dance-audition-lane-desk
Sub-discipline: Dance casting
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: The casting team pastes an audition application and role requirements, and Jev routes the applicant to a review lane with lane-specific checks.

Why typed decisions: Typed lanes and flags populate casting queues directly without interpreting prose recommendations.

TAM: Est. 100k global dance casting users
SAM: Est. 12k digitally managed casting users
SOM: Target 150 pilot users

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Audition Lane Desk" 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
The casting team pastes an audition application and role requirements, and Jev routes the applicant to a review lane with lane-specific checks.
Discipline: Dance & Choreography (Dance casting).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: Typed lanes and flags populate casting queues directly without interpreting prose recommendations.

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": <Application JSON, role requirements, and audition availability>, "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)
{
  "review_lane": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which review handler should receive this application?",
    "criteria": {
      "principal": "Evidence best matches a featured role's stated performance requirements.",
      "ensemble": "Evidence best matches ensemble requirements.",
      "specialist": "A required specialist movement skill is the strongest match.",
      "clarify": "Missing or contradictory information prevents a reliable match."
    }
  },
  "specialist_evidence": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "If routed to specialist, is the required skill supported by concrete experience? Otherwise return false.",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Application cites relevant training, credits, or submitted evidence.",
      "false": "Evidence is absent, merely asserted, or the specialist branch is inactive."
    }
  },
  "clarification_blocker": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "If routed to clarify, grade how strongly the missing information blocks review; otherwise select level 0.",
    "criteria": [
      "0: Clarify branch is inactive.",
      "1: A minor detail is missing.",
      "2: A role-critical requirement is unclear.",
      "3: Multiple essentials are missing or contradictory."
    ]
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0002. Rehearsal Note Switchboard

ID: dance-rehearsal-note-switchboard
Sub-discipline: Rehearsal direction
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: A choreographer pastes a rehearsal note with phrase context, and Jev routes it to timing, spatial, expressive, or production work.

Why typed decisions: A fixed handler and branch flags turn mixed rehearsal notes into actionable task queues.

TAM: Est. 500k global rehearsal leaders
SAM: Est. 60k shared-note workflow users
SOM: Target 300 pilot users

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Rehearsal Note Switchboard" 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
A choreographer pastes a rehearsal note with phrase context, and Jev routes it to timing, spatial, expressive, or production work.
Discipline: Dance & Choreography (Rehearsal direction).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: A fixed handler and branch flags turn mixed rehearsal notes into actionable task queues.

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": <Rehearsal note, phrase counts, and staging context>, "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)
{
  "note_handler": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which handler owns the primary correction?",
    "criteria": {
      "timing": "Counts, tempo, synchronization, or cue timing.",
      "spacing": "Positions, pathways, formations, or distance.",
      "expression": "Intention, dynamics, focus, or performance quality.",
      "production": "Lighting, sound playback, costume, or technical logistics."
    }
  },
  "shared_timing_fix": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "For timing notes, does the correction require multiple dancers to rehearse together? Otherwise return false.",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The correction depends on shared synchronization or a handoff.",
      "false": "It is an individual correction or the timing branch is inactive."
    }
  },
  "spacing_scope": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "For spacing notes, grade the reach of the formation change; otherwise select level 0.",
    "criteria": [
      "0: Spacing branch is inactive.",
      "1: One dancer's placement changes.",
      "2: A pair or subgroup must adjust.",
      "3: The full formation or traffic pattern must change."
    ]
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0003. Phrase Study Shelves

ID: dance-phrase-study-shelves
Sub-discipline: Choreographic composition
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: A choreographer pastes a movement phrase description, and Jev files it by compositional engine while grading relevant study properties.

Why typed decisions: Typed shelves make a phrase library filterable and reproducible instead of filling it with inconsistent descriptive tags.

TAM: Est. 300k global choreographic creators
SAM: Est. 35k digital phrase-library users
SOM: Target 200 pilot users

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Phrase Study Shelves" 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
A choreographer pastes a movement phrase description, and Jev files it by compositional engine while grading relevant study properties.
Discipline: Dance & Choreography (Choreographic composition).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: Typed shelves make a phrase library filterable and reproducible instead of filling it with inconsistent descriptive tags.

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": <Phrase description, counts, and composition 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)
{
  "phrase_shelf": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which compositional engine most strongly organizes the phrase?",
    "criteria": {
      "repetition": "Recurring motifs and their variation organize the phrase.",
      "travel": "Pathways and displacement organize the phrase.",
      "partnering": "Relationships and exchanges between bodies organize the phrase.",
      "stillness": "Pauses, held shapes, and restrained transitions organize the phrase."
    }
  },
  "partner_contact": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "For partnering phrases, is physical contact structurally necessary? Otherwise return false.",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The described exchange depends on touch, support, or shared weight.",
      "false": "The relationship can remain noncontact or the partnering branch is inactive."
    }
  },
  "variation_depth": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "For repetition phrases, grade the extent of motif transformation; otherwise select level 0.",
    "criteria": [
      "0: Repetition branch is inactive.",
      "1: Nearly exact repetition.",
      "2: One clear parameter changes.",
      "3: Multiple parameters transform while the motif remains recognizable."
    ]
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0004. Class Readiness Gates

ID: dance-class-readiness-gates
Sub-discipline: Dance pedagogy
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: A teacher pastes a learner's self-reported experience and class prerequisites, and Jev routes the enrollment to a suitable review path.

Why typed decisions: Typed readiness routes support consistent enrollment handling without inventing an authoritative assessment of physical ability.

TAM: Est. 1m global dance educators
SAM: Est. 100k online enrollment users
SOM: Target 400 pilot users

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Class Readiness Gates" 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
A teacher pastes a learner's self-reported experience and class prerequisites, and Jev routes the enrollment to a suitable review path.
Discipline: Dance & Choreography (Dance pedagogy).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: Typed readiness routes support consistent enrollment handling without inventing an authoritative assessment of physical ability.

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": <Learner experience, learning goals, and class prerequisites>, "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)
{
  "enrollment_route": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which enrollment handler fits the supplied evidence?",
    "criteria": {
      "standard": "Reported experience meets the stated prerequisites.",
      "foundation": "A foundational prerequisite is explicitly not yet met.",
      "teacher_review": "Evidence is ambiguous or prerequisites require observation.",
      "access_planning": "A stated access request needs planning with the teacher."
    }
  },
  "foundation_available": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "For foundation routing, does the provided course catalog contain a matching prerequisite class? Otherwise return false.",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "An available class explicitly addresses the missing prerequisite.",
      "false": "No matching class is supplied or the foundation branch is inactive."
    }
  },
  "access_coordination": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "For access planning, grade the coordination described, not the learner's capability; otherwise select level 0.",
    "criteria": [
      "0: Access-planning branch is inactive.",
      "1: One stated classroom adjustment.",
      "2: Several adjustments or a teacher check-in.",
      "3: Coordination with venue staff or additional support personnel."
    ]
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0005. Formation Traffic Desk

ID: dance-formation-traffic-desk
Sub-discipline: Ensemble staging
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: A movement director pastes a formation transition in counts and coordinates, and Jev routes it to the most relevant traffic-review handler.

Why typed decisions: Typed review categories connect semantic movement descriptions to staging overlays without implying a certified safety check.

TAM: Est. 200k global ensemble staging users
SAM: Est. 25k digitally planned ensemble users
SOM: Target 120 pilot users

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Formation Traffic Desk" 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
A movement director pastes a formation transition in counts and coordinates, and Jev routes it to the most relevant traffic-review handler.
Discipline: Dance & Choreography (Ensemble staging).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: Typed review categories connect semantic movement descriptions to staging overlays without implying a certified safety check.

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": <Transition JSON, stage dimensions, and dancer pathways>, "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)
{
  "traffic_handler": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which issue most needs human staging review?",
    "criteria": {
      "crossing": "Pathways intersect within overlapping counts.",
      "bottleneck": "Several dancers converge on a narrow passage.",
      "sightline": "A featured action is obscured by the arrangement.",
      "routine": "No specific traffic concern is apparent in the supplied description."
    }
  },
  "crossing_same_count": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "For crossing routing, do intersecting paths explicitly share a count window? Otherwise return false.",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The supplied timing places dancers at the intersection together.",
      "false": "Timing is separated, unspecified, or the crossing branch is inactive."
    }
  },
  "bottleneck_extent": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "For bottleneck routing, grade the described congestion; otherwise select level 0.",
    "criteria": [
      "0: Bottleneck branch is inactive.",
      "1: A pair shares a constrained passage.",
      "2: A subgroup converges with limited clearance.",
      "3: Multiple groups converge or an entrance and exit compete."
    ]
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0006. Transition Stitch Bench

ID: dance-transition-stitch-bench
Sub-discipline: Phrase sequencing
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: A choreographer pastes two adjacent phrase descriptions, and Jev routes their join to the editing technique most likely to resolve the mismatch.

Why typed decisions: A typed editing route opens the appropriate timeline tool rather than producing a vague transition suggestion.

TAM: Est. 300k global choreographic creators
SAM: Est. 40k digital sequencing users
SOM: Target 200 pilot users

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Transition Stitch Bench" 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
A choreographer pastes two adjacent phrase descriptions, and Jev routes their join to the editing technique most likely to resolve the mismatch.
Discipline: Dance & Choreography (Phrase sequencing).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: A typed editing route opens the appropriate timeline tool rather than producing a vague transition suggestion.

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": <Adjacent phrase descriptions, end states, and musical counts>, "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)
{
  "join_handler": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which editing handler best addresses the dominant join problem?",
    "criteria": {
      "pathway": "Ending and starting locations or facings do not connect.",
      "rhythm": "Count structure or momentum conflicts at the join.",
      "dynamic": "Movement qualities shift without the intended continuity.",
      "preserve": "The join already supports the stated intention."
    }
  },
  "pathway_reset": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "For pathway routing, is an explicit repositioning interval needed in the supplied sequence? Otherwise return false.",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The stated endpoints cannot connect within the existing movement description.",
      "false": "A connection is already described or the pathway branch is inactive."
    }
  },
  "rhythm_disruption": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "For rhythm routing, grade the size of the count mismatch; otherwise select level 0.",
    "criteria": [
      "0: Rhythm branch is inactive.",
      "1: A local accent or pickup conflicts.",
      "2: A full count group needs adjustment.",
      "3: Phrase lengths or meters fundamentally conflict."
    ]
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0007. Music Fit Lanes

ID: dance-music-fit-lanes
Sub-discipline: Music-led choreography
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: A choreographer pastes track structure notes and a dance brief, and Jev routes the track to a preset choreographic use lane.

Why typed decisions: Typed fit lanes drive playlist organization without generating unsupported claims about audio that was never supplied.

TAM: Est. 600k global dance music selectors
SAM: Est. 70k annotated-playlist users
SOM: Target 250 pilot users

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Music Fit Lanes" 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
A choreographer pastes track structure notes and a dance brief, and Jev routes the track to a preset choreographic use lane.
Discipline: Dance & Choreography (Music-led choreography).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: Typed fit lanes drive playlist organization without generating unsupported claims about audio that was never supplied.

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": <User-supplied track annotations and choreographic brief>, "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)
{
  "music_lane": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Based only on the annotations, which choreographic use best fits this track?",
    "criteria": {
      "unison": "Stable pulse and clear phrasing support synchronized ensemble work.",
      "improvisation": "Open structure or evolving texture supports exploratory movement.",
      "narrative": "Distinct sections and emotional changes support a dramatic arc.",
      "review": "Annotations are insufficient or conflict with the brief."
    }
  },
  "unison_count_anchor": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "For unison routing, are recurring count anchors explicitly documented? Otherwise return false.",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Annotations identify repeatable downbeats, accents, or phrase boundaries.",
      "false": "Anchors are not documented or the unison branch is inactive."
    }
  },
  "narrative_contrast": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "For narrative routing, grade the documented sectional contrast; otherwise select level 0.",
    "criteria": [
      "0: Narrative branch is inactive.",
      "1: One modest change in mood or energy.",
      "2: Several clearly differentiated sections.",
      "3: A pronounced buildup, reversal, or resolution across sections."
    ]
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0008. Costume Motion Checks

ID: dance-costume-motion-checks
Sub-discipline: Dance costume coordination
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: A movement director pastes costume specifications and choreography notes, and Jev routes the combination to a targeted fitting check.

Why typed decisions: Typed fitting queues assign the right test without mistaking a generated opinion for evidence from an actual movement fitting.

TAM: Est. 150k global dance costume collaborators
SAM: Est. 18k digitally coordinated production users
SOM: Target 100 pilot users

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Costume Motion Checks" 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
A movement director pastes costume specifications and choreography notes, and Jev routes the combination to a targeted fitting check.
Discipline: Dance & Choreography (Dance costume coordination).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: Typed fitting queues assign the right test without mistaking a generated opinion for evidence from an actual movement fitting.

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": <Costume specifications, movement demands, and fitting 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)
{
  "fitting_handler": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which fitting check is most strongly indicated?",
    "criteria": {
      "range": "Garment construction may limit required movement range.",
      "entanglement": "Loose elements may interact with partners, props, or floorwork.",
      "quick_change": "The change sequence or fastenings need operational testing.",
      "routine": "No specialized check is indicated beyond a normal movement fitting."
    }
  },
  "partner_entanglement": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "For entanglement routing, does a loose costume element meet a described partner-contact area? Otherwise return false.",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The supplied descriptions place loose material at a contact or support point.",
      "false": "No such overlap is described or the entanglement branch is inactive."
    }
  },
  "change_complexity": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "For quick-change routing, grade operational complexity; otherwise select level 0.",
    "criteria": [
      "0: Quick-change branch is inactive.",
      "1: One straightforward garment change.",
      "2: Several fastenings or a helper-dependent change.",
      "3: Multiple layers, shared helpers, or overlapping change demands."
    ]
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0009. Prop Handoff Board

ID: dance-prop-handoff-board
Sub-discipline: Prop choreography
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: A choreographer pastes a prop interaction cue, and Jev routes it to preset, transfer, movement-integration, or strike handling.

Why typed decisions: Typed handlers let a prop board assign ownership and expose handoff dependencies automatically.

TAM: Est. 180k global movement production users
SAM: Est. 20k prop-intensive production users
SOM: Target 100 pilot users

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Prop Handoff Board" 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
A choreographer pastes a prop interaction cue, and Jev routes it to preset, transfer, movement-integration, or strike handling.
Discipline: Dance & Choreography (Prop choreography).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: Typed handlers let a prop board assign ownership and expose handoff dependencies automatically.

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": <Prop cue, performer assignments, and stage sequence>, "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)
{
  "prop_handler": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which operational handler owns the cue's primary action?",
    "criteria": {
      "preset": "Place or prepare a prop before performer use.",
      "transfer": "Pass a prop between performers or crew.",
      "integration": "Manipulate a prop as part of the movement phrase.",
      "strike": "Remove or return a prop after use."
    }
  },
  "transfer_owner_clear": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "For transfer routing, are both giving and receiving roles explicitly assigned? Otherwise return false.",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Both sides of the handoff are unambiguously identified.",
      "false": "At least one role is unclear or the transfer branch is inactive."
    }
  },
  "integration_dependency": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "For integration routing, grade how much the phrase depends on the prop; otherwise select level 0.",
    "criteria": [
      "0: Integration branch is inactive.",
      "1: Prop is decorative and movement remains intact without it.",
      "2: Several actions depend on the prop.",
      "3: The phrase's timing or structure depends throughout on prop manipulation."
    ]
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0010. Access Adaptation Desk

ID: dance-access-adaptation-desk
Sub-discipline: Inclusive dance teaching
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: A teacher pastes an exercise and a participant's stated access request, and Jev routes it to the relevant adaptation-planning workflow.

Why typed decisions: Typed routes separate access tasks while preserving participant choice and avoiding inferred diagnoses.

TAM: Est. 1m global dance educators
SAM: Est. 80k access-planning workflow users
SOM: Target 250 pilot users

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Access Adaptation Desk" 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
A teacher pastes an exercise and a participant's stated access request, and Jev routes it to the relevant adaptation-planning workflow.
Discipline: Dance & Choreography (Inclusive dance teaching).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: Typed routes separate access tasks while preserving participant choice and avoiding inferred diagnoses.

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": <Exercise description, stated access request, and available resources>, "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)
{
  "adaptation_handler": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which planning handler best matches the explicit request?",
    "criteria": {
      "cue_format": "Change how instructions or counts are presented.",
      "movement_variant": "Offer an alternative movement pathway or position.",
      "environment": "Adjust room layout, sensory conditions, or equipment.",
      "participant_check": "The request needs clarification before planning."
    }
  },
  "cue_resource_ready": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "For cue-format routing, is the requested format supported by listed resources? Otherwise return false.",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The necessary visual, written, tactile-by-consent, or other requested resource is listed.",
      "false": "Support is unavailable, unspecified, or the cue-format branch is inactive."
    }
  },
  "variant_objective_fit": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "For movement-variant routing, grade how clearly the stated learning objective permits alternatives; otherwise select level 0.",
    "criteria": [
      "0: Movement-variant branch is inactive.",
      "1: Objective is unclear or tied to one prescribed form.",
      "2: Some intended qualities can be preserved through alternatives.",
      "3: Objective explicitly supports multiple movement forms."
    ]
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0011. Improvisation Constraint Deck

ID: dance-improvisation-constraint-deck
Sub-discipline: Dance improvisation
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: A facilitator pastes an existing improvisation exercise, and Jev routes it into a constraint deck with exercise-specific readiness checks.

Why typed decisions: Typed deck membership makes existing exercises searchable without generating new prompts as the product.

TAM: Est. 250k global improvisation facilitators
SAM: Est. 30k digital exercise-library users
SOM: Target 180 pilot users

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Improvisation Constraint Deck" 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
A facilitator pastes an existing improvisation exercise, and Jev routes it into a constraint deck with exercise-specific readiness checks.
Discipline: Dance & Choreography (Dance improvisation).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: Typed deck membership makes existing exercises searchable without generating new prompts as the product.

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": <Existing exercise text, group context, and facilitation requirements>, "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)
{
  "constraint_deck": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which constraint primarily drives the exercise?",
    "criteria": {
      "spatial": "Boundaries, levels, directions, or pathways.",
      "temporal": "Duration, rhythm, pauses, or speed.",
      "relational": "Attention, response, contact, or group interaction.",
      "imagistic": "An image, sensation, or metaphor drives exploration."
    }
  },
  "relational_consent": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "For relational exercises, does the text explicitly include consent and an opt-out for physical contact when contact is required? Otherwise return false.",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Required contact includes explicit consent and an alternative.",
      "false": "Those provisions are absent, contact is not required, or the relational branch is inactive."
    }
  },
  "temporal_layering": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "For temporal exercises, grade simultaneous timing constraints; otherwise select level 0.",
    "criteria": [
      "0: Temporal branch is inactive.",
      "1: One timing rule.",
      "2: Two interacting timing rules.",
      "3: Multiple independently changing timing rules."
    ]
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0012. Dance Film Coverage

ID: dance-dance-film-coverage
Sub-discipline: Screendance direction
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: A screendance director pastes a movement beat and shot constraints, and Jev routes it to a fixed coverage plan category.

Why typed decisions: Typed coverage decisions create sortable shot-board cards instead of unstructured cinematography advice.

TAM: Est. 120k global dance-film creators
SAM: Est. 15k structured shot-planning users
SOM: Target 100 pilot users

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Dance Film Coverage" 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
A screendance director pastes a movement beat and shot constraints, and Jev routes it to a fixed coverage plan category.
Discipline: Dance & Choreography (Screendance direction).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: Typed coverage decisions create sortable shot-board cards instead of unstructured cinematography advice.

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": <Movement beat, artistic priority, and camera constraints>, "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)
{
  "coverage_handler": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which coverage category best preserves the stated movement priority?",
    "criteria": {
      "full_body": "Whole-body articulation and floor contact must remain legible.",
      "detail": "A localized gesture or contact point carries the beat.",
      "formation": "Spatial relationships across the ensemble carry the beat.",
      "traveling": "Following displacement is central to the beat."
    }
  },
  "detail_context_needed": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "For detail routing, would the described gesture lose its stated meaning without an adjacent context shot? Otherwise return false.",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The meaning depends on an off-frame body, partner, or spatial relationship.",
      "false": "The detail is self-contained or the detail branch is inactive."
    }
  },
  "traveling_complexity": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "For traveling routing, grade the described camera-follow coordination; otherwise select level 0.",
    "criteria": [
      "0: Traveling branch is inactive.",
      "1: One predictable linear pathway.",
      "2: Direction changes or several subjects.",
      "3: Interweaving pathways, level changes, or moving obstructions."
    ]
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0013. Understudy Coverage Grid

ID: dance-understudy-coverage-grid
Sub-discipline: Repertory management
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: A rehearsal director pastes a role's requirements and an understudy's rehearsal log, and Jev routes the pairing to a coverage-review lane.

Why typed decisions: Typed coverage states power a dependable grid while leaving final readiness decisions to rehearsal staff.

TAM: Est. 80k global repertory management users
SAM: Est. 10k companies' digital coverage users
SOM: Target 80 pilot users

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Understudy Coverage Grid" 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
A rehearsal director pastes a role's requirements and an understudy's rehearsal log, and Jev routes the pairing to a coverage-review lane.
Discipline: Dance & Choreography (Repertory management).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: Typed coverage states power a dependable grid while leaving final readiness decisions to rehearsal staff.

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": <Role requirements, rehearsal log, and director-approved milestones>, "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)
{
  "coverage_lane": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which coverage workflow is supported by the recorded milestones?",
    "criteria": {
      "maintenance": "All required milestones have recorded approval.",
      "phrase_learning": "Required movement sections remain unlearned or unreviewed.",
      "partner_session": "Partner-specific rehearsal requirements remain outstanding.",
      "stage_run": "Movement milestones are complete but staging integration remains outstanding."
    }
  },
  "partner_available": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "For partner-session routing, is the required partner available in a supplied rehearsal slot? Otherwise return false.",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "A listed slot explicitly includes the necessary partner.",
      "false": "No matching slot is supplied or the partner-session branch is inactive."
    }
  },
  "learning_gap": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "For phrase-learning routing, grade the recorded learning gap; otherwise select level 0.",
    "criteria": [
      "0: Phrase-learning branch is inactive.",
      "1: One short section remains.",
      "2: Several sections remain.",
      "3: Most of the role remains unlearned or undocumented."
    ]
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0014. Competition Entry Lanes

ID: dance-competition-entry-lanes
Sub-discipline: Dance competition administration
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: A teacher pastes a routine description and an event's category rules, and Jev routes the entry to a supported category or manual review.

Why typed decisions: Typed category IDs can fill entry forms directly while surfacing ambiguous rule matches.

TAM: Est. 300k global competition-entry users
SAM: Est. 45k multi-event studio administrators
SOM: Target 200 pilot users

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Competition Entry Lanes" 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
A teacher pastes a routine description and an event's category rules, and Jev routes the entry to a supported category or manual review.
Discipline: Dance & Choreography (Dance competition administration).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: Typed category IDs can fill entry forms directly while surfacing ambiguous rule matches.

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": <Routine description and event rules mapped to supported entry categories>, "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)
{
  "entry_category": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which supported event category fits the supplied rules, prioritizing manual review when ambiguous?",
    "criteria": {
      "solo": "Exactly one performer and all supplied solo rules are met.",
      "duet_trio": "Two or three performers and the supplied category rules are met.",
      "group": "The supplied group-size and entry rules are met.",
      "manual_review": "Rules are missing, conflicting, or do not support a clear category."
    }
  },
  "group_size_exception": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "For group routing, does the entry rely on an explicitly allowed size exception? Otherwise return false.",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "An event-provided exception is necessary and applicable.",
      "false": "Standard size rules suffice or the group branch is inactive."
    }
  },
  "review_complexity": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "For manual review, grade the number and scope of unresolved rule issues; otherwise select level 0.",
    "criteria": [
      "0: Manual-review branch is inactive.",
      "1: One missing field.",
      "2: One substantive rule ambiguity.",
      "3: Multiple ambiguities or contradictory rules."
    ]
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0015. Movement Intent Ledger

ID: dance-movement-intent-ledger
Sub-discipline: Dramatic movement direction
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: A movement director pastes a scripted physical beat and scene context, and Jev routes the beat to a rehearsal objective category.

Why typed decisions: Typed objectives make movement beats sortable across a script without replacing the director's interpretation with generated prose.

TAM: Est. 200k global movement and theatre directors
SAM: Est. 25k digital script-breakdown users
SOM: Target 150 pilot users

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Movement Intent Ledger" 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
A movement director pastes a scripted physical beat and scene context, and Jev routes the beat to a rehearsal objective category.
Discipline: Dance & Choreography (Dramatic movement direction).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: Typed objectives make movement beats sortable across a script without replacing the director's interpretation with generated prose.

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": <Script excerpt, physical beat, and stated dramatic intention>, "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)
{
  "objective_handler": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which objective best explains the physical beat in the supplied context?",
    "criteria": {
      "status": "Establish or contest power and social position.",
      "connection": "Seek, sustain, or refuse interpersonal connection.",
      "concealment": "Hide an intention, object, reaction, or vulnerability.",
      "environment": "Respond primarily to physical surroundings or imagined conditions."
    }
  },
  "status_reversal": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "For status routing, does the beat explicitly reverse the existing power relationship? Otherwise return false.",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The scene context supports a clear reversal.",
      "false": "Status is maintained or adjusted without reversal, or the status branch is inactive."
    }
  },
  "concealment_legibility": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "For concealment routing, grade how explicitly the brief wants the audience to perceive the hidden intention; otherwise select level 0.",
    "criteria": [
      "0: Concealment branch is inactive.",
      "1: Intention should remain obscure.",
      "2: Intention should be subtly inferable.",
      "3: Intention should be obvious to the audience but hidden from another character."
    ]
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0016. Archive Provenance Gates

ID: dance-archive-provenance-gates
Sub-discipline: Dance heritage archiving
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: An archivist pastes a choreography record and its source notes, and Jev routes it to a provenance-processing queue.

Why typed decisions: Typed provenance states keep catalog workflows consistent without treating an inferred attribution as an established fact.

TAM: Est. 60k global dance archive contributors
SAM: Est. 8k structured heritage collection users
SOM: Target 60 pilot users

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Archive Provenance Gates" 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
An archivist pastes a choreography record and its source notes, and Jev routes it to a provenance-processing queue.
Discipline: Dance & Choreography (Dance heritage archiving).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: Typed provenance states keep catalog workflows consistent without treating an inferred attribution as an established fact.

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": <Movement record, attribution claims, permissions notes, and source metadata>, "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)
{
  "provenance_handler": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which provenance task should be handled first?",
    "criteria": {
      "attribution": "Creator, community, lineage, or source attribution needs clarification.",
      "permission": "Recorded usage restrictions or missing permission require review.",
      "versioning": "Sources disagree about the version or adaptation represented.",
      "catalog": "Supplied provenance fields are consistent and ready for routine catalog review."
    }
  },
  "permission_restriction": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "For permission routing, is a restriction explicitly recorded rather than merely unknown? Otherwise return false.",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "A source states a concrete restriction on access, teaching, recording, or reuse.",
      "false": "Permission is simply undocumented or the permission branch is inactive."
    }
  },
  "version_divergence": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "For versioning routing, grade the documented disagreement; otherwise select level 0.",
    "criteria": [
      "0: Versioning branch is inactive.",
      "1: Naming or date variation only.",
      "2: A localized movement or staging variation.",
      "3: Substantially different structure, authorship claims, or transmission history."
    ]
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0017. Feedback Practice Inbox

ID: dance-feedback-practice-inbox
Sub-discipline: Dancer development
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: A dancer pastes written teacher feedback and current practice goals, and Jev routes each note to a focused practice-review lane.

Why typed decisions: Typed lanes convert feedback into trackable practice categories without manufacturing exercises or medical guidance.

TAM: Est. 5m actively training dancers
SAM: Est. 400k digital practice-journal users
SOM: Target 600 pilot users

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Feedback Practice Inbox" 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
A dancer pastes written teacher feedback and current practice goals, and Jev routes each note to a focused practice-review lane.
Discipline: Dance & Choreography (Dancer development).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: Typed lanes convert feedback into trackable practice categories without manufacturing exercises or medical guidance.

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": <Teacher feedback, phrase context, and dancer-selected goals>, "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)
{
  "practice_lane": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which practice-review lane owns the feedback's main point?",
    "criteria": {
      "coordination": "Movement sequencing, articulation, or body-part coordination.",
      "musicality": "Rhythm, phrasing, accents, or timing.",
      "performance": "Focus, intention, expression, or audience communication.",
      "teacher_clarification": "Feedback is too ambiguous or context-dependent to act on reliably."
    }
  },
  "musical_reference": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "For musicality routing, does the feedback identify a usable count or musical landmark? Otherwise return false.",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "A specific count, accent, section, or timestamp is supplied.",
      "false": "No usable landmark is supplied or the musicality branch is inactive."
    }
  },
  "coordination_scope": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "For coordination routing, grade the described movement scope; otherwise select level 0.",
    "criteria": [
      "0: Coordination branch is inactive.",
      "1: One isolated action.",
      "2: A linked sequence or two coordinated actions.",
      "3: A full phrase with several interacting actions."
    ]
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0018. Site Dance Scout

ID: dance-site-dance-scout
Sub-discipline: Site-specific choreography
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: A choreographer pastes venue observations and a proposed movement scene, and Jev routes the scene to the relevant site-planning review.

Why typed decisions: Typed site-review queues organize production follow-up without presenting a text-only assessment as safety approval.

TAM: Est. 100k global site-performance creators
SAM: Est. 12k site-specific dance planning users
SOM: Target 80 pilot users

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Site Dance Scout" 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
A choreographer pastes venue observations and a proposed movement scene, and Jev routes the scene to the relevant site-planning review.
Discipline: Dance & Choreography (Site-specific choreography).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: Typed site-review queues organize production follow-up without presenting a text-only assessment as safety approval.

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": <Site observations, audience layout, scene description, and venue restrictions>, "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)
{
  "site_handler": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which site-planning issue should be reviewed first?",
    "criteria": {
      "surface": "Floor condition, terrain, or level changes affect the movement plan.",
      "audience_flow": "Audience position or movement interacts with performer pathways.",
      "permissions": "The scene conflicts with or lacks required venue permissions.",
      "environment": "Weather, daylight, ambient activity, or site conditions drive planning."
    }
  },
  "audience_path_overlap": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "For audience-flow routing, do proposed audience and performer routes explicitly overlap? Otherwise return false.",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The supplied plan places both on the same path or crossing.",
      "false": "Routes are separate, unspecified, or the audience-flow branch is inactive."
    }
  },
  "environment_dependency": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "For environment routing, grade dependence on variable site conditions; otherwise select level 0.",
    "criteria": [
      "0: Environment branch is inactive.",
      "1: Conditions affect atmosphere but not execution.",
      "2: One scene element depends on a variable condition.",
      "3: The scene's timing or execution depends on several variable conditions."
    ]
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0019. Workshop Proposal Palette

ID: dance-workshop-proposal-palette
Sub-discipline: Dance workshop programming
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: A festival programmer pastes a workshop proposal and programming brief, and Jev routes it to a fixed teaching-format lane.

Why typed decisions: Typed format lanes support balanced schedules and consistent review rather than relying on promotional wording.

TAM: Est. 120k global dance workshop programmers
SAM: Est. 16k proposal-based programming users
SOM: Target 100 pilot users

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Workshop Proposal Palette" 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
A festival programmer pastes a workshop proposal and programming brief, and Jev routes it to a fixed teaching-format lane.
Discipline: Dance & Choreography (Dance workshop programming).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: Typed format lanes support balanced schedules and consistent review rather than relying on promotional wording.

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": <Workshop proposal, intended participants, and festival programming brief>, "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)
{
  "workshop_lane": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which format describes the proposal's primary participant activity?",
    "criteria": {
      "technique": "Participants practice a defined movement vocabulary or method.",
      "composition": "Participants build, arrange, or edit movement material.",
      "repertory": "Participants learn material from an existing dance work.",
      "research": "Participants investigate an open movement question through exploration."
    }
  },
  "repertory_permission": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "For repertory routing, does the proposal explicitly document authorization to teach the named material? Otherwise return false.",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "A rights-holder authorization or applicable permission is explicitly supplied.",
      "false": "Authorization is unstated or the repertory branch is inactive."
    }
  },
  "composition_autonomy": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "For composition routing, grade participants' stated creative autonomy; otherwise select level 0.",
    "criteria": [
      "0: Composition branch is inactive.",
      "1: Participants arrange instructor-provided material.",
      "2: Participants create within tightly defined constraints.",
      "3: Participants choose material, structure, and compositional direction."
    ]
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0020. Notation Repair Queue

ID: dance-notation-repair-queue
Sub-discipline: Choreographic documentation
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: A rehearsal assistant pastes a count-sheet fragment and its notation legend, and Jev routes documentation problems to a specialized repair queue.

Why typed decisions: Typed defect categories enable targeted validation and human correction without silently rewriting choreography.

TAM: Est. 200k global dance documentation users
SAM: Est. 25k structured count-sheet users
SOM: Target 150 pilot users

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Notation Repair Queue" 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
A rehearsal assistant pastes a count-sheet fragment and its notation legend, and Jev routes documentation problems to a specialized repair queue.
Discipline: Dance & Choreography (Choreographic documentation).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: Typed defect categories enable targeted validation and human correction without silently rewriting choreography.

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": <Count-sheet text or JSON, notation legend, and adjacent phrase context>, "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)
{
  "repair_handler": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which documentation issue most strongly blocks reconstruction?",
    "criteria": {
      "timing_gap": "Counts, durations, or musical placement are missing or conflicting.",
      "spatial_gap": "Facing, level, location, or pathway is underspecified.",
      "performer_gap": "Role assignments or performer references are unclear.",
      "consistent": "The fragment is internally interpretable under the supplied legend."
    }
  },
  "timing_contradiction": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "For timing-gap routing, is there an explicit contradiction rather than only missing information? Otherwise return false.",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Two supplied count or duration statements cannot both hold.",
      "false": "Information is only missing or the timing-gap branch is inactive."
    }
  },
  "spatial_reconstruction": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "For spatial-gap routing, grade how much spatial reconstruction is blocked; otherwise select level 0.",
    "criteria": [
      "0: Spatial-gap branch is inactive.",
      "1: One facing or level is unclear.",
      "2: A pathway or formation cannot be reconstructed.",
      "3: Most spatial relationships in the fragment are indeterminate."
    ]
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0021. Phrase Continuity Gate

ID: dance-phrase-continuity-gate
Sub-discipline: Contemporary choreography
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: The choreographer pastes adjacent phrase notes, and Jev checks whether the ending position supports the next entrance and whether the momentum carries through.

Why typed decisions: Typed probabilities let code mark a transition ready only when position_match >= 0.8 AND momentum_match >= 0.8, rather than interpreting prose.

TAM: Est. 250k global choreography makers
SAM: Est. 35k using digital phrase notes
SOM: Target 350 paying users in 24 months

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Phrase Continuity 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
The choreographer pastes adjacent phrase notes, and Jev checks whether the ending position supports the next entrance and whether the momentum carries through.
Discipline: Dance & Choreography (Contemporary choreography).
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: Typed probabilities let code mark a transition ready only when position_match >= 0.8 AND momentum_match >= 0.8, rather than interpreting prose.

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": <JSON containing adjacent phrase descriptions, facings, weight placements, and momentum 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)
{
  "position_match": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the first phrase end in a position compatible with the second phrase's opening?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Facing, supporting foot, and body placement support the next opening without an unlisted reset.",
      "false": "The next opening requires a reset or essential position information is missing."
    }
  },
  "momentum_match": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the described momentum carry into the next phrase?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Direction and energy support the next action or an explicit transition resolves the change.",
      "false": "Momentum conflicts with the next action or the transition is unspecified."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0022. Audition Fit Grid

ID: dance-audition-fit-grid
Sub-discipline: Dance casting
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: The casting director pastes anonymized audition observations and role requirements, and Jev checks movement-language fit and rehearsal availability.

Why typed decisions: Typed probabilities support a consistent shortlist rule of style_fit >= 0.8 AND availability_fit >= 0.8 without generating persuasive candidate narratives.

TAM: Est. 60k dance casting leads worldwide
SAM: Est. 10k running documented auditions
SOM: Target 150 paying teams in 24 months

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Audition Fit Grid" 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
The casting director pastes anonymized audition observations and role requirements, and Jev checks movement-language fit and rehearsal availability.
Discipline: Dance & Choreography (Dance casting).
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: Typed probabilities support a consistent shortlist rule of style_fit >= 0.8 AND availability_fit >= 0.8 without generating persuasive candidate narratives.

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": <Anonymized candidate observations, role movement requirements, and rehearsal calendars>, "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)
{
  "style_fit": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Do the recorded observations demonstrate the role's required movement vocabulary?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Observed performance directly supports the listed movement requirements.",
      "false": "A requirement is unmet or supporting observation is absent."
    }
  },
  "availability_fit": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the candidate's stated availability cover all mandatory calls?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "All mandatory calls are covered, including explicitly permitted alternatives.",
      "false": "A mandatory call conflicts or availability is unresolved."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0023. Class Progression Check

ID: dance-class-progression-check
Sub-discipline: Dance pedagogy
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: The teacher pastes a lesson sequence and class profile, and Jev checks whether new material has prerequisites and whether the plan includes a simpler participation route.

Why typed decisions: Typed probabilities unlock a lesson-ready badge only when prerequisites_covered >= 0.8 AND simpler_route >= 0.8, keeping approval separate from generated advice.

TAM: Est. 500k dance teachers worldwide
SAM: Est. 80k maintaining digital lesson plans
SOM: Target 800 paying teachers in 24 months

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Class Progression Check" 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
The teacher pastes a lesson sequence and class profile, and Jev checks whether new material has prerequisites and whether the plan includes a simpler participation route.
Discipline: Dance & Choreography (Dance pedagogy).
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: Typed probabilities unlock a lesson-ready badge only when prerequisites_covered >= 0.8 AND simpler_route >= 0.8, keeping approval separate from generated advice.

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": <Lesson activities, prerequisite notes, class experience, and planned adaptations>, "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)
{
  "prerequisites_covered": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Are the prerequisites for each new movement introduced or established for this class?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Required foundations appear earlier in the lesson or in the class's documented experience.",
      "false": "A new movement depends on an unestablished foundation."
    }
  },
  "simpler_route": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is there an explicitly simpler route for the lesson's demanding material?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The plan includes usable alternatives that preserve the stated learning objective.",
      "false": "Alternatives are absent or change the objective beyond recognition."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0024. Formation Crossing Radar

ID: dance-formation-crossing-radar
Sub-discipline: Ensemble staging
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: The choreographer pastes formation transitions with timed pathway notes, and Jev checks for converging dancer routes and explicit crossing coordination.

Why typed decisions: Typed probabilities flag a crossing for rehearsal when converging_routes >= 0.7 AND coordinated_crossing < 0.8, without presenting prose as a safety guarantee.

TAM: Est. 180k ensemble choreography leads
SAM: Est. 25k using digital staging plans
SOM: Target 300 paying teams in 24 months

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Formation Crossing Radar" 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
The choreographer pastes formation transitions with timed pathway notes, and Jev checks for converging dancer routes and explicit crossing coordination.
Discipline: Dance & Choreography (Ensemble staging).
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: Typed probabilities flag a crossing for rehearsal when converging_routes >= 0.7 AND coordinated_crossing < 0.8, without presenting prose as a safety guarantee.

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": <Dancer IDs, formation coordinates, count ranges, and qualitative pathway descriptions>, "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)
{
  "converging_routes": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Do any described routes plausibly converge during overlapping counts?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Two or more dancers appear to enter the same local area at overlapping times.",
      "false": "The supplied pathways are clearly separated in space or time."
    }
  },
  "coordinated_crossing": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the plan explicitly coordinate potentially converging routes?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Passing order, count offsets, or distinct lanes resolve each potential convergence.",
      "false": "Coordination is missing or ambiguous for at least one potential convergence."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0025. Motif Return Tracker

ID: dance-motif-return-tracker
Sub-discipline: Composition analysis
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: The choreographer pastes an anchor motif and later phrase notes, and Jev checks whether the motif remains recognizable and has undergone a meaningful transformation.

Why typed decisions: Typed probabilities classify a developed return when motif_recognizable >= 0.8 AND meaningful_change >= 0.8, making motif maps computable rather than descriptive.

TAM: Est. 250k choreography makers worldwide
SAM: Est. 20k documenting composition structure
SOM: Target 250 paying users in 24 months

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Motif Return Tracker" 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
The choreographer pastes an anchor motif and later phrase notes, and Jev checks whether the motif remains recognizable and has undergone a meaningful transformation.
Discipline: Dance & Choreography (Composition analysis).
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: Typed probabilities classify a developed return when motif_recognizable >= 0.8 AND meaningful_change >= 0.8, making motif maps computable rather than descriptive.

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": <Anchor motif attributes and descriptions of candidate returning phrases>, "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)
{
  "motif_recognizable": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the candidate retain identifying features of the anchor motif?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Distinctive rhythm, shape, initiation, or spatial relationships link the phrases.",
      "false": "Only generic movement similarities exist or the identifying features disappear."
    }
  },
  "meaningful_change": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the candidate materially transform the motif rather than merely repeat it?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "A clear change in scale, timing, orientation, body distribution, or relationship develops the motif.",
      "false": "Differences are incidental or the motif is repeated unchanged."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0026. Music Edit Lock

ID: dance-music-edit-lock
Sub-discipline: Musical choreography
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: The choreographer pastes a proposed music edit map and dance cue sheet, and Jev checks whether movement anchors survive and whether phrasing remains coherent.

Why typed decisions: Typed probabilities permit edit approval only when anchors_preserved >= 0.85 AND phrasing_coherent >= 0.8, avoiding vague prose about musical suitability.

TAM: Est. 300k music-based choreography makers
SAM: Est. 45k editing tracks with cue sheets
SOM: Target 500 paying users in 24 months

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Music Edit Lock" 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
The choreographer pastes a proposed music edit map and dance cue sheet, and Jev checks whether movement anchors survive and whether phrasing remains coherent.
Discipline: Dance & Choreography (Musical choreography).
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: Typed probabilities permit edit approval only when anchors_preserved >= 0.85 AND phrasing_coherent >= 0.8, avoiding vague prose about musical suitability.

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": <Before-and-after bar maps, musical section annotations, and choreography cue dependencies>, "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)
{
  "anchors_preserved": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the edit preserve the musical events required by the choreography?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Required accents, section entries, and pauses remain or have explicit replacement mappings.",
      "false": "A required event is removed or its replacement is unclear."
    }
  },
  "phrasing_coherent": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Do the annotated movement phrases still align with the edited musical structure?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Phrase starts, resolutions, and intentional counterpoints have coherent placements.",
      "false": "The edit creates unexplained truncations or unresolved phrase boundaries."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0027. Partner Boundary Gate

ID: dance-partner-boundary-gate
Sub-discipline: Partner choreography
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: The movement director pastes a partnering sequence and participants' current boundary forms, and Jev checks explicit contact permission and a documented pause procedure.

Why typed decisions: Typed probabilities release a sequence for human review only when contact_permitted >= 0.95 AND pause_agreed >= 0.95; all other cases remain held rather than inferred from reassuring text.

TAM: Est. 100k partnering and movement leads
SAM: Est. 15k using structured boundary records
SOM: Target 200 paying teams in 24 months

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Partner Boundary 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
The movement director pastes a partnering sequence and participants' current boundary forms, and Jev checks explicit contact permission and a documented pause procedure.
Discipline: Dance & Choreography (Partner choreography).
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: Typed probabilities release a sequence for human review only when contact_permitted >= 0.95 AND pause_agreed >= 0.95; all other cases remain held rather than inferred from reassuring text.

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": <Partnering actions, current contact permissions, and agreed rehearsal pause procedures>, "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)
{
  "contact_permitted": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is every described contact explicitly covered by each relevant participant's current permissions?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "All contact locations and actions are covered by affirmative, current permissions.",
      "false": "Any permission is absent, ambiguous, withdrawn, or outside the stated scope."
    }
  },
  "pause_agreed": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is there a mutually acknowledged nonverbal pause or stop procedure for this sequence?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "A clear gesture or signal and the required response are documented for all participants.",
      "false": "The procedure or participant acknowledgment is missing."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0028. Costume Motion Check

ID: dance-costume-motion-check
Sub-discipline: Dance costume coordination
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: The costume coordinator pastes garment specifications and choreography notes, and Jev checks for movement interference and whether a relevant costume test has been recorded.

Why typed decisions: Typed probabilities queue a fitting test when movement_conflict >= 0.7 AND tested_resolution < 0.85, producing actionable flags instead of speculative costume advice.

TAM: Est. 90k dance production coordinators
SAM: Est. 12k managing costume test records
SOM: Target 180 paying teams in 24 months

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Costume Motion Check" 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
The costume coordinator pastes garment specifications and choreography notes, and Jev checks for movement interference and whether a relevant costume test has been recorded.
Discipline: Dance & Choreography (Dance costume coordination).
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: Typed probabilities queue a fitting test when movement_conflict >= 0.7 AND tested_resolution < 0.85, producing actionable flags instead of speculative costume advice.

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": <Garment construction notes, movement demands, and documented fitting-test outcomes>, "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)
{
  "movement_conflict": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Could a documented garment feature interfere with a required movement or partner interaction?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Length, rigidity, attachments, or loose fabric plausibly conflicts with a specified action.",
      "false": "No described feature conflicts with the specified movement demands."
    }
  },
  "tested_resolution": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Has the relevant garment-and-movement combination been tested with a documented resolution?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "A matching test records successful execution or a verified modification.",
      "false": "Testing is absent, unrelated, or leaves the issue unresolved."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0029. Prop Handoff Ledger

ID: dance-prop-handoff-ledger
Sub-discipline: Prop choreography
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: The choreographer pastes prop actions and dancer pathways, and Jev checks whether every handoff has an available receiver and whether each later use has a traceable prop source.

Why typed decisions: Typed probabilities pass a prop track only when receivers_ready >= 0.85 AND custody_complete >= 0.85, making missing dependencies visible without generated explanations.

TAM: Est. 120k dance and movement staging leads
SAM: Est. 15k tracking prop-heavy productions
SOM: Target 180 paying users in 24 months

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Prop Handoff Ledger" 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
The choreographer pastes prop actions and dancer pathways, and Jev checks whether every handoff has an available receiver and whether each later use has a traceable prop source.
Discipline: Dance & Choreography (Prop choreography).
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: Typed probabilities pass a prop track only when receivers_ready >= 0.85 AND custody_complete >= 0.85, making missing dependencies visible without generated explanations.

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": <Count-indexed prop actions, dancer locations, hand availability, and preset inventory>, "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)
{
  "receivers_ready": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is each named receiver positioned and otherwise available for the described handoff?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Location, timing, and occupied-hand notes support every listed receipt.",
      "false": "A receiver is elsewhere, occupied, or insufficiently specified."
    }
  },
  "custody_complete": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Can every prop use be traced through a coherent chain of presets, pickups, and transfers?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Every use has an identifiable preceding holder or preset location.",
      "false": "A prop appears without a source or has contradictory simultaneous custody."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0030. Rehearsal Recall Queue

ID: dance-rehearsal-recall-queue
Sub-discipline: Rehearsal management
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: The rehearsal director pastes session notes and upcoming performance dependencies, and Jev checks which phrases remain unsettled and which are needed at the next call.

Why typed decisions: Typed probabilities place a phrase in the priority queue when unresolved_material >= 0.75 AND next_call_dependency >= 0.8, replacing subjective prose summaries with sortable flags.

TAM: Est. 200k rehearsal leaders worldwide
SAM: Est. 35k keeping digital session notes
SOM: Target 450 paying users in 24 months

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Rehearsal Recall Queue" 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
The rehearsal director pastes session notes and upcoming performance dependencies, and Jev checks which phrases remain unsettled and which are needed at the next call.
Discipline: Dance & Choreography (Rehearsal management).
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: Typed probabilities place a phrase in the priority queue when unresolved_material >= 0.75 AND next_call_dependency >= 0.8, replacing subjective prose summaries with sortable flags.

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": <Phrase-level rehearsal notes, correction status, and next-call objectives>, "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)
{
  "unresolved_material": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Do the latest notes leave a substantive choreographic issue unresolved?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Timing, spacing, sequence, or interpretation still requires an explicit decision or repeat.",
      "false": "The latest notes clearly close the issue or record no substantive open issue."
    }
  },
  "next_call_dependency": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does an objective of the next call depend on this phrase being settled?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The phrase feeds an upcoming run, transition, partner task, or staging decision.",
      "false": "Next-call objectives do not require this phrase."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0031. Understudy Coverage Board

ID: dance-understudy-coverage-board
Sub-discipline: Dance company operations
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: The rehearsal director pastes role demands and understudy rehearsal logs, and Jev checks phrase coverage and role-specific interaction practice.

Why typed decisions: Typed probabilities mark documented coverage complete only when phrases_covered >= 0.85 AND interactions_practiced >= 0.85, avoiding an unsupported narrative claim of performance readiness.

TAM: Est. 30k dance companies and ensembles
SAM: Est. 6k with formal understudy systems
SOM: Target 90 paying organizations in 24 months

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Understudy Coverage Board" 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
The rehearsal director pastes role demands and understudy rehearsal logs, and Jev checks phrase coverage and role-specific interaction practice.
Discipline: Dance & Choreography (Dance company operations).
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: Typed probabilities mark documented coverage complete only when phrases_covered >= 0.85 AND interactions_practiced >= 0.85, avoiding an unsupported narrative claim of performance readiness.

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": <Role phrase inventory, interaction requirements, and dated understudy rehearsal records>, "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)
{
  "phrases_covered": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Do the logs document rehearsal of every required phrase in this role?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "All required phrases have matching completed rehearsal entries.",
      "false": "At least one phrase is missing, only observed, or ambiguously logged."
    }
  },
  "interactions_practiced": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Do the logs cover this role's required partnering and ensemble interactions?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Required interactions were rehearsed with the relevant partners or approved substitutes.",
      "false": "Interaction practice is missing or only solo marking is recorded."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0032. Access Route Matcher

ID: dance-access-route-matcher
Sub-discipline: Inclusive dance teaching
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: The teacher pastes an exercise, participant-stated access preferences, and an existing adaptation, and Jev checks access compatibility and preservation of the learning goal.

Why typed decisions: Typed probabilities surface an adaptation when access_match >= 0.85 AND goal_preserved >= 0.8, matching stated needs without inventing medical judgments or instructional prose.

TAM: Est. 500k dance teachers worldwide
SAM: Est. 40k planning documented access adaptations
SOM: Target 500 paying teachers in 24 months

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Access Route Matcher" 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
The teacher pastes an exercise, participant-stated access preferences, and an existing adaptation, and Jev checks access compatibility and preservation of the learning goal.
Discipline: Dance & Choreography (Inclusive dance teaching).
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: Typed probabilities surface an adaptation when access_match >= 0.85 AND goal_preserved >= 0.8, matching stated needs without inventing medical judgments or instructional prose.

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": <Exercise objective, participant-stated access preferences, and candidate adaptation details>, "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)
{
  "access_match": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the adaptation honor all supplied access preferences without assuming unstated capabilities?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Its required actions and communication modes fit the explicitly stated preferences.",
      "false": "It conflicts with a preference or depends on an unstated capability."
    }
  },
  "goal_preserved": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the adaptation retain the exercise's stated learning objective?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The same rhythm, spatial, expressive, or relational objective remains practicable.",
      "false": "The adaptation removes the essential learning objective."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0033. Improvisation Constraint Lab

ID: dance-improvisation-constraint-lab
Sub-discipline: Improvisational composition
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: The facilitator pastes an improvisation score and session goals, and Jev checks whether its constraints can coexist and whether dancers retain meaningful choices.

Why typed decisions: Typed probabilities accept a score when constraints_compatible >= 0.8 AND agency_remaining >= 0.8, enabling a usable filter rather than generating new prompts.

TAM: Est. 160k improvisation teachers and makers
SAM: Est. 18k maintaining written score libraries
SOM: Target 250 paying users in 24 months

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Improvisation Constraint Lab" 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
The facilitator pastes an improvisation score and session goals, and Jev checks whether its constraints can coexist and whether dancers retain meaningful choices.
Discipline: Dance & Choreography (Improvisational composition).
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: Typed probabilities accept a score when constraints_compatible >= 0.8 AND agency_remaining >= 0.8, enabling a usable filter rather than generating new prompts.

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": <Improvisation rules, spatial limits, participant roles, and session objectives>, "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)
{
  "constraints_compatible": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Can a dancer satisfy all stated constraints at the same time?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The rules admit at least one plausible movement approach without contradicting each other.",
      "false": "The rules conflict or essential terms prevent a coherent interpretation."
    }
  },
  "agency_remaining": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Do the constraints leave meaningful improvisational decisions to the dancer?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Dancers can vary significant timing, pathway, shape, response, or relationship choices.",
      "false": "The score effectively fixes all meaningful decisions or blocks action."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0034. Cultural Context Gate

ID: dance-cultural-context-gate
Sub-discipline: Repertoire stewardship
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: The curator pastes a dance workshop listing and source documentation, and Jev checks attribution coverage and whether documented use restrictions conflict with the planned presentation.

Why typed decisions: Typed probabilities route a listing to review when attribution_complete < 0.85 OR restriction_conflict >= 0.6, enforcing documented checks rather than generating claims of cultural authorization.

TAM: Est. 180k dance educators and programmers
SAM: Est. 20k managing source-sensitive repertoire
SOM: Target 200 paying teams in 24 months

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Cultural Context 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
The curator pastes a dance workshop listing and source documentation, and Jev checks attribution coverage and whether documented use restrictions conflict with the planned presentation.
Discipline: Dance & Choreography (Repertoire stewardship).
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: Typed probabilities route a listing to review when attribution_complete < 0.85 OR restriction_conflict >= 0.6, enforcing documented checks rather than generating claims of cultural authorization.

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": <Workshop listing, source and contributor records, and documented presentation permissions or restrictions>, "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)
{
  "attribution_complete": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the listing include the attribution required by the supplied source records?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Named creators, traditions, contributors, and required contextual labels are accurately represented.",
      "false": "Required attribution is missing, misleading, or unsupported by the records."
    }
  },
  "restriction_conflict": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the planned presentation conflict with any supplied use restriction?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The plan contradicts a documented limit on teaching, staging, recording, or commercial use.",
      "false": "No conflict appears within the supplied restrictions; this does not establish broader permission."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0035. Camera Phrase Keeper

ID: dance-camera-phrase-keeper
Sub-discipline: Screendance direction
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: The movement director pastes shot descriptions and phrase annotations, and Jev checks whether framing preserves essential movement information and cuts preserve choreographic relationships.

Why typed decisions: Typed probabilities approve a shot sequence only when movement_visible >= 0.85 AND relationships_preserved >= 0.8, creating edit gates rather than subjective film commentary.

TAM: Est. 120k screendance and movement creators
SAM: Est. 18k using annotated shot plans
SOM: Target 250 paying users in 24 months

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Camera Phrase Keeper" 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
The movement director pastes shot descriptions and phrase annotations, and Jev checks whether framing preserves essential movement information and cuts preserve choreographic relationships.
Discipline: Dance & Choreography (Screendance direction).
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: Typed probabilities approve a shot sequence only when movement_visible >= 0.85 AND relationships_preserved >= 0.8, creating edit gates rather than subjective film commentary.

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": <Shot framing and cut annotations paired with phrase landmarks and dancer relationships>, "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)
{
  "movement_visible": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Will the described framing show the body regions and space essential to understanding the phrase?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Critical gestures, footwork, trajectories, and contact points remain visible when needed.",
      "false": "The framing hides a movement feature identified as essential."
    }
  },
  "relationships_preserved": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Do the proposed cuts retain the phrase's important temporal and spatial relationships?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Cause and response, unison, canon, and spatial connections remain legible as specified.",
      "false": "A cut obscures or contradicts an essential choreographic relationship."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0036. Site Adaptation Gate

ID: dance-site-adaptation-gate
Sub-discipline: Site-specific dance
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: The choreographer pastes a venue survey and a touring phrase plan, and Jev checks spatial compatibility and preservation of the work's essential site relationships.

Why typed decisions: Typed probabilities mark an adaptation conceptually compatible when space_compatible >= 0.85 AND relationship_preserved >= 0.8, without mistaking generated assurances for a venue safety assessment.

TAM: Est. 70k site-specific performance makers
SAM: Est. 9k adapting works across venues
SOM: Target 120 paying teams in 24 months

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Site Adaptation 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
The choreographer pastes a venue survey and a touring phrase plan, and Jev checks spatial compatibility and preservation of the work's essential site relationships.
Discipline: Dance & Choreography (Site-specific dance).
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: Typed probabilities mark an adaptation conceptually compatible when space_compatible >= 0.85 AND relationship_preserved >= 0.8, without mistaking generated assurances for a venue safety assessment.

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": <Venue dimensions and access notes, phrase spatial demands, and essential audience-site relationships>, "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)
{
  "space_compatible": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Do the supplied venue characteristics support the phrase's stated spatial demands?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Required pathways, clearances, entrances, and audience separations fit the documented site.",
      "false": "A requirement conflicts with the site or relevant information is missing."
    }
  },
  "relationship_preserved": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the adaptation preserve the work's specified relationship to its audience and site?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Essential proximity, orientation, discovery, or architectural interaction remains intact.",
      "false": "The adaptation removes or reverses a relationship marked essential."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0037. Cue Anchor Audit

ID: dance-cue-anchor-audit
Sub-discipline: Dance stage management
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: The stage manager pastes lighting and projection cues with movement notes, and Jev checks whether each cue has an observable anchor and a uniquely identifiable occurrence.

Why typed decisions: Typed probabilities lock a cue only when anchor_observable >= 0.85 AND occurrence_unique >= 0.85, giving the cue system reliable booleans instead of interpretive descriptions.

TAM: Est. 80k dance production and stage managers
SAM: Est. 12k maintaining digital movement cues
SOM: Target 180 paying users in 24 months

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Cue Anchor Audit" 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
The stage manager pastes lighting and projection cues with movement notes, and Jev checks whether each cue has an observable anchor and a uniquely identifiable occurrence.
Discipline: Dance & Choreography (Dance stage management).
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: Typed probabilities lock a cue only when anchor_observable >= 0.85 AND occurrence_unique >= 0.85, giving the cue system reliable booleans instead of interpretive descriptions.

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": <Cue triggers, movement sequence annotations, operator sightlines, and repeated motif locations>, "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)
{
  "anchor_observable": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Can the operator observe the stated movement trigger from the documented operating position?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The trigger is a visible event within the supplied sightline conditions.",
      "false": "It depends on internal sensation, hidden action, or an unspecified sightline."
    }
  },
  "occurrence_unique": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the cue description distinguish its intended occurrence from similar movement events?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Sequence context, dancer identity, location, or count uniquely identifies the event.",
      "false": "Repeated or similar events could reasonably trigger the same cue description."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0038. Competition Entry Check

ID: dance-competition-entry-check
Sub-discipline: Dance competition administration
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: The studio director pastes a routine synopsis and competition rules, and Jev checks category fit and whether the described content triggers a listed restriction.

Why typed decisions: Typed probabilities clear an entry only when category_fit >= 0.85 AND restricted_content < 0.15, turning rule interpretation into a reviewable gate rather than generated reassurance.

TAM: Est. 100k competition dance studios worldwide
SAM: Est. 20k handling multi-event entries
SOM: Target 250 paying studios in 24 months

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Competition Entry Check" 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
The studio director pastes a routine synopsis and competition rules, and Jev checks category fit and whether the described content triggers a listed restriction.
Discipline: Dance & Choreography (Dance competition administration).
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: Typed probabilities clear an entry only when category_fit >= 0.85 AND restricted_content < 0.15, turning rule interpretation into a reviewable gate rather than generated reassurance.

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": <Routine movement synopsis, selected category, and organizer-provided category and content rules>, "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)
{
  "category_fit": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the routine's described movement content satisfy the selected category's definition?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Its dominant vocabulary and required features match the supplied category rules.",
      "false": "It conflicts with the definition or lacks evidence for a required feature."
    }
  },
  "restricted_content": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the synopsis describe any action or element prohibited by the supplied rules?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "A described lift, prop, movement element, or staging feature matches an explicit prohibition.",
      "false": "No described element matches an explicit prohibition in the supplied rules."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0039. Notation Ambiguity Lens

ID: dance-notation-ambiguity-lens
Sub-discipline: Choreographic documentation
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: The choreographer pastes a phrase record and notation glossary, and Jev checks whether movement references resolve and whether timing relationships are explicit.

Why typed decisions: Typed probabilities mark a record reconstruction-ready only when references_resolved >= 0.85 AND timing_explicit >= 0.85, making archive quality measurable without rewriting the choreography.

TAM: Est. 200k choreography documenters and educators
SAM: Est. 22k maintaining reusable notation archives
SOM: Target 250 paying users in 24 months

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Notation Ambiguity Lens" 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
The choreographer pastes a phrase record and notation glossary, and Jev checks whether movement references resolve and whether timing relationships are explicit.
Discipline: Dance & Choreography (Choreographic documentation).
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: Typed probabilities mark a record reconstruction-ready only when references_resolved >= 0.85 AND timing_explicit >= 0.85, making archive quality measurable without rewriting the choreography.

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": <Phrase notation, dancer and space identifiers, local glossary, and timing conventions>, "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)
{
  "references_resolved": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Can every movement, dancer, direction, and spatial reference be resolved using the supplied record and glossary?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Terms and references have clear meanings without undocumented local knowledge.",
      "false": "A term, pronoun, facing, or location has multiple plausible meanings or no definition."
    }
  },
  "timing_explicit": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Are ordering, overlap, duration, and intentional timing freedom specified sufficiently to reconstruct the phrase?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The record distinguishes fixed timing from deliberate flexibility and defines key relationships.",
      "false": "Important timing relationships are absent or contradictory."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0040. Movement Intent Compass

ID: dance-movement-intent-compass
Sub-discipline: Theatrical movement direction
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: The movement director pastes a scene's dramatic objective and proposed movement beats, and Jev checks whether the movement supports the objective and respects the production's established physical vocabulary.

Why typed decisions: Typed probabilities mark a beat aligned when objective_supported >= 0.8 AND vocabulary_consistent >= 0.8, providing comparable creative checks without generating replacement staging.

TAM: Est. 150k movement directors and theatre makers
SAM: Est. 20k using written movement briefs
SOM: Target 250 paying users in 24 months

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Movement Intent Compass" 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
The movement director pastes a scene's dramatic objective and proposed movement beats, and Jev checks whether the movement supports the objective and respects the production's established physical vocabulary.
Discipline: Dance & Choreography (Theatrical movement direction).
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: Typed probabilities mark a beat aligned when objective_supported >= 0.8 AND vocabulary_consistent >= 0.8, providing comparable creative checks without generating replacement staging.

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": <Scene objective, character relationships, proposed movement beats, and production movement conventions>, "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)
{
  "objective_supported": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Do the movement beats support the scene's stated dramatic objective?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Actions make the intended pursuit, resistance, relationship, or change legible.",
      "false": "Actions undermine the objective or have no supported relationship to it."
    }
  },
  "vocabulary_consistent": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Do the beats follow the production's physical vocabulary or a documented intentional exception?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Movement qualities and conventions match the vocabulary or an explicit motivated departure.",
      "false": "The beats introduce an unexplained contradiction in the established physical language."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0041. Audition Fit Board

ID: dance-audition-fit-board
Sub-discipline: Dance casting
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste a role brief and anonymised audition notes, and Jev scores each dancer's demonstrated movement fit, interpretive fit and ensemble responsiveness for ranking.

Why typed decisions: Typed scores support an inspectable shortlist using score/(levels-1) and user-controlled weights in code rather than persuasive prose.

TAM: Illustrative: 300k dance casting users globally
SAM: Illustrative: 30k digitised audition users
SOM: Illustrative: 300 early paid users

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Audition Fit Board" 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 role brief and anonymised audition notes, and Jev scores each dancer's demonstrated movement fit, interpretive fit and ensemble responsiveness for ranking.
Discipline: Dance & Choreography (Dance casting).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: Typed scores support an inspectable shortlist using score/(levels-1) and user-controlled weights in code rather than persuasive prose.

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": <Role requirements and anonymised candidate audition observations>, "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)
{
  "movement_fit": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How closely does this candidate's observed movement match the role requirements?",
    "criteria": [
      "Little demonstrated match",
      "Partial demonstrated match",
      "Strong demonstrated match"
    ]
  },
  "interpretive_fit": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How closely does the observed interpretation match the role's expressive brief?",
    "criteria": [
      "Conflicting interpretation",
      "Some expressive alignment",
      "Strong expressive alignment"
    ]
  },
  "ensemble_response": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How well do the documented exercises demonstrate responsiveness to other performers?",
    "criteria": [
      "Limited responsiveness",
      "Inconsistent responsiveness",
      "Consistent responsiveness"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0042. Phrase Transition Lab

ID: dance-phrase-transition-lab
Sub-discipline: Choreographic sequencing
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste two movement phrases and candidate bridges, and Jev scores each bridge's continuity, rhythmic fit and dramatic purpose.

Why typed decisions: Typed scores let code rank bridges with score/(levels-1) and user-controlled weights without inventing choreography.

TAM: Illustrative: 500k choreographers globally
SAM: Illustrative: 50k text-planning choreographers
SOM: Illustrative: 500 early paid users

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Phrase Transition Lab" 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 two movement phrases and candidate bridges, and Jev scores each bridge's continuity, rhythmic fit and dramatic purpose.
Discipline: Dance & Choreography (Choreographic sequencing).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: Typed scores let code rank bridges with score/(levels-1) and user-controlled weights without inventing choreography.

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": <Adjacent phrase descriptions, musical counts and candidate bridges>, "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)
{
  "movement_continuity": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How coherently does this bridge connect the ending and starting movement states?",
    "criteria": [
      "Abrupt or incompatible",
      "Workable with adjustment",
      "Coherent connection"
    ]
  },
  "rhythmic_fit": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How well does the bridge fit the supplied counts and accents?",
    "criteria": [
      "Conflicts with timing",
      "Fits some timing constraints",
      "Fits timing and accents"
    ]
  },
  "dramatic_purpose": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How well does the bridge support the stated dramatic progression?",
    "criteria": [
      "Undermines progression",
      "Neutral contribution",
      "Clearly supports progression"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0043. Class Arc Curator

ID: dance-class-arc-curator
Sub-discipline: Dance teaching
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste a class objective, learner prerequisites and candidate exercises, and Jev scores each exercise's objective alignment, prerequisite fit and progression value.

Why typed decisions: Typed scores become a reproducible exercise ranking through score/(levels-1) and user-controlled weights in code.

TAM: Illustrative: 1m dance teachers globally
SAM: Illustrative: 100k digitally planning teachers
SOM: Illustrative: 1k early paid users

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Class Arc Curator" 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 class objective, learner prerequisites and candidate exercises, and Jev scores each exercise's objective alignment, prerequisite fit and progression value.
Discipline: Dance & Choreography (Dance teaching).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: Typed scores become a reproducible exercise ranking through score/(levels-1) and user-controlled weights in code.

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": <Class objective, documented learner prerequisites and exercise descriptions>, "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)
{
  "objective_alignment": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How directly does this exercise practise the stated learning objective?",
    "criteria": [
      "Little relevance",
      "Indirect practice",
      "Direct targeted practice"
    ]
  },
  "prerequisite_fit": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How well do the exercise demands match the documented prerequisites?",
    "criteria": [
      "Major prerequisite gaps",
      "Some gaps or underchallenge",
      "Appropriate prerequisite match"
    ]
  },
  "progression_value": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How usefully does this exercise bridge the preceding and following class activities?",
    "criteria": [
      "Breaks progression",
      "Provides limited connection",
      "Provides a clear progression step"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0044. Rehearsal Priority Deck

ID: dance-rehearsal-priority-deck
Sub-discipline: Rehearsal direction
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste rehearsal notes, performance goals and candidate passages, and Jev scores each passage's audience impact, unresolvedness and session suitability.

Why typed decisions: Typed scores make rehearsal priorities adjustable using score/(levels-1) and user-controlled weights in code rather than a generated agenda.

TAM: Illustrative: 400k rehearsal leaders globally
SAM: Illustrative: 40k shared-note rehearsal teams
SOM: Illustrative: 400 early paid users

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Rehearsal Priority Deck" 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 rehearsal notes, performance goals and candidate passages, and Jev scores each passage's audience impact, unresolvedness and session suitability.
Discipline: Dance & Choreography (Rehearsal direction).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: Typed scores make rehearsal priorities adjustable using score/(levels-1) and user-controlled weights in code rather than a generated agenda.

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": <Passage notes, production goals and next-session constraints>, "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)
{
  "audience_impact": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How consequential is improving this passage to the stated audience experience?",
    "criteria": [
      "Minor consequence",
      "Meaningful local consequence",
      "Central to intended experience"
    ]
  },
  "unresolvedness": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How unresolved is this passage according to the supplied notes?",
    "criteria": [
      "Mostly resolved",
      "Some unresolved elements",
      "Major unresolved elements"
    ]
  },
  "session_suitability": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How well can this passage's documented issues be addressed with the next session's people and resources?",
    "criteria": [
      "Poor session fit",
      "Partially addressable",
      "Strong session fit"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0045. Formation Sightline Sorter

ID: dance-formation-sightline-sorter
Sub-discipline: Ensemble staging
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste annotated stage-layout JSON and candidate formations, and Jev scores each formation's focal clarity, motif coherence and use of performance space.

Why typed decisions: Typed scores expose staging tradeoffs through score/(levels-1) and user-controlled weights in code without treating prose as layout data.

TAM: Illustrative: 350k ensemble staging users globally
SAM: Illustrative: 35k digital stage planners
SOM: Illustrative: 350 early paid users

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Formation Sightline Sorter" 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 annotated stage-layout JSON and candidate formations, and Jev scores each formation's focal clarity, motif coherence and use of performance space.
Discipline: Dance & Choreography (Ensemble staging).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: Typed scores expose staging tradeoffs through score/(levels-1) and user-controlled weights in code without treating prose as layout data.

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": <Stage zones, audience orientation, focal intent and candidate formation JSON>, "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)
{
  "focal_clarity": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How clearly does the formation direct attention to the intended focal action?",
    "criteria": [
      "Competing or obscured focus",
      "Partly legible focus",
      "Clearly legible focus"
    ]
  },
  "motif_coherence": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How strongly does the formation express the stated spatial motif?",
    "criteria": [
      "Contradicts motif",
      "Partially expresses motif",
      "Clearly expresses motif"
    ]
  },
  "space_use": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How purposefully does the formation use the available stage zones?",
    "criteria": [
      "Unmotivated distribution",
      "Some purposeful distribution",
      "Consistently purposeful distribution"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0046. Music Phrase Matcher

ID: dance-music-phrase-matcher
Sub-discipline: Dance musicality
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste annotated music sections and a movement phrase, and Jev scores each section's accent compatibility, energy alignment and structural fit.

Why typed decisions: Typed judgements rank supplied annotations using score/(levels-1) and user-controlled weights in code without generating music or text.

TAM: Illustrative: 800k dance music-selection users globally
SAM: Illustrative: 60k annotation-based planners
SOM: Illustrative: 600 early paid users

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Music Phrase Matcher" 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 annotated music sections and a movement phrase, and Jev scores each section's accent compatibility, energy alignment and structural fit.
Discipline: Dance & Choreography (Dance musicality).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: Typed judgements rank supplied annotations using score/(levels-1) and user-controlled weights in code without generating music or text.

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": <Movement counts and candidate music-section annotations, without audio>, "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)
{
  "accent_compatibility": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How closely do the annotated musical accents support the phrase's key actions?",
    "criteria": [
      "Accents conflict",
      "Some accents support actions",
      "Accents consistently support actions"
    ]
  },
  "energy_alignment": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How closely does the annotated musical energy match the intended movement quality?",
    "criteria": [
      "Strong mismatch",
      "Partial alignment",
      "Strong alignment"
    ]
  },
  "structural_fit": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How well does the section's described structure support the phrase's development?",
    "criteria": [
      "Structure obstructs development",
      "Structure partly supports development",
      "Structure clearly supports development"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0047. Improvisation Prompt Shelf

ID: dance-improvisation-prompt-shelf
Sub-discipline: Dance improvisation
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste a workshop brief and existing improvisation prompts, and Jev scores each prompt's exploratory potential, constraint clarity and group relevance.

Why typed decisions: Typed scores select from existing prompts via score/(levels-1) and user-controlled weights in code instead of producing new prompts.

TAM: Illustrative: 250k improvisation facilitators globally
SAM: Illustrative: 25k prompt-library users
SOM: Illustrative: 250 early paid users

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Improvisation Prompt Shelf" 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 workshop brief and existing improvisation prompts, and Jev scores each prompt's exploratory potential, constraint clarity and group relevance.
Discipline: Dance & Choreography (Dance improvisation).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: Typed scores select from existing prompts via score/(levels-1) and user-controlled weights in code instead of producing new prompts.

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": <Workshop goals, group experience and candidate prompt texts>, "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)
{
  "exploratory_potential": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How much meaningful movement exploration does this prompt invite within the workshop theme?",
    "criteria": [
      "Little meaningful exploration",
      "Some varied exploration",
      "Rich varied exploration"
    ]
  },
  "constraint_clarity": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How clearly does the prompt communicate actionable movement constraints?",
    "criteria": [
      "Ambiguous constraints",
      "Partly actionable constraints",
      "Clear actionable constraints"
    ]
  },
  "group_relevance": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How well does the prompt suit the supplied group's experience and interests?",
    "criteria": [
      "Poor relevance",
      "Partial relevance",
      "Strong relevance"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0048. Movement Motif Finder

ID: dance-movement-motif-finder
Sub-discipline: Choreographic research
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste a new work's concept and archived phrase descriptions, and Jev scores each phrase's thematic resonance, transformation potential and vocabulary compatibility.

Why typed decisions: Typed scores make archive retrieval sortable through score/(levels-1) and user-controlled weights in code rather than narrative recommendations.

TAM: Illustrative: 300k choreography archive users globally
SAM: Illustrative: 20k structured archive users
SOM: Illustrative: 200 early paid users

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Movement Motif Finder" 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 new work's concept and archived phrase descriptions, and Jev scores each phrase's thematic resonance, transformation potential and vocabulary compatibility.
Discipline: Dance & Choreography (Choreographic research).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: Typed scores make archive retrieval sortable through score/(levels-1) and user-controlled weights in code rather than narrative recommendations.

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": <Creative concept, target movement vocabulary and archived phrase records>, "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)
{
  "thematic_resonance": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How strongly does this phrase's documented movement relate to the new concept?",
    "criteria": [
      "Weak relation",
      "Plausible relation",
      "Strong specific relation"
    ]
  },
  "transformation_potential": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How much scope does this phrase offer for the requested choreographic transformations?",
    "criteria": [
      "Little usable scope",
      "Some usable scope",
      "Extensive usable scope"
    ]
  },
  "vocabulary_compatibility": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How compatible is the phrase with the target movement vocabulary?",
    "criteria": [
      "Major vocabulary mismatch",
      "Partial compatibility",
      "Strong compatibility"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0049. Duet Dialogue Desk

ID: dance-duet-dialogue-desk
Sub-discipline: Partner choreography
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste a duet brief and candidate paired phrase descriptions, and Jev scores each pairing's relational clarity, reciprocal agency and timing compatibility.

Why typed decisions: Typed scores expose relational choices using score/(levels-1) and user-controlled weights in code without claiming physical safety validation.

TAM: Illustrative: 200k partner-work creators globally
SAM: Illustrative: 20k notation-based duet planners
SOM: Illustrative: 200 early paid users

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Duet Dialogue Desk" 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 duet brief and candidate paired phrase descriptions, and Jev scores each pairing's relational clarity, reciprocal agency and timing compatibility.
Discipline: Dance & Choreography (Partner choreography).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: Typed scores expose relational choices using score/(levels-1) and user-controlled weights in code without claiming physical safety validation.

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": <Duet relationship brief and paired movement descriptions with counts>, "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)
{
  "relational_clarity": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How clearly does this pairing express the intended relationship?",
    "criteria": [
      "Relationship unreadable or contradictory",
      "Relationship partly expressed",
      "Relationship clearly expressed"
    ]
  },
  "reciprocal_agency": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How strongly does the pairing give both performers meaningful influence as requested by the brief?",
    "criteria": [
      "Little reciprocal influence",
      "Some reciprocal influence",
      "Sustained reciprocal influence"
    ]
  },
  "timing_compatibility": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How coherently do the described actions and responses align in time?",
    "criteria": [
      "Timing conflicts",
      "Partly coordinated timing",
      "Coherent timing throughout"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0050. Dance Film Takeboard

ID: dance-dance-film-takeboard
Sub-discipline: Screendance editing
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste a scene brief and logged dance-film takes, and Jev scores each take's movement readability, emotional alignment and edit continuity.

Why typed decisions: Typed scores enable comparable take selection through score/(levels-1) and user-controlled weights in code without fabricating unseen footage.

TAM: Illustrative: 150k screendance creators globally
SAM: Illustrative: 15k logged-footage editors
SOM: Illustrative: 150 early paid users

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Dance Film Takeboard" 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 scene brief and logged dance-film takes, and Jev scores each take's movement readability, emotional alignment and edit continuity.
Discipline: Dance & Choreography (Screendance editing).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: Typed scores enable comparable take selection through score/(levels-1) and user-controlled weights in code without fabricating unseen footage.

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": <Scene intent, neighbouring shot logs and candidate take annotations>, "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)
{
  "movement_readability": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How clearly is the intended movement visible according to this take's annotations?",
    "criteria": [
      "Key movement obscured",
      "Movement partly readable",
      "Key movement clearly readable"
    ]
  },
  "emotional_alignment": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How closely does the logged performance quality match the scene's emotional intent?",
    "criteria": [
      "Conflicting quality",
      "Partial alignment",
      "Strong alignment"
    ]
  },
  "edit_continuity": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How well do the logged entry and exit states connect to the neighbouring shots?",
    "criteria": [
      "Major continuity conflicts",
      "Manageable continuity gaps",
      "Strong continuity match"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0051. Inclusive Variation Palette

ID: dance-inclusive-variation-palette
Sub-discipline: Accessible dance teaching
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste a movement objective, participant-stated access preferences and teacher-authored variations, and Jev scores each variation's objective retention, preference alignment and ensemble integration.

Why typed decisions: Typed scores support teacher-reviewed comparisons using score/(levels-1) and user-controlled weights in code without making medical suitability claims.

TAM: Illustrative: 500k inclusive dance educators globally
SAM: Illustrative: 40k variation-library users
SOM: Illustrative: 400 early paid users

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Inclusive Variation Palette" 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 movement objective, participant-stated access preferences and teacher-authored variations, and Jev scores each variation's objective retention, preference alignment and ensemble integration.
Discipline: Dance & Choreography (Accessible dance teaching).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: Typed scores support teacher-reviewed comparisons using score/(levels-1) and user-controlled weights in code without making medical suitability claims.

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": <Learning objective, stated access preferences and candidate movement variations>, "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)
{
  "objective_retention": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How well does the variation preserve the stated expressive or learning objective?",
    "criteria": [
      "Objective largely lost",
      "Objective partly retained",
      "Objective strongly retained"
    ]
  },
  "preference_alignment": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How closely does the variation match the participant's explicitly stated access preferences?",
    "criteria": [
      "Conflicts with preferences",
      "Partly matches preferences",
      "Closely matches preferences"
    ]
  },
  "ensemble_integration": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How well does the variation preserve meaningful participation in the shared phrase?",
    "criteria": [
      "Limited shared participation",
      "Some shared participation",
      "Strong shared participation"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0052. Site Specific Compass

ID: dance-site-specific-compass
Sub-discipline: Site-specific choreography
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste a site description, artistic intent and candidate movement sequences, and Jev scores each sequence's site responsiveness, audience legibility and environmental integration.

Why typed decisions: Typed scores rank artistic site fit through score/(levels-1) and user-controlled weights in code while leaving safety and permissions to separate review.

TAM: Illustrative: 120k site-specific movement creators globally
SAM: Illustrative: 12k digital project planners
SOM: Illustrative: 120 early paid users

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Site Specific Compass" 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 site description, artistic intent and candidate movement sequences, and Jev scores each sequence's site responsiveness, audience legibility and environmental integration.
Discipline: Dance & Choreography (Site-specific choreography).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: Typed scores rank artistic site fit through score/(levels-1) and user-controlled weights in code while leaving safety and permissions to separate review.

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": <Site affordance notes, audience route, artistic intent and sequence descriptions>, "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)
{
  "site_responsiveness": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How specifically does this sequence respond to the site's described features?",
    "criteria": [
      "Interchangeable with any site",
      "Uses some site features",
      "Strongly site-responsive"
    ]
  },
  "audience_legibility": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How legible is the intended action from the described audience route?",
    "criteria": [
      "Mostly illegible",
      "Partly legible",
      "Clearly legible"
    ]
  },
  "environmental_integration": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How purposefully does the sequence incorporate the site's described textures and rhythms?",
    "criteria": [
      "Little integration",
      "Some integration",
      "Strong purposeful integration"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0053. Costume Motion Filter

ID: dance-costume-motion-filter
Sub-discipline: Dance costume collaboration
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste choreographic requirements and costume prototype test notes, and Jev scores each prototype's movement support, silhouette readability and character alignment.

Why typed decisions: Typed scores translate test observations into a ranking using score/(levels-1) and user-controlled weights in code instead of unsupported garment assurances.

TAM: Illustrative: 180k dance costume collaborators globally
SAM: Illustrative: 18k prototype-documenting users
SOM: Illustrative: 180 early paid users

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Costume Motion Filter" 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 choreographic requirements and costume prototype test notes, and Jev scores each prototype's movement support, silhouette readability and character alignment.
Discipline: Dance & Choreography (Dance costume collaboration).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: Typed scores translate test observations into a ranking using score/(levels-1) and user-controlled weights in code instead of unsupported garment assurances.

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": <Movement requirements, character brief and costume prototype test records>, "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)
{
  "movement_support": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How well do the documented costume tests support the required movement vocabulary?",
    "criteria": [
      "Frequent documented interference",
      "Some documented interference",
      "Consistent documented support"
    ]
  },
  "silhouette_readability": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How well do the test notes indicate that the costume reveals the intended movement shapes?",
    "criteria": [
      "Shapes obscured",
      "Shapes partly readable",
      "Shapes clearly readable"
    ]
  },
  "character_alignment": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How closely does the prototype's description match the movement character brief?",
    "criteria": [
      "Conflicting character",
      "Partial alignment",
      "Strong alignment"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0054. Prop Phrase Selector

ID: dance-prop-phrase-selector
Sub-discipline: Object choreography
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste an object-led scene brief and tested prop-phrase descriptions, and Jev scores each option's object dramaturgy, movement integration and visual clarity.

Why typed decisions: Typed scores organise tested options through score/(levels-1) and user-controlled weights in code without substituting for prop safety checks.

TAM: Illustrative: 160k object-based movement creators globally
SAM: Illustrative: 16k rehearsal-log users
SOM: Illustrative: 160 early paid users

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Prop Phrase Selector" 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 an object-led scene brief and tested prop-phrase descriptions, and Jev scores each option's object dramaturgy, movement integration and visual clarity.
Discipline: Dance & Choreography (Object choreography).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: Typed scores organise tested options through score/(levels-1) and user-controlled weights in code without substituting for prop safety checks.

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": <Scene intention and candidate prop-phrase rehearsal annotations>, "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)
{
  "object_dramaturgy": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How meaningfully does the object contribute to the scene's stated dramatic purpose?",
    "criteria": [
      "Decorative or contradictory",
      "Some dramatic contribution",
      "Essential dramatic contribution"
    ]
  },
  "movement_integration": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How fully is the object's behaviour integrated into the described movement?",
    "criteria": [
      "Object and movement disconnected",
      "Partly integrated",
      "Strongly interdependent"
    ]
  },
  "visual_clarity": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How clearly do the annotations communicate the intended object-performer relationship to viewers?",
    "criteria": [
      "Relationship unclear",
      "Partly readable relationship",
      "Clearly readable relationship"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0055. Festival Programme Weave

ID: dance-festival-programme-weave
Sub-discipline: Dance programming
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste a festival theme and candidate programme-order JSON, and Jev scores each ordering's thematic arc, dynamic contrast and adjacency coherence.

Why typed decisions: Typed scores compare whole programme orders using score/(levels-1) and user-controlled weights in code rather than generating curatorial copy.

TAM: Illustrative: 80k dance programmers globally
SAM: Illustrative: 8k multi-work programme planners
SOM: Illustrative: 80 early paid users

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Festival Programme Weave" 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 festival theme and candidate programme-order JSON, and Jev scores each ordering's thematic arc, dynamic contrast and adjacency coherence.
Discipline: Dance & Choreography (Dance programming).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: Typed scores compare whole programme orders using score/(levels-1) and user-controlled weights in code rather than generating curatorial copy.

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": <Festival brief, work synopses and candidate programme-order JSON>, "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)
{
  "thematic_arc": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How clearly does this ordering develop the festival's stated theme?",
    "criteria": [
      "No coherent thematic development",
      "Partial thematic development",
      "Clear thematic development"
    ]
  },
  "dynamic_contrast": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How purposefully does the ordering vary the works' described energies and scales?",
    "criteria": [
      "Flat or arbitrary variation",
      "Some purposeful contrast",
      "Consistently purposeful contrast"
    ]
  },
  "adjacency_coherence": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How meaningful are the artistic connections between neighbouring works?",
    "criteria": [
      "Mostly arbitrary connections",
      "Some meaningful connections",
      "Consistently meaningful connections"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0056. Battle Round Picker

ID: dance-battle-round-picker
Sub-discipline: Freestyle preparation
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste a battle format, artistic goal and logged practice rounds, and Jev scores each round's vocabulary range, musical responsiveness and signature clarity.

Why typed decisions: Typed scores help dancers compare practice material through score/(levels-1) and user-controlled weights in code without predicting competition results.

TAM: Illustrative: 600k competitive freestyle dancers globally
SAM: Illustrative: 50k practice-log users
SOM: Illustrative: 500 early paid users

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Battle Round Picker" 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 battle format, artistic goal and logged practice rounds, and Jev scores each round's vocabulary range, musical responsiveness and signature clarity.
Discipline: Dance & Choreography (Freestyle preparation).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: Typed scores help dancers compare practice material through score/(levels-1) and user-controlled weights in code without predicting competition results.

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": <Battle format, dancer goals and annotated practice-round records>, "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)
{
  "vocabulary_range": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How well does this round demonstrate the purposeful movement variety requested by the dancer?",
    "criteria": [
      "Narrow or repetitive",
      "Some purposeful variety",
      "Broad purposeful variety"
    ]
  },
  "musical_responsiveness": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How strongly do the notes show specific responses to musical changes rather than generic timing?",
    "criteria": [
      "Little specific response",
      "Some specific responses",
      "Sustained specific responses"
    ]
  },
  "signature_clarity": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How clearly does the round communicate the dancer's stated signature qualities?",
    "criteria": [
      "Signature qualities absent",
      "Qualities intermittently visible",
      "Qualities consistently distinct"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0057. Notation Handoff Check

ID: dance-notation-handoff-check
Sub-discipline: Choreographic documentation
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste a source phrase record and candidate notation drafts, and Jev scores each draft's fidelity, reconstructability and timing specificity.

Why typed decisions: Typed scores rank documentation quality using score/(levels-1) and user-controlled weights in code instead of silently rewriting the choreographer's record.

TAM: Illustrative: 220k dance documentation users globally
SAM: Illustrative: 22k notation-sharing users
SOM: Illustrative: 220 early paid users

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Notation Handoff Check" 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 source phrase record and candidate notation drafts, and Jev scores each draft's fidelity, reconstructability and timing specificity.
Discipline: Dance & Choreography (Choreographic documentation).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: Typed scores rank documentation quality using score/(levels-1) and user-controlled weights in code instead of silently rewriting the choreographer's record.

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": <Source movement record and candidate text or structured notation drafts>, "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)
{
  "source_fidelity": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How faithfully does this draft preserve the supplied source phrase's documented actions and qualities?",
    "criteria": [
      "Major omissions or contradictions",
      "Minor omissions or ambiguities",
      "Faithful preservation"
    ]
  },
  "reconstructability": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How well could the intended reader reconstruct spatial and bodily relationships from this draft?",
    "criteria": [
      "Major relationships unspecified",
      "Some relationships inferable",
      "Key relationships explicit"
    ]
  },
  "timing_specificity": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How precisely does the draft communicate the source phrase's timing relationships?",
    "criteria": [
      "Timing largely unspecified",
      "Timing partly specified",
      "Timing clearly specified"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0058. Character Gesture Atlas

ID: dance-character-gesture-atlas
Sub-discipline: Movement direction
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste a character brief and a library of observed gesture descriptions, and Jev scores each gesture's character specificity, scene relevance and ensemble distinctiveness.

Why typed decisions: Typed scores provide a selectable gesture palette through score/(levels-1) and user-controlled weights in code rather than generated character advice.

TAM: Illustrative: 250k movement directors and theatre makers globally
SAM: Illustrative: 25k gesture-library users
SOM: Illustrative: 250 early paid users

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Character Gesture Atlas" 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 character brief and a library of observed gesture descriptions, and Jev scores each gesture's character specificity, scene relevance and ensemble distinctiveness.
Discipline: Dance & Choreography (Movement direction).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: Typed scores provide a selectable gesture palette through score/(levels-1) and user-controlled weights in code rather than generated character advice.

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": <Character and scene briefs, ensemble gesture references and candidate gestures>, "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)
{
  "character_specificity": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How specifically does this gesture express the character's stated habits or intentions?",
    "criteria": [
      "Generic or contradictory",
      "Some character specificity",
      "Strong character specificity"
    ]
  },
  "scene_relevance": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How well does the gesture serve the character's objective in this scene?",
    "criteria": [
      "Distracts from objective",
      "Loosely supports objective",
      "Directly supports objective"
    ]
  },
  "ensemble_distinctiveness": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How clearly does this gesture distinguish the character from the supplied ensemble references?",
    "criteria": [
      "Indistinguishable vocabulary",
      "Some distinctive qualities",
      "Clearly distinctive vocabulary"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0059. Feedback Focus Lens

ID: dance-feedback-focus-lens
Sub-discipline: Dance coaching
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste a learner's stated goal, rehearsal observations and teacher-written feedback points, and Jev scores each point's evidence grounding, goal relevance and actionability.

Why typed decisions: Typed scores prioritise existing feedback through score/(levels-1) and user-controlled weights in code without generating criticism or personality judgements.

TAM: Illustrative: 1m dance coaching users globally
SAM: Illustrative: 80k written-feedback users
SOM: Illustrative: 800 early paid users

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Feedback Focus Lens" 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 learner's stated goal, rehearsal observations and teacher-written feedback points, and Jev scores each point's evidence grounding, goal relevance and actionability.
Discipline: Dance & Choreography (Dance coaching).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: Typed scores prioritise existing feedback through score/(levels-1) and user-controlled weights in code without generating criticism or personality judgements.

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": <Learner goal, observed rehearsal evidence and candidate feedback points>, "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)
{
  "evidence_grounding": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How directly is this feedback point supported by the supplied rehearsal observations?",
    "criteria": [
      "Unsupported by observations",
      "Partly supported",
      "Directly supported"
    ]
  },
  "goal_relevance": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How closely does this point address the learner's stated movement goal?",
    "criteria": [
      "Unrelated to goal",
      "Indirectly related",
      "Directly related"
    ]
  },
  "actionability": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How clearly does this point identify a movement adjustment the learner can try?",
    "criteria": [
      "No actionable adjustment",
      "Partly actionable adjustment",
      "Clear testable adjustment"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0060. Tour Adaptation Board

ID: dance-tour-adaptation-board
Sub-discipline: Touring choreography
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste an original staging brief, venue constraints and candidate adaptation plans, and Jev scores each plan's artistic fidelity, spatial compatibility and rehearsal economy.

Why typed decisions: Typed scores compare adaptation tradeoffs through score/(levels-1) and user-controlled weights in code while keeping technical approval separate.

TAM: Illustrative: 100k touring dance production users globally
SAM: Illustrative: 10k multi-venue planning users
SOM: Illustrative: 100 early paid users

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Tour Adaptation Board" 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 an original staging brief, venue constraints and candidate adaptation plans, and Jev scores each plan's artistic fidelity, spatial compatibility and rehearsal economy.
Discipline: Dance & Choreography (Touring choreography).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: Typed scores compare adaptation tradeoffs through score/(levels-1) and user-controlled weights in code while keeping technical approval separate.

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": <Original staging priorities, venue specifications and candidate adaptation plans>, "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)
{
  "artistic_fidelity": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How well does this adaptation preserve the production's stated essential artistic relationships?",
    "criteria": [
      "Essentials substantially lost",
      "Essentials partly preserved",
      "Essentials strongly preserved"
    ]
  },
  "spatial_compatibility": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How coherently does the plan map the described choreography onto the venue's available performance zones?",
    "criteria": [
      "Major unresolved spatial conflicts",
      "Some unresolved spatial conflicts",
      "Coherent spatial mapping"
    ]
  },
  "rehearsal_economy": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How well does the plan minimise relearning while addressing the documented venue differences?",
    "criteria": [
      "Extensive avoidable relearning",
      "Moderate reuse of existing staging",
      "Strong reuse with targeted changes"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0061. Count Cue Clipper

ID: dance-count-cue-clipper
Sub-discipline: Rehearsal notation
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: A choreographer pastes rehearsal notes, code extracts count-linked phrases, and Jev selects the exact cue to copy into a chosen eight-count slot.

Why typed decisions: A typed selection preserves the choreographer's original wording and count references instead of inventing an instruction.

TAM: Illustrative: 1M dance makers worldwide
SAM: Illustrative: 100K digital-note users
SOM: Illustrative: 500 early adopters

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Count Cue Clipper" 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
A choreographer pastes rehearsal notes, code extracts count-linked phrases, and Jev selects the exact cue to copy into a chosen eight-count slot.
Discipline: Dance & Choreography (Rehearsal notation).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: A typed selection preserves the choreographer's original wording and count references instead of inventing an instruction.

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": <Target eight-count and three indexed source cue spans with surrounding context.>, "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)
{
  "select_cue": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which source cue belongs in the target eight-count?",
    "criteria": {
      "candidate_1": "Copy extracted cue span 1 verbatim.",
      "candidate_2": "Copy extracted cue span 2 verbatim.",
      "candidate_3": "Copy extracted cue span 3 verbatim.",
      "none": "No extracted cue clearly belongs in this slot."
    }
  },
  "count_explicit": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the source explicitly connect the selected cue to the target counts?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The count connection is stated directly.",
      "false": "The connection is inferred, ambiguous, or absent."
    }
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0062. Formation Intent Picker

ID: dance-formation-intent-picker
Sub-discipline: Spatial choreography
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: A choreographer pastes blocking notes and a transition target, code extracts formation phrases, and Jev selects the intended destination label for a floor-plan card.

Why typed decisions: Selecting an existing formation phrase prevents a generated label from silently changing the spatial instruction.

TAM: Illustrative: 600K choreography practitioners
SAM: Illustrative: 60K blocking-tool users
SOM: Illustrative: 300 early adopters

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Formation Intent Picker" 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
A choreographer pastes blocking notes and a transition target, code extracts formation phrases, and Jev selects the intended destination label for a floor-plan card.
Discipline: Dance & Choreography (Spatial choreography).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: Selecting an existing formation phrase prevents a generated label from silently changing the spatial instruction.

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": <Transition target and three extracted formation spans in source context.>, "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)
{
  "select_formation": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which phrase names the destination formation for this transition?",
    "criteria": {
      "candidate_1": "Copy formation phrase 1 verbatim.",
      "candidate_2": "Copy formation phrase 2 verbatim.",
      "candidate_3": "Copy formation phrase 3 verbatim.",
      "none": "No candidate identifies the destination."
    }
  },
  "destination_clear": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is this clearly a destination rather than a starting position?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The source marks it as the resulting formation.",
      "false": "It is a starting position, an alternative, or unclear."
    }
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0063. Phrase Title Keeper

ID: dance-phrase-title-keeper
Sub-discipline: Choreographic archiving
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: A dancer pastes a rehearsal journal and a section description, code extracts quoted names and headings, and Jev selects the existing phrase title to attach to an archive entry.

Why typed decisions: A typed choice keeps established studio vocabulary intact rather than generating a plausible but unfamiliar title.

TAM: Illustrative: 1M dance makers worldwide
SAM: Illustrative: 80K rehearsal archivists
SOM: Illustrative: 400 early adopters

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Phrase Title Keeper" 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
A dancer pastes a rehearsal journal and a section description, code extracts quoted names and headings, and Jev selects the existing phrase title to attach to an archive entry.
Discipline: Dance & Choreography (Choreographic archiving).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: A typed choice keeps established studio vocabulary intact rather than generating a plausible but unfamiliar title.

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": <Section description and three extracted title spans with journal context.>, "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)
{
  "select_title": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which existing title names the described movement section?",
    "criteria": {
      "candidate_1": "Copy extracted title 1 verbatim.",
      "candidate_2": "Copy extracted title 2 verbatim.",
      "candidate_3": "Copy extracted title 3 verbatim.",
      "none": "The described section has no supported title among the candidates."
    }
  },
  "title_match": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How strongly does the source connect the selected title to the section?",
    "criteria": [
      "0: No supported connection or no selection.",
      "1: Indirect thematic similarity only.",
      "2: Strong contextual connection.",
      "3: Explicit naming of the section."
    ]
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0064. Correction Landing Pad

ID: dance-correction-landing-pad
Sub-discipline: Dance teaching
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: A teacher pastes class corrections and a target exercise, code extracts correction sentences, and Jev selects the original sentence that belongs on that exercise's practice card.

Why typed decisions: Copying a source correction avoids adding technique advice the teacher never gave.

TAM: Illustrative: 500K dance educators
SAM: Illustrative: 75K digital lesson planners
SOM: Illustrative: 600 early adopters

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Correction Landing Pad" 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
A teacher pastes class corrections and a target exercise, code extracts correction sentences, and Jev selects the original sentence that belongs on that exercise's practice card.
Discipline: Dance & Choreography (Dance teaching).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: Copying a source correction avoids adding technique advice the teacher never gave.

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": <Target exercise and three extracted correction sentences with attribution.>, "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)
{
  "select_correction": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which correction addresses the target exercise?",
    "criteria": {
      "candidate_1": "Copy correction sentence 1 verbatim.",
      "candidate_2": "Copy correction sentence 2 verbatim.",
      "candidate_3": "Copy correction sentence 3 verbatim.",
      "none": "None clearly addresses this exercise."
    }
  },
  "correction_scope": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is the selected correction intended for the whole class?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The source explicitly gives a class-wide correction.",
      "false": "It addresses an individual, a subgroup, or an unspecified audience."
    }
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0065. Motif Return Finder

ID: dance-motif-return-finder
Sub-discipline: Movement dramaturgy
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: A movement director pastes scene notes and a reference motif, code extracts movement descriptions, and Jev selects the source span that documents the motif's return.

Why typed decisions: A selection anchors dramaturgical links to documented movement rather than inventing thematic connections as prose.

TAM: Illustrative: 200K movement storytellers
SAM: Illustrative: 20K dramaturgy-note users
SOM: Illustrative: 150 early adopters

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Motif Return Finder" 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
A movement director pastes scene notes and a reference motif, code extracts movement descriptions, and Jev selects the source span that documents the motif's return.
Discipline: Dance & Choreography (Movement dramaturgy).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: A selection anchors dramaturgical links to documented movement rather than inventing thematic connections as prose.

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": <Reference motif and three movement-description spans with scene identifiers.>, "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)
{
  "select_return": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which span documents a return of the reference motif?",
    "criteria": {
      "candidate_1": "Copy movement-description span 1 verbatim.",
      "candidate_2": "Copy movement-description span 2 verbatim.",
      "candidate_3": "Copy movement-description span 3 verbatim.",
      "none": "No candidate supports a motif return."
    }
  },
  "motif_continuity": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How recognizable is the motif in the selected description?",
    "criteria": [
      "0: No supported match.",
      "1: Shared mood but few movement features.",
      "2: Several defining movement features recur.",
      "3: The source explicitly identifies the same motif."
    ]
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0066. Music Entry Pin

ID: dance-music-entry-pin
Sub-discipline: Musical staging
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: A choreographer pastes written music annotations and a dancer's entrance description, code extracts musical landmark phrases, and Jev selects the exact landmark to pin on the entrance card.

Why typed decisions: Selecting a documented musical landmark avoids fabricating lyrics, timestamps, or instrumentation.

TAM: Illustrative: 800K dance staging practitioners
SAM: Illustrative: 80K written music annotators
SOM: Illustrative: 400 early adopters

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Music Entry Pin" 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
A choreographer pastes written music annotations and a dancer's entrance description, code extracts musical landmark phrases, and Jev selects the exact landmark to pin on the entrance card.
Discipline: Dance & Choreography (Musical staging).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: Selecting a documented musical landmark avoids fabricating lyrics, timestamps, or instrumentation.

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": <Entrance description and three extracted musical landmark spans.>, "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)
{
  "select_landmark": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which landmark is the intended trigger for this entrance?",
    "criteria": {
      "candidate_1": "Copy musical landmark 1 verbatim.",
      "candidate_2": "Copy musical landmark 2 verbatim.",
      "candidate_3": "Copy musical landmark 3 verbatim.",
      "none": "No landmark is supported as the entrance trigger."
    }
  },
  "repeat_disambiguated": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the source distinguish this occurrence from repeated musical material?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "A section, count, or occurrence marker uniquely identifies it.",
      "false": "Repeated occurrences remain indistinguishable."
    }
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0067. Understudy Delta Desk

ID: dance-understudy-delta-desk
Sub-discipline: Cast adaptation
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: A rehearsal director pastes alternate-cast notes and a role identifier, code extracts substitution instructions, and Jev selects the exact instruction that applies to that understudy.

Why typed decisions: A typed selection preserves approved cast-specific adaptations without improvising new choreography.

TAM: Illustrative: 100K dance rehearsal leads
SAM: Illustrative: 15K multi-cast production users
SOM: Illustrative: 120 early adopters

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Understudy Delta Desk" 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
A rehearsal director pastes alternate-cast notes and a role identifier, code extracts substitution instructions, and Jev selects the exact instruction that applies to that understudy.
Discipline: Dance & Choreography (Cast adaptation).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: A typed selection preserves approved cast-specific adaptations without improvising new choreography.

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": <Role and cast identifiers plus three extracted substitution instructions.>, "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)
{
  "select_substitution": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which instruction applies to this understudy in this role?",
    "criteria": {
      "candidate_1": "Copy substitution instruction 1 verbatim.",
      "candidate_2": "Copy substitution instruction 2 verbatim.",
      "candidate_3": "Copy substitution instruction 3 verbatim.",
      "none": "No candidate applies unambiguously."
    }
  },
  "approval_explicit": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is the selected substitution explicitly approved rather than proposed?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The source records approval or adoption.",
      "false": "It is tentative, rejected, or has no approval status."
    }
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0068. Prop Handoff Ledger

ID: dance-prop-handoff-ledger-1
Sub-discipline: Prop choreography
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: A movement director pastes staging notes and a prop-transition query, code extracts transfer clauses, and Jev selects the clause to copy into a handoff ledger.

Why typed decisions: Source selection retains the actual giver, receiver, and timing instead of constructing an unsupported transfer.

TAM: Illustrative: 250K movement staging practitioners
SAM: Illustrative: 30K prop-heavy production users
SOM: Illustrative: 200 early adopters

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Prop Handoff Ledger" 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
A movement director pastes staging notes and a prop-transition query, code extracts transfer clauses, and Jev selects the clause to copy into a handoff ledger.
Discipline: Dance & Choreography (Prop choreography).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: Source selection retains the actual giver, receiver, and timing instead of constructing an unsupported transfer.

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": <Target prop transition and three extracted transfer clauses in context.>, "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)
{
  "select_handoff": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which clause describes the requested prop handoff?",
    "criteria": {
      "candidate_1": "Copy transfer clause 1 verbatim.",
      "candidate_2": "Copy transfer clause 2 verbatim.",
      "candidate_3": "Copy transfer clause 3 verbatim.",
      "none": "No clause documents this handoff."
    }
  },
  "handoff_complete": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How complete is the selected handoff instruction?",
    "criteria": [
      "0: No applicable instruction.",
      "1: Names the prop but leaves participants unclear.",
      "2: Identifies giver and receiver but not timing.",
      "3: Identifies giver, receiver, and a timing cue."
    ]
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0069. Costume Constraint Clip

ID: dance-costume-constraint-clip
Sub-discipline: Costume-aware movement
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: A choreographer pastes fitting notes and a movement description, code extracts garment-related restrictions, and Jev selects the source restriction relevant to that movement.

Why typed decisions: Copying a recorded restriction keeps the tool from inventing costume limitations or unsupported safety assurances.

TAM: Illustrative: 300K dance production practitioners
SAM: Illustrative: 35K costume-note users
SOM: Illustrative: 200 early adopters

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Costume Constraint Clip" 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
A choreographer pastes fitting notes and a movement description, code extracts garment-related restrictions, and Jev selects the source restriction relevant to that movement.
Discipline: Dance & Choreography (Costume-aware movement).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: Copying a recorded restriction keeps the tool from inventing costume limitations or unsupported safety assurances.

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": <Movement description and three extracted costume restriction spans.>, "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)
{
  "select_restriction": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which recorded restriction bears directly on this movement?",
    "criteria": {
      "candidate_1": "Copy costume restriction 1 verbatim.",
      "candidate_2": "Copy costume restriction 2 verbatim.",
      "candidate_3": "Copy costume restriction 3 verbatim.",
      "none": "No candidate documents a relevant restriction."
    }
  },
  "restriction_relevance": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How directly does the selected restriction relate to the movement?",
    "criteria": [
      "0: No supported relationship.",
      "1: Same garment but unrelated movement feature.",
      "2: Relevant range, grip, or visibility limitation.",
      "3: The exact movement is explicitly discussed."
    ]
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0070. Access Variant Shelf

ID: dance-access-variant-shelf
Sub-discipline: Inclusive dance teaching
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: A teacher pastes their approved exercise adaptations and a participant's stated movement preference, code extracts adaptation entries, and Jev selects the existing variant to display verbatim.

Why typed decisions: Selection limits the tool to teacher-provided options rather than generating unreviewed physical adaptations.

TAM: Illustrative: 500K dance educators
SAM: Illustrative: 50K adaptation-library users
SOM: Illustrative: 400 early adopters

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Access Variant Shelf" 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
A teacher pastes their approved exercise adaptations and a participant's stated movement preference, code extracts adaptation entries, and Jev selects the existing variant to display verbatim.
Discipline: Dance & Choreography (Inclusive dance teaching).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: Selection limits the tool to teacher-provided options rather than generating unreviewed physical adaptations.

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": <Stated movement preference and three extracted teacher-approved adaptation entries.>, "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)
{
  "select_variant": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which provided variant explicitly accommodates the stated preference?",
    "criteria": {
      "candidate_1": "Copy approved adaptation entry 1 verbatim.",
      "candidate_2": "Copy approved adaptation entry 2 verbatim.",
      "candidate_3": "Copy approved adaptation entry 3 verbatim.",
      "none": "No provided variant clearly accommodates the preference."
    }
  },
  "preference_supported": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is the preference match supported without inferring a diagnosis or medical suitability?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The variant directly matches the stated movement preference.",
      "false": "The match requires unstated physical or medical assumptions."
    }
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0071. Improvisation Prompt Crate

ID: dance-improvisation-prompt-crate
Sub-discipline: Improvisation facilitation
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: A facilitator pastes a workshop goal and their prompt library, code extracts prompt entries, and Jev selects an existing prompt to copy onto a session card.

Why typed decisions: Typed selection reuses the facilitator's tested language instead of generating an untested exercise.

TAM: Illustrative: 400K dance facilitators
SAM: Illustrative: 60K prompt-library users
SOM: Illustrative: 450 early adopters

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Improvisation Prompt Crate" 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
A facilitator pastes a workshop goal and their prompt library, code extracts prompt entries, and Jev selects an existing prompt to copy onto a session card.
Discipline: Dance & Choreography (Improvisation facilitation).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: Typed selection reuses the facilitator's tested language instead of generating an untested exercise.

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": <Workshop goal and three extracted prompt entries with tags.>, "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)
{
  "select_prompt": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which existing prompt best serves the workshop goal?",
    "criteria": {
      "candidate_1": "Copy prompt entry 1 verbatim.",
      "candidate_2": "Copy prompt entry 2 verbatim.",
      "candidate_3": "Copy prompt entry 3 verbatim.",
      "none": "None of the provided prompts serves the goal."
    }
  },
  "goal_alignment": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How closely does the selected prompt address the stated goal?",
    "criteria": [
      "0: No suitable prompt selected.",
      "1: Broad thematic overlap.",
      "2: Exercises a relevant movement quality.",
      "3: Directly practices the stated objective."
    ]
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0072. Partner Contact Bookmark

ID: dance-partner-contact-bookmark
Sub-discipline: Partnering rehearsal
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: A rehearsal lead pastes partnering notes and a transition name, code extracts contact instructions, and Jev selects the documented contact cue for that transition.

Why typed decisions: A source-bound choice avoids inventing grips or weight-transfer directions in a physically consequential context.

TAM: Illustrative: 300K partnering practitioners
SAM: Illustrative: 30K structured rehearsal-note users
SOM: Illustrative: 180 early adopters

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Partner Contact Bookmark" 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
A rehearsal lead pastes partnering notes and a transition name, code extracts contact instructions, and Jev selects the documented contact cue for that transition.
Discipline: Dance & Choreography (Partnering rehearsal).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: A source-bound choice avoids inventing grips or weight-transfer directions in a physically consequential context.

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": <Transition name and three extracted contact instruction spans.>, "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)
{
  "select_contact": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which documented contact cue belongs to this transition?",
    "criteria": {
      "candidate_1": "Copy contact instruction 1 verbatim.",
      "candidate_2": "Copy contact instruction 2 verbatim.",
      "candidate_3": "Copy contact instruction 3 verbatim.",
      "none": "No candidate clearly documents the contact cue."
    }
  },
  "roles_explicit": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the selected source identify each partner's role?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Both partners' relevant actions are explicitly attributed.",
      "false": "One or more actions lack clear attribution."
    }
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0073. Camera Movement Anchor

ID: dance-camera-movement-anchor
Sub-discipline: Dance for camera
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: A dance filmmaker pastes a shot list and a choreographic beat, code extracts shot descriptions, and Jev selects the existing shot span that covers that movement.

Why typed decisions: Selecting a real shot description preserves the planned coverage instead of inventing camera directions.

TAM: Illustrative: 250K dance video creators
SAM: Illustrative: 40K shot-list users
SOM: Illustrative: 300 early adopters

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Camera Movement Anchor" 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
A dance filmmaker pastes a shot list and a choreographic beat, code extracts shot descriptions, and Jev selects the existing shot span that covers that movement.
Discipline: Dance & Choreography (Dance for camera).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: Selecting a real shot description preserves the planned coverage instead of inventing camera directions.

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": <Choreographic beat and three extracted shot descriptions with shot IDs.>, "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)
{
  "select_shot": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which planned shot covers the specified choreographic beat?",
    "criteria": {
      "candidate_1": "Copy shot description 1 verbatim.",
      "candidate_2": "Copy shot description 2 verbatim.",
      "candidate_3": "Copy shot description 3 verbatim.",
      "none": "The candidates do not establish coverage of this beat."
    }
  },
  "coverage_explicit": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the shot description explicitly include the movement's defining action?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The defining action is named in the shot's coverage.",
      "false": "Coverage is only inferred from scene proximity or general framing."
    }
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0074. Lighting Trigger Tab

ID: dance-lighting-trigger-tab
Sub-discipline: Technical dance staging
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: A choreographer pastes technical notes and a lighting cue identifier, code extracts movement-trigger clauses, and Jev selects the exact clause to attach to the cue sheet.

Why typed decisions: A typed choice prevents a fabricated trigger from entering a live production document.

TAM: Illustrative: 200K dance production leads
SAM: Illustrative: 25K technical cue-sheet users
SOM: Illustrative: 150 early adopters

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Lighting Trigger Tab" 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
A choreographer pastes technical notes and a lighting cue identifier, code extracts movement-trigger clauses, and Jev selects the exact clause to attach to the cue sheet.
Discipline: Dance & Choreography (Technical dance staging).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: A typed choice prevents a fabricated trigger from entering a live production document.

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": <Lighting cue identifier and three extracted movement-trigger clauses.>, "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)
{
  "select_trigger": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which movement clause triggers this lighting cue?",
    "criteria": {
      "candidate_1": "Copy trigger clause 1 verbatim.",
      "candidate_2": "Copy trigger clause 2 verbatim.",
      "candidate_3": "Copy trigger clause 3 verbatim.",
      "none": "No candidate is clearly linked to this cue."
    }
  },
  "trigger_observable": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How observable is the selected trigger as written?",
    "criteria": [
      "0: No trigger selected.",
      "1: Internal intention or vague atmosphere only.",
      "2: Visible action with an ambiguous endpoint.",
      "3: Distinct visible event with a clear moment."
    ]
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0075. Touring Cut Compass

ID: dance-touring-cut-compass
Sub-discipline: Touring adaptation
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: A rehearsal director pastes venue constraints and approved version notes, code extracts cut instructions, and Jev selects the existing cut that matches the venue brief.

Why typed decisions: Selection confines the app to documented touring edits rather than generating unauthorized cuts.

TAM: Illustrative: 80K touring dance practitioners
SAM: Illustrative: 10K version-management users
SOM: Illustrative: 100 early adopters

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Touring Cut Compass" 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
A rehearsal director pastes venue constraints and approved version notes, code extracts cut instructions, and Jev selects the existing cut that matches the venue brief.
Discipline: Dance & Choreography (Touring adaptation).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: Selection confines the app to documented touring edits rather than generating unauthorized cuts.

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": <Venue constraints and three extracted approved cut instructions.>, "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)
{
  "select_cut": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which approved cut matches the stated venue constraints?",
    "criteria": {
      "candidate_1": "Copy approved cut instruction 1 verbatim.",
      "candidate_2": "Copy approved cut instruction 2 verbatim.",
      "candidate_3": "Copy approved cut instruction 3 verbatim.",
      "none": "No documented cut adequately matches the constraints."
    }
  },
  "conditions_complete": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Are all stated prerequisites for the selected cut satisfied by the venue brief?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Every recorded prerequisite has supporting venue information.",
      "false": "At least one prerequisite is unmet or undocumented."
    }
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0076. Lesson Objective Lens

ID: dance-lesson-objective-lens
Sub-discipline: Dance curriculum
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: A dance teacher pastes a class plan and syllabus, code extracts learning-objective statements, and Jev selects the exact objective best evidenced by the planned exercises.

Why typed decisions: Copying an official objective preserves curriculum wording and avoids claiming an invented learning outcome.

TAM: Illustrative: 500K dance educators
SAM: Illustrative: 100K syllabus-based instructors
SOM: Illustrative: 700 early adopters

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Lesson Objective Lens" 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
A dance teacher pastes a class plan and syllabus, code extracts learning-objective statements, and Jev selects the exact objective best evidenced by the planned exercises.
Discipline: Dance & Choreography (Dance curriculum).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: Copying an official objective preserves curriculum wording and avoids claiming an invented learning outcome.

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": <Class plan and three extracted syllabus objective statements.>, "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)
{
  "select_objective": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which syllabus objective is best evidenced by the planned exercises?",
    "criteria": {
      "candidate_1": "Copy objective statement 1 verbatim.",
      "candidate_2": "Copy objective statement 2 verbatim.",
      "candidate_3": "Copy objective statement 3 verbatim.",
      "none": "No candidate objective is meaningfully evidenced."
    }
  },
  "practice_alignment": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How substantially does the plan practice the selected objective?",
    "criteria": [
      "0: No supported objective.",
      "1: Mentioned but not practiced.",
      "2: Practiced in one substantive exercise.",
      "3: Practiced repeatedly with an explicit observation task."
    ]
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0077. Program Credit Keeper

ID: dance-program-credit-keeper
Sub-discipline: Choreographic attribution
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: A choreographer pastes collaborator agreements and a program credit category, code extracts credit clauses, and Jev selects the exact authorized wording for that category.

Why typed decisions: A typed selection preserves attribution language rather than inventing titles, names, or permissions.

TAM: Illustrative: 500K dance project creators
SAM: Illustrative: 50K independent production administrators
SOM: Illustrative: 250 early adopters

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Program Credit Keeper" 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
A choreographer pastes collaborator agreements and a program credit category, code extracts credit clauses, and Jev selects the exact authorized wording for that category.
Discipline: Dance & Choreography (Choreographic attribution).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: A typed selection preserves attribution language rather than inventing titles, names, or permissions.

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": <Credit category and three extracted credit clauses with project context.>, "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)
{
  "select_credit": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which source clause supplies the credit wording for this category and project?",
    "criteria": {
      "candidate_1": "Copy credit clause 1 verbatim.",
      "candidate_2": "Copy credit clause 2 verbatim.",
      "candidate_3": "Copy credit clause 3 verbatim.",
      "none": "No candidate establishes the requested credit wording."
    }
  },
  "wording_final": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is the selected wording explicitly final or approved in the source?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The wording is marked final, agreed, or approved.",
      "false": "It is proposed, superseded, or lacks an explicit status."
    }
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0078. Rehearsal Change Stamp

ID: dance-rehearsal-change-stamp
Sub-discipline: Choreography version control
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: A rehearsal director pastes dated revision notes and a movement query, code extracts competing instruction spans, and Jev selects the source instruction that explicitly supersedes the others.

Why typed decisions: Selection preserves the actual adopted revision and can abstain when chronology alone does not establish authority.

TAM: Illustrative: 600K choreography practitioners
SAM: Illustrative: 70K revision-heavy rehearsal users
SOM: Illustrative: 500 early adopters

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Rehearsal Change Stamp" 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
A rehearsal director pastes dated revision notes and a movement query, code extracts competing instruction spans, and Jev selects the source instruction that explicitly supersedes the others.
Discipline: Dance & Choreography (Choreography version control).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: Selection preserves the actual adopted revision and can abstain when chronology alone does not establish authority.

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": <Movement query and three extracted revision spans with dates and status markers.>, "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)
{
  "select_revision": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which instruction is documented as the current adopted version?",
    "criteria": {
      "candidate_1": "Copy revision instruction 1 verbatim.",
      "candidate_2": "Copy revision instruction 2 verbatim.",
      "candidate_3": "Copy revision instruction 3 verbatim.",
      "none": "The source does not establish a single current version."
    }
  },
  "unresolved_conflict": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Do the notes contain an unresolved conflict about this movement?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Contradictory instructions remain without a clear supersession.",
      "false": "The instructions agree or the source clearly resolves their conflict."
    }
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0079. Festival Fit Extractor

ID: dance-festival-fit-extractor
Sub-discipline: Dance submission planning
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: A choreographer pastes a festival call and a work summary, code extracts program-category descriptions, and Jev selects the source category to copy into a submission checklist.

Why typed decisions: A typed choice uses the festival's real category wording instead of inventing a track or implying acceptance.

TAM: Illustrative: 400K dance work creators
SAM: Illustrative: 60K festival applicants
SOM: Illustrative: 450 early adopters

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Festival Fit Extractor" 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
A choreographer pastes a festival call and a work summary, code extracts program-category descriptions, and Jev selects the source category to copy into a submission checklist.
Discipline: Dance & Choreography (Dance submission planning).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: A typed choice uses the festival's real category wording instead of inventing a track or implying acceptance.

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": <Work summary and three extracted festival category descriptions.>, "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)
{
  "select_category": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which published category best fits the described work under its stated conditions?",
    "criteria": {
      "candidate_1": "Copy festival category description 1 verbatim.",
      "candidate_2": "Copy festival category description 2 verbatim.",
      "candidate_3": "Copy festival category description 3 verbatim.",
      "none": "No candidate has a supported fit."
    }
  },
  "requirements_documented": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the work summary address every explicit requirement of the selected category?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "All published requirements have supporting details in the summary.",
      "false": "One or more requirements are unmet or undocumented."
    }
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0080. Transition Glue Index

ID: dance-transition-glue-index
Sub-discipline: Choreographic composition
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: A choreographer pastes a movement notebook and the end and start states of two phrases, code extracts existing transition descriptions, and Jev selects a documented bridge to copy between them.

Why typed decisions: Source selection surfaces material the choreographer already created without generating a new transition or claiming physical feasibility.

TAM: Illustrative: 800K dance composition practitioners
SAM: Illustrative: 80K movement-notebook users
SOM: Illustrative: 400 early adopters

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Transition Glue Index" 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
A choreographer pastes a movement notebook and the end and start states of two phrases, code extracts existing transition descriptions, and Jev selects a documented bridge to copy between them.
Discipline: Dance & Choreography (Choreographic composition).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: Source selection surfaces material the choreographer already created without generating a new transition or claiming physical feasibility.

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": <Adjacent phrase states and three extracted transition descriptions.>, "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)
{
  "select_bridge": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which documented transition best matches both phrase boundary states?",
    "criteria": {
      "candidate_1": "Copy transition description 1 verbatim.",
      "candidate_2": "Copy transition description 2 verbatim.",
      "candidate_3": "Copy transition description 3 verbatim.",
      "none": "No candidate has a supported match at both boundaries."
    }
  },
  "boundary_match": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How completely do the written boundary details match?",
    "criteria": [
      "0: No supported transition.",
      "1: Only the starting or ending state matches.",
      "2: Both states broadly match but orientation or level is unspecified.",
      "3: Both states explicitly match position, orientation, and level."
    ]
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0081. Audition Evidence Desk

ID: dance-audition-evidence-desk
Sub-discipline: Dance casting
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Casting teams paste audition forms and timestamped assessor notes, and Jev verifies each claimed skill while sending low- or mid-confidence claims to human review.

Why typed decisions: Typed probabilities support consistent verification gates without turning ambiguous audition evidence into confident prose.

TAM: Global performing-arts casting software; unquantified
SAM: Dance companies running documented auditions; unquantified
SOM: Illustrative pilot target: 12 casting teams

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Audition Evidence Desk" 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
Casting teams paste audition forms and timestamped assessor notes, and Jev verifies each claimed skill while sending low- or mid-confidence claims to human review.
Discipline: Dance & Choreography (Dance casting).
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 probabilities support consistent verification gates without turning ambiguous audition evidence into confident prose.

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": <Candidate skill claims, role requirements, and timestamped assessor 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)
{
  "skill_supported": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "For each skill claim, does the supplied evidence support the claimed proficiency?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Specific observations support the skill at the claimed level.",
      "false": "Observations are missing, contradictory, or below the claimed level."
    }
  },
  "review_lane": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which reviewer should resolve an uncertain skill claim?",
    "criteria": {
      "technique": "A technique specialist should assess execution.",
      "performance": "A choreographer should assess interpretation.",
      "documentation": "A casting coordinator should locate missing evidence."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0082. Phrase Credit Ledger

ID: dance-phrase-credit-ledger
Sub-discipline: Choreographic attribution
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Choreographers paste phrase-credit records and rehearsal provenance notes, and Jev checks each attribution against the evidence, queuing low or mid probabilities for human review.

Why typed decisions: Typed verification flags disputed credits without inventing authorship narratives.

TAM: Creative attribution workflow tools; unquantified
SAM: Collaborative choreography projects; unquantified
SOM: Illustrative pilot target: 20 productions

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Phrase Credit Ledger" 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
Choreographers paste phrase-credit records and rehearsal provenance notes, and Jev checks each attribution against the evidence, queuing low or mid probabilities for human review.
Discipline: Dance & Choreography (Choreographic attribution).
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 verification flags disputed credits without inventing authorship narratives.

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": <Phrase identifiers, proposed credits, and dated contribution records>, "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)
{
  "credit_supported": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "For each attribution, do the records support the named contribution?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Dated records directly connect the contributor to the claimed contribution.",
      "false": "The connection is absent, disputed, or contradicted."
    }
  },
  "credit_issue": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "What kind of evidence issue should a reviewer investigate?",
    "criteria": {
      "origin": "The initial creation credit is uncertain.",
      "adaptation": "The extent of a later adaptation is uncertain.",
      "collaboration": "Several contributors have overlapping claims.",
      "record_gap": "The supporting record is incomplete."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0083. Notation Concordance Board

ID: dance-notation-concordance-board
Sub-discipline: Movement notation
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Notators paste structured movement notation and corresponding rehearsal annotations, and Jev verifies each notation field, escalating low or mid probabilities to a notation reviewer.

Why typed decisions: Field-level probabilities let software mark uncertain symbols without silently rewriting the score.

TAM: Movement documentation software; unquantified
SAM: Dance archives and notation practitioners; unquantified
SOM: Illustrative pilot target: 8 notation teams

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Notation Concordance Board" 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
Notators paste structured movement notation and corresponding rehearsal annotations, and Jev verifies each notation field, escalating low or mid probabilities to a notation reviewer.
Discipline: Dance & Choreography (Movement notation).
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: Field-level probabilities let software mark uncertain symbols without silently rewriting the score.

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": <Notation JSON fields and linked rehearsal annotations>, "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)
{
  "notation_supported": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "For each notation field, does the linked observation support its meaning?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The observed action matches the field's movement meaning.",
      "false": "The observation conflicts with the field or leaves it unresolved."
    }
  },
  "notation_dimension": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which notation dimension needs review?",
    "criteria": {
      "body": "Body part or supporting limb.",
      "space": "Direction, facing, or spatial level.",
      "time": "Duration, sequence, or simultaneity.",
      "quality": "Dynamics or movement quality."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0084. Restaging Fidelity Gate

ID: dance-restaging-fidelity-gate
Sub-discipline: Repertory restaging
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Rehearsal directors paste restaging change logs and authorized source notes, and Jev checks each fidelity claim, routing low or mid probabilities to the designated human reviewer.

Why typed decisions: Typed verification preserves explicit boundaries between documented fidelity and interpretive judgment.

TAM: Performing-arts production workflow tools; unquantified
SAM: Companies restaging licensed repertory; unquantified
SOM: Illustrative pilot target: 10 restagings

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Restaging Fidelity 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
Rehearsal directors paste restaging change logs and authorized source notes, and Jev checks each fidelity claim, routing low or mid probabilities to the designated human reviewer.
Discipline: Dance & Choreography (Repertory restaging).
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 verification preserves explicit boundaries between documented fidelity and interpretive 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": <Restaging claims, source descriptions, and approved variation records>, "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)
{
  "fidelity_supported": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does each claim of fidelity follow from the source and approved variations?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The element matches the source or an explicitly approved variation.",
      "false": "The element departs from the record or approval is unclear."
    }
  },
  "review_owner": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Who should examine an uncertain fidelity claim?",
    "criteria": {
      "repetiteur": "Movement execution or phrasing requires review.",
      "rights_representative": "The scope of authorized variation requires review.",
      "archivist": "The source record needs clarification."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0085. Understudy Readiness Grid

ID: dance-understudy-readiness-grid
Sub-discipline: Rehearsal management
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Rehearsal directors paste understudy readiness checklists and rehearsal logs, and Jev verifies each completion claim while holding low- or mid-confidence items for human review.

Why typed decisions: Typed evidence checks keep readiness dashboards from mistaking attendance for demonstrated coverage.

TAM: Performing-arts rehearsal software; unquantified
SAM: Dance ensembles managing understudy coverage; unquantified
SOM: Illustrative pilot target: 15 ensembles

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Understudy Readiness Grid" 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
Rehearsal directors paste understudy readiness checklists and rehearsal logs, and Jev verifies each completion claim while holding low- or mid-confidence items for human review.
Discipline: Dance & Choreography (Rehearsal management).
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 checks keep readiness dashboards from mistaking attendance for demonstrated coverage.

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": <Role checkpoints, readiness claims, and witnessed rehearsal logs>, "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)
{
  "checkpoint_supported": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "For each checkpoint, does the log support the claimed demonstration?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The dancer demonstrated the specified material under the required conditions.",
      "false": "The log shows only attendance, partial coverage, or no relevant observation."
    }
  },
  "coverage_level": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How complete is the documented checkpoint coverage?",
    "criteria": [
      "0: No direct demonstration is documented.",
      "1: Isolated components are documented.",
      "2: Most components are documented with gaps.",
      "3: All specified components are documented."
    ]
  }
}

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

---

## 0086. Class Prerequisite Check

ID: dance-class-prerequisite-check
Sub-discipline: Dance education
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Teachers paste course-entry claims and prior assessment notes, and Jev verifies each prerequisite, sending low or mid probabilities to a teacher rather than automatically placing students.

Why typed decisions: Typed checks expose unsupported prerequisites without generating subjective student profiles.

TAM: Arts education administration tools; unquantified
SAM: Dance schools using assessed course prerequisites; unquantified
SOM: Illustrative pilot target: 20 schools

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Class Prerequisite Check" 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
Teachers paste course-entry claims and prior assessment notes, and Jev verifies each prerequisite, sending low or mid probabilities to a teacher rather than automatically placing students.
Discipline: Dance & Choreography (Dance education).
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 checks expose unsupported prerequisites without generating subjective student profiles.

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": <Course prerequisites, student claims, and teacher assessment excerpts>, "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)
{
  "prerequisite_supported": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the supplied assessment support each claimed prerequisite?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "A relevant assessment explicitly demonstrates the required capability.",
      "false": "The evidence is irrelevant, incomplete, or inconsistent with the requirement."
    }
  },
  "evidence_gap": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "What should the teacher investigate for an uncertain prerequisite?",
    "criteria": {
      "terminology": "Different terminology may describe an equivalent skill.",
      "proficiency": "The skill is named but its level is unclear.",
      "currency": "The assessment may not reflect current capability.",
      "missing": "No relevant assessment is supplied."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0087. Rubric Evidence Pins

ID: dance-rubric-evidence-pins
Sub-discipline: Dance assessment
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Dance teachers paste rubric selections and observation notes, and Jev verifies each selected descriptor, escalating low- or mid-confidence matches before results are finalized.

Why typed decisions: Typed probabilities make assessment evidence auditable while leaving final grading with teachers.

TAM: Arts assessment software; unquantified
SAM: Dance educators using formal rubrics; unquantified
SOM: Illustrative pilot target: 40 teachers

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Rubric Evidence Pins" 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
Dance teachers paste rubric selections and observation notes, and Jev verifies each selected descriptor, escalating low- or mid-confidence matches before results are finalized.
Discipline: Dance & Choreography (Dance assessment).
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 probabilities make assessment evidence auditable while leaving final grading with teachers.

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": <Rubric descriptors, selected levels, and linked observation 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)
{
  "descriptor_supported": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the observation evidence support each selected rubric descriptor?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Specific observations meet the descriptor's stated conditions.",
      "false": "The notes are generic, contradictory, or support a different descriptor."
    }
  },
  "evidence_specificity": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How specifically do the notes describe the assessed behavior?",
    "criteria": [
      "0: No observable behavior is described.",
      "1: Broad impressions are recorded.",
      "2: Concrete examples cover part of the descriptor.",
      "3: Concrete examples cover all descriptor conditions."
    ]
  }
}

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

---

## 0088. Accessible Class Audit

ID: dance-accessible-class-audit
Sub-discipline: Inclusive dance teaching
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Teachers paste advertised class-access features and lesson-plan excerpts, and Jev checks each claim against documented provisions, queuing low or mid probabilities for human review.

Why typed decisions: Typed verification prevents broad accessibility labels from substituting for specific documented provisions.

TAM: Accessible arts programming tools; unquantified
SAM: Dance providers publishing concrete access provisions; unquantified
SOM: Illustrative pilot target: 15 providers

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Accessible Class Audit" 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
Teachers paste advertised class-access features and lesson-plan excerpts, and Jev checks each claim against documented provisions, queuing low or mid probabilities for human review.
Discipline: Dance & Choreography (Inclusive dance teaching).
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 verification prevents broad accessibility labels from substituting for specific documented provisions.

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": <Access claims, lesson activities, venue facts, and adaptation 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)
{
  "access_claim_supported": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the evidence substantiate each specific advertised access feature?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The promised provision is explicitly documented for the relevant activity.",
      "false": "The provision is missing, conditional without disclosure, or contradicted."
    }
  },
  "access_review_lane": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which area needs review for an uncertain access claim?",
    "criteria": {
      "movement_options": "Alternative movement pathways need confirmation.",
      "instruction_format": "Written or visual instructional provisions need confirmation.",
      "venue": "Physical access or facility details need confirmation.",
      "session_structure": "Breaks, pacing, or participation options need 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
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

---

## 0089. Contact Consent Gate

ID: dance-contact-consent-gate
Sub-discipline: Partnering coordination
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Movement directors paste proposed contact assignments and current permission records, and Jev checks each permission claim, sending low or mid probabilities to a designated human without authorizing contact.

Why typed decisions: Typed evidence checks reveal scope mismatches while preserving the need for ongoing, revocable human consent.

TAM: Performing-arts consent workflow tools; unquantified
SAM: Dance productions documenting partnered contact; unquantified
SOM: Illustrative pilot target: 12 productions

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Contact Consent 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
Movement directors paste proposed contact assignments and current permission records, and Jev checks each permission claim, sending low or mid probabilities to a designated human without authorizing contact.
Discipline: Dance & Choreography (Partnering coordination).
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 checks reveal scope mismatches while preserving the need for ongoing, revocable human consent.

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": <Contact assignments and scoped, dated, revocable permission records>, "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)
{
  "permission_documented": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the current record explicitly cover each proposed contact assignment?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The documented scope covers the action and participants with no recorded withdrawal.",
      "false": "Scope, participants, currency, or withdrawal status leaves coverage unsupported."
    }
  },
  "consent_review_issue": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "What requires human clarification?",
    "criteria": {
      "action_scope": "The proposed action exceeds or differs from the documented scope.",
      "participants": "The documented permission concerns different partners.",
      "currency": "A change or withdrawal may supersede the record.",
      "missing_record": "Relevant documentation is absent."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0090. Costume Motion Proof

ID: dance-costume-motion-proof
Sub-discipline: Costume coordination
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Choreographers paste costume movement-clearance claims and fitting-test notes, and Jev verifies each claim, holding low- or mid-confidence items for wardrobe and dancer review.

Why typed decisions: Typed checks distinguish tested movement compatibility from reassuring but unsupported descriptions.

TAM: Live-production costume workflow tools; unquantified
SAM: Dance wardrobe teams documenting motion tests; unquantified
SOM: Illustrative pilot target: 10 wardrobe teams

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Costume Motion Proof" 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
Choreographers paste costume movement-clearance claims and fitting-test notes, and Jev verifies each claim, holding low- or mid-confidence items for wardrobe and dancer review.
Discipline: Dance & Choreography (Costume coordination).
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 checks distinguish tested movement compatibility from reassuring but unsupported descriptions.

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": <Costume versions, movement requirements, and fitting-test observations>, "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)
{
  "clearance_claim_supported": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does each clearance claim have matching evidence for this costume version and movement?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The relevant movement was tested in the specified costume version with supporting observations.",
      "false": "The version or movement differs, or observations are missing or contradictory."
    }
  },
  "wardrobe_review_lane": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "What should the wardrobe reviewer inspect?",
    "criteria": {
      "range": "Restriction during extension, bending, or rotation.",
      "entanglement": "Interaction with partners, props, or costume elements.",
      "retention": "Fastenings or garment position during movement.",
      "version": "Whether the test used the current costume."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0091. Prop Handoff Proof

ID: dance-prop-handoff-proof
Sub-discipline: Dance stage management
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Stage managers paste prop handoff tables and run-through notes, and Jev verifies each ownership and timing field, queuing low or mid probabilities for human review.

Why typed decisions: Typed field checks expose ambiguous handoffs without inventing a plausible backstage sequence.

TAM: Stage-management workflow software; unquantified
SAM: Prop-intensive dance productions; unquantified
SOM: Illustrative pilot target: 18 productions

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Prop Handoff Proof" 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
Stage managers paste prop handoff tables and run-through notes, and Jev verifies each ownership and timing field, queuing low or mid probabilities for human review.
Discipline: Dance & Choreography (Dance stage management).
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 field checks expose ambiguous handoffs without inventing a plausible backstage sequence.

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": <Prop handoff JSON and timestamped run-through observations>, "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)
{
  "handoff_field_supported": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "For each handoff field, does the observed sequence support its value?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The notes explicitly support the person, location, or timing specified.",
      "false": "The field conflicts with the observed sequence or lacks evidence."
    }
  },
  "handoff_issue": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which handoff dimension requires review?",
    "criteria": {
      "custody": "Who holds or receives the prop is unclear.",
      "location": "The exchange position is unclear.",
      "timing": "The exchange cue or count is unclear.",
      "reset": "The post-use return state is unclear."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0092. Formation Label Check

ID: dance-formation-label-check
Sub-discipline: Spatial choreography
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Choreographers paste formation labels and coordinate exports with performer annotations, and Jev verifies each spatial claim, routing low or mid probabilities to human review.

Why typed decisions: Typed checks connect semantic labels such as staggered or mirrored to evidence without replacing the choreographer's diagram.

TAM: Choreography planning software; unquantified
SAM: Ensembles using digital formation diagrams; unquantified
SOM: Illustrative pilot target: 25 ensembles

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Formation Label Check" 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
Choreographers paste formation labels and coordinate exports with performer annotations, and Jev verifies each spatial claim, routing low or mid probabilities to human review.
Discipline: Dance & Choreography (Spatial choreography).
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 checks connect semantic labels such as staggered or mirrored to evidence without replacing the choreographer's diagram.

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": <Formation claims, coordinate JSON, and performer-facing annotations>, "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)
{
  "formation_claim_supported": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does each formation claim match the coordinates and supplied spatial conventions?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The arrangement satisfies the claim under the documented conventions.",
      "false": "The arrangement contradicts the claim or the conventions are unclear."
    }
  },
  "spatial_review_issue": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which spatial interpretation needs review?",
    "criteria": {
      "alignment": "Row, column, or stagger relationships are uncertain.",
      "symmetry": "Mirrored or balanced relationships are uncertain.",
      "facing": "Orientation relative to audience or partners is uncertain.",
      "reference": "Stage coordinates or viewpoint conventions are uncertain."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0093. Cue Anchor Verifier

ID: dance-cue-anchor-verifier
Sub-discipline: Movement cueing
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Movement directors paste cue sheets and annotated rehearsal timelines, and Jev checks each cue's claimed movement anchor, escalating low or mid probabilities before cue-sheet approval.

Why typed decisions: Typed verification flags uncertain movement-to-cue links without fabricating timing instructions.

TAM: Live-performance cueing tools; unquantified
SAM: Dance productions with movement-triggered cues; unquantified
SOM: Illustrative pilot target: 15 cueing teams

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Cue Anchor Verifier" 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
Movement directors paste cue sheets and annotated rehearsal timelines, and Jev checks each cue's claimed movement anchor, escalating low or mid probabilities before cue-sheet approval.
Discipline: Dance & Choreography (Movement cueing).
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 verification flags uncertain movement-to-cue links without fabricating timing instructions.

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": <Cue fields, phrase identifiers, and annotated rehearsal timelines>, "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)
{
  "anchor_supported": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the timeline support each cue's stated movement anchor?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "A uniquely identified movement event matches the stated anchor.",
      "false": "The event is absent, ambiguous, or inconsistent with the cue."
    }
  },
  "anchor_issue": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "What makes the cue anchor uncertain?",
    "criteria": {
      "repetition": "The same movement appears at multiple points.",
      "description": "The cue description does not identify the observed movement clearly.",
      "sequence": "The stated before-or-after relationship conflicts with the timeline.",
      "version": "The cue and timeline refer to different revisions."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0094. Rehearsal Change Closure

ID: dance-rehearsal-change-closure
Sub-discipline: Choreographic revision
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Rehearsal directors paste marked-complete corrections and subsequent rehearsal notes, and Jev verifies each closure claim, returning low- or mid-confidence items to a human review queue.

Why typed decisions: Typed decisions prevent an issue tracker from treating acknowledgment as evidence that a correction was demonstrated.

TAM: Creative revision tracking tools; unquantified
SAM: Dance teams keeping structured rehearsal notes; unquantified
SOM: Illustrative pilot target: 30 rehearsal teams

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Rehearsal Change Closure" 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
Rehearsal directors paste marked-complete corrections and subsequent rehearsal notes, and Jev verifies each closure claim, returning low- or mid-confidence items to a human review queue.
Discipline: Dance & Choreography (Choreographic revision).
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 decisions prevent an issue tracker from treating acknowledgment as evidence that a correction was demonstrated.

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": <Correction tickets, closure claims, and later rehearsal observations>, "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)
{
  "closure_supported": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does later evidence show that each requested correction was demonstrated?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "A subsequent observation explicitly confirms the requested change.",
      "false": "The record only acknowledges the note or shows unresolved execution."
    }
  },
  "confirmation_strength": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How thoroughly is the correction confirmed?",
    "criteria": [
      "0: No subsequent demonstration is recorded.",
      "1: A partial or ambiguous demonstration is recorded.",
      "2: One clear demonstration is recorded.",
      "3: Clear demonstrations recur across relevant runs."
    ]
  }
}

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

---

## 0095. Workshop Promise Audit

ID: dance-workshop-promise-audit
Sub-discipline: Workshop programming
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Dance teachers paste workshop listing claims and session plans, and Jev verifies each promised activity or outcome against planned evidence, queuing low or mid probabilities for editorial review.

Why typed decisions: Typed checks can block unsupported listing fields without generating replacement marketing copy.

TAM: Creative workshop publishing tools; unquantified
SAM: Dance educators and workshop presenters; unquantified
SOM: Illustrative pilot target: 25 workshop providers

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Workshop Promise Audit" 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
Dance teachers paste workshop listing claims and session plans, and Jev verifies each promised activity or outcome against planned evidence, queuing low or mid probabilities for editorial review.
Discipline: Dance & Choreography (Workshop programming).
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 checks can block unsupported listing fields without generating replacement marketing copy.

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": <Workshop claims, activity plans, durations, and assessment methods>, "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)
{
  "promise_supported": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the plan substantiate each advertised activity or provide a credible opportunity to assess the claimed outcome?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Relevant activities and, where needed, assessment opportunities are explicitly planned.",
      "false": "The promise lacks corresponding activities or implies an unsupported guaranteed result."
    }
  },
  "promise_review_issue": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "What aspect of the promise needs editorial review?",
    "criteria": {
      "content": "The advertised topic is missing from the plan.",
      "depth": "The advertised depth exceeds the documented activity scope.",
      "outcome": "The outcome claim exceeds what the plan can substantiate.",
      "format": "The advertised participation format differs from the plan."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0096. Dance Archive Facets

ID: dance-dance-archive-facets
Sub-discipline: Dance archiving
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Archivists paste proposed catalogue tags and source programme excerpts, and Jev verifies each metadata field, holding low- or mid-confidence tags for human review before indexing.

Why typed decisions: Typed verification prevents speculative metadata from becoming authoritative search filters.

TAM: Cultural collection management tools; unquantified
SAM: Dance archives digitizing programme metadata; unquantified
SOM: Illustrative pilot target: 6 archives

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Dance Archive Facets" 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
Archivists paste proposed catalogue tags and source programme excerpts, and Jev verifies each metadata field, holding low- or mid-confidence tags for human review before indexing.
Discipline: Dance & Choreography (Dance archiving).
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 verification prevents speculative metadata from becoming authoritative search filters.

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": <Proposed catalogue fields and linked programme or archive excerpts>, "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)
{
  "metadata_supported": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the source explicitly support each proposed metadata field without speculative inference?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The source states the value or an unambiguous equivalent.",
      "false": "The value is inferred, disputed, missing, or contradicted."
    }
  },
  "metadata_review_lane": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which cataloguing specialty should review the uncertain field?",
    "criteria": {
      "work_identity": "Work title, version, or production identity.",
      "credits": "Named creative or performing contributions.",
      "movement_terms": "Style or technique terminology used by the source.",
      "event_details": "Performance date, venue, or presentation context."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0097. Usage Permission Desk

ID: dance-usage-permission-desk
Sub-discipline: Choreography licensing
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Producers paste proposed choreography-use fields and permission excerpts, and Jev checks each claimed authorization, sending low or mid probabilities to human rights review rather than approving use.

Why typed decisions: Typed evidence checks isolate unsupported permission fields without presenting generated legal interpretations as clearance.

TAM: Creative rights administration tools; unquantified
SAM: Producers licensing choreography for defined uses; unquantified
SOM: Illustrative pilot target: 10 producers

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Usage Permission Desk" 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
Producers paste proposed choreography-use fields and permission excerpts, and Jev checks each claimed authorization, sending low or mid probabilities to human rights review rather than approving use.
Discipline: Dance & Choreography (Choreography licensing).
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 checks isolate unsupported permission fields without presenting generated legal interpretations as clearance.

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": <Proposed use JSON, permission excerpts, and amendment records>, "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)
{
  "authorization_supported": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the supplied permission language explicitly support each claimed use field?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The stated permission directly covers the field with no supplied conflicting amendment.",
      "false": "Coverage is absent, ambiguous, conditional, or contradicted."
    }
  },
  "rights_review_issue": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which permission dimension requires human review?",
    "criteria": {
      "presentation": "Live performance, recording, or distribution scope.",
      "territory_term": "Location, dates, or duration of permission.",
      "adaptation": "Changes to choreography or presentation.",
      "conditions": "Credit, reporting, or other permission conditions."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0098. Cultural Context Check

ID: dance-cultural-context-check
Sub-discipline: Dance programme curation
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Curators paste programme fields naming movement traditions and supplied artist-approved sources, and Jev verifies each contextual claim, escalating low or mid probabilities to a human cultural reviewer.

Why typed decisions: Typed checks distinguish source-backed descriptions from unsupported cultural claims without inventing context.

TAM: Cultural programme review tools; unquantified
SAM: Dance presenters publishing sourced programme information; unquantified
SOM: Illustrative pilot target: 12 presenters

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Cultural Context Check" 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
Curators paste programme fields naming movement traditions and supplied artist-approved sources, and Jev verifies each contextual claim, escalating low or mid probabilities to a human cultural reviewer.
Discipline: Dance & Choreography (Dance programme curation).
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 checks distinguish source-backed descriptions from unsupported cultural claims without inventing context.

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": <Programme claims, artist-approved references, and source provenance>, "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)
{
  "context_claim_supported": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does an appropriate supplied source support each contextual claim at its stated scope?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The source directly supports the wording and scope of the claim.",
      "false": "The claim generalizes beyond the source, conflicts with it, or lacks support."
    }
  },
  "context_review_issue": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which contextual issue needs human review?",
    "criteria": {
      "terminology": "Naming or transliteration needs confirmation.",
      "lineage": "A claimed teaching or artistic lineage needs confirmation.",
      "scope": "A claim extends from a specific practice to a broader community.",
      "source_conflict": "Supplied references disagree."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0099. Competition Entry Proof

ID: dance-competition-entry-proof
Sub-discipline: Dance competition administration
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Coaches paste routine-entry fields, published category rules, and routine breakdowns, and Jev verifies each category claim, queuing low or mid probabilities before a human submits the entry.

Why typed decisions: Typed verification surfaces semantic rule mismatches without allowing generated explanations to decide eligibility.

TAM: Competition entry management tools; unquantified
SAM: Dance studios entering rule-based competitions; unquantified
SOM: Illustrative pilot target: 30 studios

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Competition Entry Proof" 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
Coaches paste routine-entry fields, published category rules, and routine breakdowns, and Jev verifies each category claim, queuing low or mid probabilities before a human submits the entry.
Discipline: Dance & Choreography (Dance competition administration).
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 verification surfaces semantic rule mismatches without allowing generated explanations to decide eligibility.

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": <Entry claims, category definitions, and annotated routine breakdowns>, "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)
{
  "entry_claim_supported": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the routine evidence support each entry claim under the supplied category definition?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The documented routine satisfies the relevant definition.",
      "false": "The routine conflicts with the definition or lacks enough detail to establish fit."
    }
  },
  "entry_review_issue": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which category interpretation needs review?",
    "criteria": {
      "style": "Movement vocabulary may not match the category.",
      "format": "Solo, duet, ensemble, or other participation structure is unclear.",
      "content": "Required or restricted movement content needs interpretation.",
      "mixed_category": "The routine spans categories with unclear precedence."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0100. Touring Adaptation Proof

ID: dance-touring-adaptation-proof
Sub-discipline: Touring choreography
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Touring directors paste venue-adaptation claims, choreographic constraints, and site-rehearsal notes, and Jev verifies each claimed accommodation, escalating low or mid probabilities without issuing safety clearance.

Why typed decisions: Typed checks distinguish documented artistic accommodation from assumed compatibility across venues.

TAM: Touring performing-arts workflow tools; unquantified
SAM: Dance companies adapting repertory across venues; unquantified
SOM: Illustrative pilot target: 10 touring companies

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Touring Adaptation Proof" 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
Touring directors paste venue-adaptation claims, choreographic constraints, and site-rehearsal notes, and Jev verifies each claimed accommodation, escalating low or mid probabilities without issuing safety clearance.
Discipline: Dance & Choreography (Touring choreography).
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 checks distinguish documented artistic accommodation from assumed compatibility across venues.

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": <Venue adaptations, protected choreographic requirements, and site-rehearsal observations>, "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)
{
  "adaptation_supported": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the site evidence support each claim that an adaptation preserves the specified choreographic requirement?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The relevant requirement was explicitly demonstrated with the proposed adaptation.",
      "false": "The requirement was not tested, was compromised, or remains unclear."
    }
  },
  "tour_review_lane": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which adaptation area should a human examine?",
    "criteria": {
      "spacing": "Formation scale or travel pathways.",
      "entrances": "Entrance, exit, or crossover continuity.",
      "sightlines": "Visibility of required movement relationships.",
      "scenic_relationship": "Interaction between choreography and relocated scenic elements."
    }
  }
}

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

---

# Discipline: Music & Sound Design

Audience: musicians, producers, composers, sound designers
Market anchor: the music software market (~$11B and music creators (~50M))

## 0101. Sample Landing Pads

ID: music-sample-landing-pads
Sub-discipline: Sample organization
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: The user pastes sample descriptions and analyzer metadata, and Jev routes each sample to a drum, tonal, or texture handler with route-specific readiness checks.

Why typed decisions: Typed routes and checks can populate sampler banks directly without interpreting generated prose.

TAM: Est. $120M/yr sample-workflow software
SAM: Est. $18M/yr independent sample collectors
SOM: Target $180K ARR at 3,000 × $60

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Sample Landing Pads" 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
The user pastes sample descriptions and analyzer metadata, and Jev routes each sample to a drum, tonal, or texture handler with route-specific readiness checks.
Discipline: Music & Sound Design (Sample organization).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: Typed routes and checks can populate sampler banks directly without interpreting generated prose.

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 descriptions, duration, pitch confidence, transient density, and target sampler settings.>, "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)
{
  "sample_route": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which sampler handler best fits this sample?",
    "criteria": {
      "drum": "A discrete percussive event suited to a drum pad.",
      "tonal": "A pitched sound suited to keyboard mapping.",
      "texture": "An evolving or diffuse sound suited to a texture layer."
    }
  },
  "preparation_needed": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "For drum, is transient trimming needed; for tonal, is pitch correction needed; for texture, is loop-boundary repair needed?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The selected handler's preparation step is needed.",
      "false": "The sample is ready for the selected handler."
    }
  },
  "mapping_fitness": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Grade pad playability for drum, pitch stability for tonal, or sustained-layer usefulness for texture.",
    "criteria": [
      "0: Poor fit for the selected handler.",
      "1: Usable after substantial preparation.",
      "2: Good fit with minor preparation.",
      "3: Immediately useful."
    ]
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0102. Mix Repair Switchboard

ID: music-mix-repair-switchboard
Sub-discipline: Mix engineering
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: The user pastes instrumental mix notes and track measurements, and Jev routes each issue to spectral, dynamics, or spatial repair.

Why typed decisions: A typed repair route can select the right inspection panel and prioritize work without inventing processing instructions.

TAM: Est. $180M/yr mix-workflow utilities
SAM: Est. $24M/yr independent mix engineers
SOM: Target $240K ARR at 2,000 × $120

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Mix Repair Switchboard" 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
The user pastes instrumental mix notes and track measurements, and Jev routes each issue to spectral, dynamics, or spatial repair.
Discipline: Music & Sound Design (Mix engineering).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: A typed repair route can select the right inspection panel and prioritize work without inventing processing instructions.

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": <Mix notes, instrument roles, spectral overlap, crest factors, and stereo measurements.>, "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)
{
  "repair_route": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which repair handler best addresses the stated issue?",
    "criteria": {
      "spectral": "Frequency balance or masking is the main concern.",
      "dynamics": "Envelope, peaks, or level consistency is the main concern.",
      "spatial": "Width, placement, or depth is the main concern."
    }
  },
  "comparison_required": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "For spectral, should competing tracks be auditioned together; for dynamics, should bypass be loudness-matched; for spatial, should mono compatibility be checked?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The branch-specific comparison is necessary.",
      "false": "The issue can be assessed without that comparison."
    }
  },
  "repair_priority": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Grade masking severity for spectral, envelope disruption for dynamics, or placement instability for spatial.",
    "criteria": [
      "0: Negligible impact.",
      "1: Noticeable but nonessential.",
      "2: Clearly harms the mix.",
      "3: Blocks a reliable mix decision."
    ]
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0103. Harmony Fork Finder

ID: music-harmony-fork-finder
Sub-discipline: Harmonic composition
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: The user pastes a chord progression, key context, and compositional intent, and Jev routes each harmonic event to diatonic, borrowed-color, or modulation analysis.

Why typed decisions: Typed harmonic categories can drive existing notation overlays and analysis tools without generating musical passages.

TAM: Est. $75M/yr composition-analysis tools
SAM: Est. $9M/yr harmony-focused composers
SOM: Target $90K ARR at 1,500 × $60

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Harmony Fork Finder" 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
The user pastes a chord progression, key context, and compositional intent, and Jev routes each harmonic event to diatonic, borrowed-color, or modulation analysis.
Discipline: Music & Sound Design (Harmonic composition).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: Typed harmonic categories can drive existing notation overlays and analysis tools without generating musical passages.

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": <Chord symbols, local key, neighboring chords, and intended harmonic effect.>, "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)
{
  "harmony_route": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which analysis handler best explains this harmonic event in context?",
    "criteria": {
      "diatonic": "The event functions within the established key.",
      "borrowed_color": "The event adds chromatic color without establishing a new key.",
      "modulation": "The event helps establish a different tonal center."
    }
  },
  "support_present": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "For diatonic, does surrounding harmony support its function; for borrowed_color, does the original center remain clear; for modulation, is the new center confirmed?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Context supports the selected interpretation.",
      "false": "The selected interpretation lacks contextual support."
    }
  },
  "harmonic_salience": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Grade functional emphasis for diatonic, color contrast for borrowed_color, or tonal departure for modulation.",
    "criteria": [
      "0: Barely perceptible.",
      "1: Subtle.",
      "2: Clearly audible.",
      "3: Structurally defining."
    ]
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0104. Groove Role Grid

ID: music-groove-role-grid
Sub-discipline: Rhythm programming
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: The user pastes MIDI-event summaries and groove intent, and Jev routes each rhythmic layer to anchor, subdivision, or accent handling.

Why typed decisions: Typed rhythmic roles let a sequencer expose the appropriate editing controls without guessing from a written critique.

TAM: Est. $90M/yr rhythm-workflow tools
SAM: Est. $12M/yr MIDI beatmakers
SOM: Target $120K ARR at 2,000 × $60

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Groove Role Grid" 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
The user pastes MIDI-event summaries and groove intent, and Jev routes each rhythmic layer to anchor, subdivision, or accent handling.
Discipline: Music & Sound Design (Rhythm programming).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: Typed rhythmic roles let a sequencer expose the appropriate editing controls without guessing from a written critique.

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": <Onset grids, velocities, instrument labels, meter, and groove intent.>, "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)
{
  "rhythm_route": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "What is this layer's primary rhythmic job?",
    "criteria": {
      "anchor": "Establishes the main pulse or backbeat.",
      "subdivision": "Fills the pulse with recurring smaller divisions.",
      "accent": "Adds occasional emphasis, interruption, or punctuation."
    }
  },
  "timing_review": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "For anchor, does pulse stability need review; for subdivision, does swing consistency need review; for accent, does collision with focal hits need review?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The branch-specific timing issue warrants review.",
      "false": "Timing appears consistent with the intended role."
    }
  },
  "role_strength": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Grade pulse clarity for anchor, flow contribution for subdivision, or emphasis effectiveness for accent.",
    "criteria": [
      "0: Role is obscured.",
      "1: Role is weak.",
      "2: Role is clear.",
      "3: Role strongly supports the groove."
    ]
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0105. Stem Intake Dock

ID: music-stem-intake-dock
Sub-discipline: Session preparation
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: The user pastes an instrumental stem manifest and export notes, and Jev routes each file to direct import, alignment inspection, or replacement request.

Why typed decisions: Typed intake decisions can gate session imports and populate fixed issue badges without ambiguous prose.

TAM: Est. $100M/yr studio-handoff software
SAM: Est. $15M/yr remote production teams
SOM: Target $150K ARR at 1,250 × $120

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Stem Intake Dock" 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
The user pastes an instrumental stem manifest and export notes, and Jev routes each file to direct import, alignment inspection, or replacement request.
Discipline: Music & Sound Design (Session preparation).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: Typed intake decisions can gate session imports and populate fixed issue badges without ambiguous prose.

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": <Stem filenames, start times, lengths, formats, instrument roles, and export 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)
{
  "intake_route": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which intake handler should receive this stem?",
    "criteria": {
      "direct_import": "The stem appears compatible and correctly positioned.",
      "alignment_check": "Timing or placement needs inspection before import.",
      "replacement": "The delivered file appears unsuitable for the session."
    }
  },
  "branch_gate": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "For direct_import, does the file meet session format rules; for alignment_check, is a reliable synchronization reference available; for replacement, is the defect supported by explicit evidence?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The selected branch's gate is satisfied.",
      "false": "The selected branch's gate is not satisfied."
    }
  },
  "intake_effort": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Grade setup effort for direct_import, synchronization effort for alignment_check, or delivery disruption for replacement.",
    "criteria": [
      "0: Negligible.",
      "1: Small local task.",
      "2: Significant session preparation.",
      "3: Blocks session progress."
    ]
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0106. Orchestral Seat Planner

ID: music-orchestral-seat-planner
Sub-discipline: Orchestration
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: The user pastes orchestral passage summaries and ensemble constraints, and Jev routes each part to foreground, support, or color treatment.

Why typed decisions: Typed orchestral roles can control score filters and balance-check views without generating notes or commentary.

TAM: Est. $80M/yr orchestration utilities
SAM: Est. $8M/yr small scoring teams
SOM: Target $96K ARR at 800 × $120

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Orchestral Seat Planner" 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
The user pastes orchestral passage summaries and ensemble constraints, and Jev routes each part to foreground, support, or color treatment.
Discipline: Music & Sound Design (Orchestration).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: Typed orchestral roles can control score filters and balance-check views without generating notes or commentary.

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": <Instrument ranges, dynamics, articulation summaries, passage roles, and ensemble roster.>, "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)
{
  "orchestration_route": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which orchestration role best describes this part in context?",
    "criteria": {
      "foreground": "Carries the primary theme or focal gesture.",
      "support": "Provides harmonic, rhythmic, or structural foundation.",
      "color": "Adds timbral shading or decorative detail."
    }
  },
  "balance_risk": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "For foreground, is the part likely to be masked; for support, is it likely to overpower the focal material; for color, is it likely to disappear unintentionally?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The selected role has a material balance risk.",
      "false": "The selected role appears appropriately balanced."
    }
  },
  "role_suitability": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Grade projection for foreground, foundation strength for support, or timbral contribution for color.",
    "criteria": [
      "0: Poorly suited.",
      "1: Needs substantial adjustment.",
      "2: Suitable with minor adjustment.",
      "3: Strongly suited."
    ]
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0107. Adaptive Cue Junction

ID: music-adaptive-cue-junction
Sub-discipline: Game music implementation
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: The user pastes gameplay-event descriptions and music-system rules, and Jev routes each event to a stinger, layer change, or section transition.

Why typed decisions: Typed event routes map directly to middleware handlers while branch checks prevent musically inappropriate triggers.

TAM: Est. $110M/yr game-audio workflow tools
SAM: Est. $14M/yr indie adaptive-music teams
SOM: Target $168K ARR at 700 × $240

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Adaptive Cue Junction" 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
The user pastes gameplay-event descriptions and music-system rules, and Jev routes each event to a stinger, layer change, or section transition.
Discipline: Music & Sound Design (Game music implementation).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: Typed event routes map directly to middleware handlers while branch checks prevent musically inappropriate triggers.

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": <Gameplay events, intensity context, current music state, and transition rules.>, "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)
{
  "music_event_route": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which music-system handler best fits this gameplay event?",
    "criteria": {
      "stinger": "A short musical punctuation fits the event.",
      "layer_change": "An ongoing intensity or texture adjustment fits the event.",
      "section_transition": "A change of musical section fits the event."
    }
  },
  "synchronization_required": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "For stinger, should onset wait for a beat; for layer_change, should activation wait for a bar; for section_transition, should switching wait for a phrase boundary?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The branch-specific musical boundary should be respected.",
      "false": "Immediate response is more appropriate."
    }
  },
  "event_weight": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Grade punctuation importance for stinger, sustained intensity change for layer_change, or structural significance for section_transition.",
    "criteria": [
      "0: No meaningful musical response needed.",
      "1: Minor response.",
      "2: Clear response.",
      "3: Major musical response."
    ]
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0108. Scene Music Compass

ID: music-scene-music-compass
Sub-discipline: Screen scoring
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: The user pastes scene action summaries and scoring intentions, and Jev routes each scene beat to underscore, musical punctuation, or intentional silence.

Why typed decisions: Typed spotting decisions can become timeline markers and cue-sheet states without generating a score or written treatment.

TAM: Est. $95M/yr screen-scoring workflow software
SAM: Est. $10M/yr independent screen composers
SOM: Target $120K ARR at 1,000 × $120

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Scene Music Compass" 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
The user pastes scene action summaries and scoring intentions, and Jev routes each scene beat to underscore, musical punctuation, or intentional silence.
Discipline: Music & Sound Design (Screen scoring).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: Typed spotting decisions can become timeline markers and cue-sheet states without generating a score or written treatment.

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": <Scene beats, emotional turns, existing cue boundaries, and scoring intentions.>, "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)
{
  "spotting_route": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which spotting treatment best serves this scene beat?",
    "criteria": {
      "underscore": "Continuous musical support serves the scene.",
      "punctuation": "A localized musical gesture serves the scene.",
      "silence": "Withholding music best serves the scene."
    }
  },
  "boundary_check": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "For underscore, should the cue span the next edit; for punctuation, is a precise action sync needed; for silence, should the previous cue resolve before this beat?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The branch-specific boundary treatment is appropriate.",
      "false": "The branch-specific boundary treatment is unnecessary."
    }
  },
  "treatment_importance": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Grade sustained emotional support for underscore, hit significance for punctuation, or dramatic value of absence for silence.",
    "criteria": [
      "0: Little dramatic value.",
      "1: Modest value.",
      "2: Clear dramatic value.",
      "3: Essential to the intended scene effect."
    ]
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0109. Foley Action Bins

ID: music-foley-action-bins
Sub-discipline: Foley editing
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: The user pastes visual-action descriptions and available prop metadata, and Jev routes each action to impact, friction, or movement recording.

Why typed decisions: Typed action classes create recordable work queues with appropriate capture checks instead of free-form sound suggestions.

TAM: Est. $60M/yr Foley-workflow software
SAM: Est. $6M/yr boutique Foley teams
SOM: Target $72K ARR at 600 × $120

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Foley Action Bins" 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
The user pastes visual-action descriptions and available prop metadata, and Jev routes each action to impact, friction, or movement recording.
Discipline: Music & Sound Design (Foley editing).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: Typed action classes create recordable work queues with appropriate capture checks instead of free-form sound suggestions.

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": <Action descriptions, materials, shot scale, synchronization needs, and prop inventory.>, "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)
{
  "foley_route": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which recording handler captures the action's dominant sound behavior?",
    "criteria": {
      "impact": "A collision, strike, or abrupt contact dominates.",
      "friction": "Rubbing, scraping, or sustained contact dominates.",
      "movement": "A sequence of object or body movements dominates."
    }
  },
  "capture_requirement": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "For impact, are multiple force levels needed; for friction, is a sustained clean take needed; for movement, is continuous picture-synchronized performance needed?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The selected branch requires this capture treatment.",
      "false": "A simpler capture is sufficient."
    }
  },
  "sync_sensitivity": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Grade contact-point precision for impact, duration matching for friction, or gesture sequencing for movement.",
    "criteria": [
      "0: Loose synchronization is acceptable.",
      "1: Approximate timing is sufficient.",
      "2: Close synchronization is important.",
      "3: Precise synchronization is essential."
    ]
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0110. Patch Habitat Atlas

ID: music-patch-habitat-atlas
Sub-discipline: Synth preset curation
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: The user pastes synth-preset tags, parameter summaries, and audition notes, and Jev routes each patch to lead, bed, or motion browsing.

Why typed decisions: Typed roles and audition flags produce consistent preset filters without relying on descriptive naming.

TAM: Est. $100M/yr preset-management utilities
SAM: Est. $12M/yr hardware and software synth collectors
SOM: Target $120K ARR at 2,000 × $60

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Patch Habitat Atlas" 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
The user pastes synth-preset tags, parameter summaries, and audition notes, and Jev routes each patch to lead, bed, or motion browsing.
Discipline: Music & Sound Design (Synth preset curation).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: Typed roles and audition flags produce consistent preset filters without relying on descriptive naming.

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": <Preset parameters, envelope summaries, modulation tags, and audition 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)
{
  "patch_route": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which musical-use browser should contain this patch primarily?",
    "criteria": {
      "lead": "Suited to a focal melodic line.",
      "bed": "Suited to sustained harmonic or atmospheric support.",
      "motion": "Suited to repeating, pulsing, or evolving rhythmic activity."
    }
  },
  "audition_check": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "For lead, should legato behavior be tested; for bed, should release overlap be tested; for motion, should tempo synchronization be tested?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The branch-specific audition check is important.",
      "false": "That check is not important for this patch."
    }
  },
  "performance_fit": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Grade melodic expressiveness for lead, sustained cohesion for bed, or rhythmic usefulness for motion.",
    "criteria": [
      "0: Poor role fit.",
      "1: Specialized or limited fit.",
      "2: Good role fit.",
      "3: Excellent role fit."
    ]
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0111. Arrangement Pressure Valves

ID: music-arrangement-pressure-valves
Sub-discipline: Music arrangement
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: The user pastes section-by-section instrument roles and energy targets, and Jev routes each section to thinning, reinforcement, or preservation.

Why typed decisions: Typed arrangement decisions select bounded editing workflows while leaving actual musical edits to the producer.

TAM: Est. $130M/yr arrangement-workflow tools
SAM: Est. $16M/yr independent instrumental producers
SOM: Target $180K ARR at 2,500 × $72

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Arrangement Pressure Valves" 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
The user pastes section-by-section instrument roles and energy targets, and Jev routes each section to thinning, reinforcement, or preservation.
Discipline: Music & Sound Design (Music arrangement).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: Typed arrangement decisions select bounded editing workflows while leaving actual musical edits to the producer.

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": <Section instrument maps, density summaries, neighboring sections, and energy targets.>, "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)
{
  "arrangement_route": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which arrangement workflow best serves this section?",
    "criteria": {
      "thin": "Reduce competing or redundant material.",
      "reinforce": "Strengthen missing support or insufficient energy.",
      "preserve": "Retain the current arrangement structure."
    }
  },
  "branch_check": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "For thin, is there a clearly redundant role; for reinforce, is there an unfilled musical role; for preserve, does the section contrast adequately with its neighbors?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Evidence supports the branch-specific condition.",
      "false": "The branch-specific condition is not established."
    }
  },
  "target_alignment": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Grade expected clarity gain for thin, energy gain for reinforce, or current target fit for preserve.",
    "criteria": [
      "0: Little alignment with intent.",
      "1: Partial alignment.",
      "2: Strong alignment.",
      "3: Very strong alignment."
    ]
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0112. Master Delivery Gates

ID: music-master-delivery-gates
Sub-discipline: Mastering quality control
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: The user pastes mastering reports, listening notes, and delivery specifications, and Jev routes each master to release, technical correction, or artistic review.

Why typed decisions: Typed gates separate measurable delivery failures from taste decisions and can block exports deterministically.

TAM: Est. $125M/yr mastering and delivery utilities
SAM: Est. $18M/yr independent mastering studios
SOM: Target $216K ARR at 1,200 × $180

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Master Delivery Gates" 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
The user pastes mastering reports, listening notes, and delivery specifications, and Jev routes each master to release, technical correction, or artistic review.
Discipline: Music & Sound Design (Mastering quality control).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: Typed gates separate measurable delivery failures from taste decisions and can block exports deterministically.

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": <Loudness reports, peak measurements, format requirements, reference notes, and listening observations.>, "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)
{
  "master_route": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which delivery gate should handle this master?",
    "criteria": {
      "release": "No material delivery or artistic concern is evident.",
      "technical_fix": "An explicit delivery requirement or technical quality check fails.",
      "artistic_review": "A subjective tonal, dynamic, or reference-fit concern remains."
    }
  },
  "gate_confirmation": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "For release, are all mandatory checks documented; for technical_fix, is the failure reproducible from supplied data; for artistic_review, is an approved reference available?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The selected gate has its required supporting evidence.",
      "false": "Supporting evidence is missing."
    }
  },
  "gate_weight": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Grade evidence completeness for release, defect severity for technical_fix, or creative mismatch for artistic_review.",
    "criteria": [
      "0: Minimal.",
      "1: Limited.",
      "2: Substantial.",
      "3: Decisive."
    ]
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0113. Cue Catalog Shelves

ID: music-cue-catalog-shelves
Sub-discipline: Production music cataloging
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: The user pastes instrumental cue descriptions and structural metadata, and Jev routes each cue to background bed, narrative build, or featured theme shelving.

Why typed decisions: Typed usage shelves make catalog filtering and audition queues consistent across contributors.

TAM: Est. $140M/yr music-catalog workflow software
SAM: Est. $20M/yr boutique production libraries
SOM: Target $240K ARR at 200 × $1,200

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Cue Catalog Shelves" 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
The user pastes instrumental cue descriptions and structural metadata, and Jev routes each cue to background bed, narrative build, or featured theme shelving.
Discipline: Music & Sound Design (Production music cataloging).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: Typed usage shelves make catalog filtering and audition queues consistent across contributors.

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": <Cue descriptions, section maps, intensity curves, instrumentation, and ending types.>, "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)
{
  "catalog_route": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which primary usage shelf best fits this cue?",
    "criteria": {
      "background_bed": "Supports visuals without demanding sustained attention.",
      "narrative_build": "Develops toward a clear rise, reveal, or payoff.",
      "featured_theme": "Offers a memorable focal identity or melodic statement."
    }
  },
  "edit_utility": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "For background_bed, can it loop unobtrusively; for narrative_build, are useful intermediate edit points present; for featured_theme, does a short extract retain its identity?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The cue supports the selected shelf's editing use.",
      "false": "The cue does not clearly support that use."
    }
  },
  "shelf_fit": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Grade unobtrusiveness for background_bed, escalation clarity for narrative_build, or recognizability for featured_theme.",
    "criteria": [
      "0: Weak fit.",
      "1: Conditional fit.",
      "2: Good fit.",
      "3: Defining example of the shelf."
    ]
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0114. Spatial Object Dock

ID: music-spatial-object-dock
Sub-discipline: Immersive sound design
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: The user pastes sound-object descriptions and scene geometry, and Jev routes each object to point source, moving path, or diffuse field rendering.

Why typed decisions: Typed spatial classes select renderer templates while branch-specific flags identify setup risks.

TAM: Est. $100M/yr immersive-audio utilities
SAM: Est. $12M/yr small immersive production teams
SOM: Target $144K ARR at 600 × $240

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Spatial Object Dock" 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
The user pastes sound-object descriptions and scene geometry, and Jev routes each object to point source, moving path, or diffuse field rendering.
Discipline: Music & Sound Design (Immersive sound design).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: Typed spatial classes select renderer templates while branch-specific flags identify setup risks.

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": <Object descriptions, source behavior, scene geometry, listener positions, and playback format.>, "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)
{
  "spatial_route": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which spatial renderer best matches the object's intended behavior?",
    "criteria": {
      "point_source": "A localized source with a stable position.",
      "moving_path": "A localized source whose trajectory matters.",
      "diffuse_field": "An enveloping sound without a single clear origin."
    }
  },
  "spatial_check": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "For point_source, should occlusion be modeled; for moving_path, should trajectory smoothing be enabled; for diffuse_field, should interchannel correlation be reviewed?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The branch-specific spatial check is needed.",
      "false": "The branch-specific check is unnecessary."
    }
  },
  "spatial_importance": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Grade localization importance for point_source, motion readability for moving_path, or envelopment importance for diffuse_field.",
    "criteria": [
      "0: Spatial treatment is incidental.",
      "1: Spatial treatment adds modest value.",
      "2: Spatial treatment materially supports the scene.",
      "3: Spatial treatment defines the experience."
    ]
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0115. Transition Stitch Bench

ID: music-transition-stitch-bench
Sub-discipline: Live electronic performance
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: The user pastes adjacent instrumental track metadata and performance notes, and Jev routes each transition to beat blend, texture bridge, or hard cut.

Why typed decisions: Typed transition choices can load fixed performance macros without generating mix instructions.

TAM: Est. $90M/yr electronic-performance utilities
SAM: Est. $11M/yr instrumental live-set performers
SOM: Target $108K ARR at 1,500 × $72

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Transition Stitch Bench" 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
The user pastes adjacent instrumental track metadata and performance notes, and Jev routes each transition to beat blend, texture bridge, or hard cut.
Discipline: Music & Sound Design (Live electronic performance).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: Typed transition choices can load fixed performance macros without generating mix instructions.

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": <Track tempos, keys, phrase maps, energy profiles, texture notes, and performance intent.>, "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)
{
  "transition_route": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which transition handler best joins this track pair?",
    "criteria": {
      "beat_blend": "Overlapping rhythmic material can create continuity.",
      "texture_bridge": "An atmospheric passage can bridge incompatible rhythms.",
      "hard_cut": "A deliberate abrupt change best serves the transition."
    }
  },
  "transition_guard": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "For beat_blend, should overlapping bass be isolated; for texture_bridge, is a sufficiently sparse passage available; for hard_cut, is a clear phrase boundary available?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The branch-specific safeguard or enabling condition applies.",
      "false": "The safeguard is unnecessary or the enabling condition is absent."
    }
  },
  "transition_fit": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Grade rhythmic compatibility for beat_blend, atmospheric continuity for texture_bridge, or dramatic effectiveness for hard_cut.",
    "criteria": [
      "0: Poor transition fit.",
      "1: Risky or specialized fit.",
      "2: Reliable fit.",
      "3: Especially effective fit."
    ]
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0116. Round Robin Forge

ID: music-round-robin-forge
Sub-discipline: Sample instrument authoring
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: The user pastes descriptions and measurements for recorded instrument takes, and Jev routes each take to velocity layer, round-robin variation, or reject review.

Why typed decisions: Typed assignments can fill sampler mapping tables while keeping expressive variation separate from recording defects.

TAM: Est. $65M/yr sample-authoring software
SAM: Est. $7M/yr boutique instrument developers
SOM: Target $84K ARR at 350 × $240

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Round Robin Forge" 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
The user pastes descriptions and measurements for recorded instrument takes, and Jev routes each take to velocity layer, round-robin variation, or reject review.
Discipline: Music & Sound Design (Sample instrument authoring).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: Typed assignments can fill sampler mapping tables while keeping expressive variation separate from recording defects.

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": <Take metadata, intended articulation, dynamic markings, level measurements, and quality 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)
{
  "take_route": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which instrument-building handler should receive this take?",
    "criteria": {
      "velocity_layer": "The take represents a meaningfully distinct playing intensity.",
      "round_robin": "The take adds natural variation within an existing intensity.",
      "reject_review": "A defect or articulation mismatch may make the take unusable."
    }
  },
  "mapping_check": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "For velocity_layer, is timbral separation from neighboring layers clear; for round_robin, is loudness consistent with peers; for reject_review, is the defect likely repairable?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The selected branch's condition is supported.",
      "false": "The selected branch's condition is not supported."
    }
  },
  "take_value": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Grade dynamic coverage for velocity_layer, variation value for round_robin, or salvage value for reject_review.",
    "criteria": [
      "0: No meaningful value.",
      "1: Limited value.",
      "2: Useful contribution.",
      "3: Important contribution."
    ]
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0117. Field Texture Sorter

ID: music-field-texture-sorter
Sub-discipline: Environmental recording
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: The user pastes non-speech field-recording logs and analyzer summaries, and Jev routes each recording to ambience bed, isolated event, or experimental material.

Why typed decisions: Typed destinations can organize large recording sessions and expose the right restoration checks without poetic descriptions.

TAM: Est. $70M/yr field-recording workflow tools
SAM: Est. $8M/yr independent environmental recordists
SOM: Target $96K ARR at 1,600 × $60

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Field Texture Sorter" 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
The user pastes non-speech field-recording logs and analyzer summaries, and Jev routes each recording to ambience bed, isolated event, or experimental material.
Discipline: Music & Sound Design (Environmental recording).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: Typed destinations can organize large recording sessions and expose the right restoration checks without poetic descriptions.

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": <Environmental recording logs, event density, noise measurements, duration, and intended uses.>, "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)
{
  "field_route": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which library handler best fits this recording?",
    "criteria": {
      "ambience_bed": "A sustained environmental scene suitable for background use.",
      "isolated_event": "A distinct identifiable event suitable for extraction.",
      "experimental": "Material primarily valuable for transformation or abstraction."
    }
  },
  "processing_check": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "For ambience_bed, should intrusive foreground events be removed; for isolated_event, should boundaries be trimmed; for experimental, should the raw dynamic range be preserved?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The branch-specific processing treatment is appropriate.",
      "false": "The branch-specific treatment is unnecessary."
    }
  },
  "reuse_potential": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Grade continuity for ambience_bed, event clarity for isolated_event, or transformation potential for experimental.",
    "criteria": [
      "0: Little reusable value.",
      "1: Narrow use.",
      "2: Several useful applications.",
      "3: Highly reusable material."
    ]
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0118. Score Proof Lantern

ID: music-score-proof-lantern
Sub-discipline: Music engraving
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: The user pastes structured notation warnings and instrumental passage context, and Jev routes each warning to readability, playability, or intentional-notation review.

Why typed decisions: Typed warning classes keep visual cleanup separate from performance problems and deliberate compositional choices.

TAM: Est. $85M/yr notation-workflow utilities
SAM: Est. $9M/yr freelance engravers and copyists
SOM: Target $108K ARR at 900 × $120

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Score Proof Lantern" 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
The user pastes structured notation warnings and instrumental passage context, and Jev routes each warning to readability, playability, or intentional-notation review.
Discipline: Music & Sound Design (Music engraving).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: Typed warning classes keep visual cleanup separate from performance problems and deliberate compositional choices.

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": <Notation warnings, MusicXML-derived passage summaries, instrument constraints, and style rules.>, "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)
{
  "proof_route": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which proofing handler should inspect this warning?",
    "criteria": {
      "readability": "Layout or notation presentation is the main concern.",
      "playability": "Instrumental execution is the main concern.",
      "intent_review": "An unusual notation may represent deliberate compositional intent."
    }
  },
  "specialist_review": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "For readability, is manual engraving review needed; for playability, is performer confirmation needed; for intent_review, is composer confirmation needed?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The selected specialist should review the item.",
      "false": "Existing rules and context are sufficient."
    }
  },
  "rehearsal_impact": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Grade reading friction for readability, execution difficulty for playability, or interpretive ambiguity for intent_review.",
    "criteria": [
      "0: Negligible rehearsal impact.",
      "1: Minor hesitation.",
      "2: Likely rehearsal interruption.",
      "3: Likely blocks correct performance."
    ]
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0119. Sample Rights Gates

ID: music-sample-rights-gates
Sub-discipline: Sample clearance workflow
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: The user pastes sample-license excerpts and intended release uses, and Jev routes each asset to documented use, permission review, or missing-evidence intake.

Why typed decisions: Typed administrative gates can prevent undocumented assets from entering release exports without treating generated prose as legal advice.

TAM: Est. $100M/yr music-rights workflow software
SAM: Est. $10M/yr sample-heavy independent production teams
SOM: Target $120K ARR at 500 × $240

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Sample Rights Gates" 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
The user pastes sample-license excerpts and intended release uses, and Jev routes each asset to documented use, permission review, or missing-evidence intake.
Discipline: Music & Sound Design (Sample clearance workflow).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: Typed administrative gates can prevent undocumented assets from entering release exports without treating generated prose as legal advice.

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": <License excerpts, source provenance, intended use, and attached permission records.>, "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)
{
  "rights_route": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which administrative review queue fits the supplied evidence, without inferring legal clearance?",
    "criteria": {
      "documented_use": "Supplied terms explicitly appear to cover the stated use.",
      "permission_review": "Supplied terms contain restrictions or ambiguities relevant to the use.",
      "missing_evidence": "Source or permission documentation is insufficient."
    }
  },
  "branch_requirement": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "For documented_use, is attribution explicitly required; for permission_review, is additional permission explicitly indicated; for missing_evidence, is a traceable source identified?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The branch-specific requirement or source condition is evidenced.",
      "false": "The branch-specific requirement or source condition is not evidenced."
    }
  },
  "release_attention": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Grade obligation-tracking effort for documented_use, review urgency for permission_review, or provenance-recovery urgency for missing_evidence.",
    "criteria": [
      "0: No immediate administrative work.",
      "1: Routine follow-up.",
      "2: Resolve before release approval.",
      "3: Hold the asset pending qualified review."
    ]
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0120. Revision Signal Desk

ID: music-revision-signal-desk
Sub-discipline: Creative audio review
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: The user pastes client feedback on instrumental cues or sound assets with delivery context, and Jev routes each note to composition, sound palette, or mix revision.

Why typed decisions: Typed revision routes assign work to the right project layer and expose approval dependencies without rewriting client feedback.

TAM: Est. $150M/yr creative-audio review software
SAM: Est. $22M/yr freelance composers and sound studios
SOM: Target $240K ARR at 2,000 × $120

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Revision Signal Desk" 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
The user pastes client feedback on instrumental cues or sound assets with delivery context, and Jev routes each note to composition, sound palette, or mix revision.
Discipline: Music & Sound Design (Creative audio review).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: Typed revision routes assign work to the right project layer and expose approval dependencies without rewriting client feedback.

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": <Client notes, asset descriptions, approved references, project stage, and locked decisions.>, "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)
{
  "revision_route": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which revision handler addresses the note's underlying concern most directly?",
    "criteria": {
      "composition": "Notes, rhythm, structure, or thematic development must change.",
      "sound_palette": "Instrumentation, synthesis, or source character must change.",
      "mix": "Balance, processing, depth, or presentation must change."
    }
  },
  "approval_dependency": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "For composition, would the change reopen approved structure; for sound_palette, would it replace an approved sonic identity; for mix, would it conflict with an approved delivery reference?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The selected revision requires renewed approval.",
      "false": "The revision stays within current approvals."
    }
  },
  "revision_scope": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Grade structural scope for composition, asset replacement scope for sound_palette, or processing scope for mix.",
    "criteria": [
      "0: No substantive edit is indicated.",
      "1: Local adjustment.",
      "2: Multiple connected changes.",
      "3: Broad revision across the asset."
    ]
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0121. Demo Readiness Gate

ID: music-demo-readiness-gate
Sub-discipline: Demo production
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste a demo’s notes and mix metadata; Jev checks independent readiness conditions, which code combines into a go, revise, or hold decision.

Why typed decisions: Separate typed checks make the release gate auditable and actionable without relying on generated feedback.

TAM: $5B global music production software
SAM: $900M demo and collaboration tools
SOM: $8M early adopters

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Demo Readiness 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 demo’s notes and mix metadata; Jev checks independent readiness conditions, which code combines into a go, revise, or hold decision.
Discipline: Music & Sound Design (Demo production).
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: Separate typed checks make the release gate auditable and actionable without relying on generated feedback.

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": <Demo notes, mix metadata, and intended use>, "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)
{
  "has_clear_arrangement": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the material describe a complete, followable arrangement?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Sections and their order are identifiable.",
      "false": "Sections or their order are missing or unclear."
    }
  },
  "has_reviewable_mix": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is the mix described well enough for a meaningful review?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The notes or metadata identify the mix version and relevant listening context.",
      "false": "The version or listening context is too ambiguous."
    }
  },
  "has_delivery_info": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Are the intended delivery format and destination specified?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Both format and destination are stated.",
      "false": "Either format or destination is absent."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0122. Sample License Scout

ID: music-sample-license-scout
Sub-discipline: Sample clearance
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste sample descriptions and project-use details; Jev checks independent clearance conditions, which code combines into a review flag.

Why typed decisions: Independent yes-or-no checks expose clearance gaps without pretending to provide legal advice.

TAM: $2B music rights technology
SAM: $250M sample licensing workflows
SOM: $4M independent producers

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Sample License Scout" 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 sample descriptions and project-use details; Jev checks independent clearance conditions, which code combines into a review flag.
Discipline: Music & Sound Design (Sample clearance).
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: Independent yes-or-no checks expose clearance gaps without pretending to provide legal advice.

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 provenance, license notes, and intended release>, "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)
{
  "source_identified": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is the source of each sample identified?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Every sample has a named source or documented origin.",
      "false": "At least one sample has no identifiable source."
    }
  },
  "commercial_use_permitted": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Do the provided terms appear to permit the stated commercial use?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The notes explicitly allow the stated use.",
      "false": "Permission is absent, restricted, or unclear."
    }
  },
  "attribution_resolved": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Are any required attribution obligations accounted for?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "No attribution is required, or required credit is recorded.",
      "false": "Credit is required but missing or unclear."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0123. Setlist Arc Checker

ID: music-setlist-arc-checker
Sub-discipline: Live performance planning
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste a setlist with song notes and performance constraints; Jev checks independent flow conditions, which code combines into reorder suggestions or a readiness flag.

Why typed decisions: Typed checks let performers apply their own setlist rules consistently instead of interpreting free-form advice.

TAM: $1.5B live music planning tools
SAM: $180M setlist and rehearsal software
SOM: $3M touring artists

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Setlist Arc Checker" 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 setlist with song notes and performance constraints; Jev checks independent flow conditions, which code combines into reorder suggestions or a readiness flag.
Discipline: Music & Sound Design (Live performance planning).
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: Typed checks let performers apply their own setlist rules consistently instead of interpreting free-form advice.

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": <Ordered setlist, song descriptions, and show constraints>, "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)
{
  "energy_arc_coherent": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the stated energy progression fit the intended show arc?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The progression supports the described opening, middle, and ending.",
      "false": "The progression conflicts with the intended arc or is unspecified."
    }
  },
  "transitions_feasible": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Are the planned transitions feasible with the listed setup?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Transition notes fit the instruments and changeover constraints.",
      "false": "A transition requires unavailable setup or lacks necessary detail."
    }
  },
  "duration_within_limit": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the stated set duration fit the available slot?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The listed duration is within the slot.",
      "false": "It exceeds the slot or duration information is missing."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0124. Cue Sheet Auditor

ID: music-cue-sheet-auditor
Sub-discipline: Sound design
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste a scene cue sheet and production constraints; Jev checks independent cue-integrity conditions, which code combines into a pass or review queue.

Why typed decisions: Binary checks catch omissions predictably while leaving creative cue decisions to the sound designer.

TAM: $3B professional audio production tools
SAM: $300M theatre and post cue management
SOM: $5M sound teams

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Cue Sheet Auditor" 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 scene cue sheet and production constraints; Jev checks independent cue-integrity conditions, which code combines into a pass or review queue.
Discipline: Music & Sound Design (Sound 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: Binary checks catch omissions predictably while leaving creative cue decisions to the sound designer.

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": <Cue sheet rows, scene notes, and playback constraints>, "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)
{
  "cue_has_trigger": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does each cue have a clear trigger or timing reference?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Every cue is tied to a visible, audible, or timed event.",
      "false": "At least one cue has no usable trigger."
    }
  },
  "cue_has_destination": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does each cue specify an output or playback destination?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Destinations are recorded for all cues.",
      "false": "A cue destination is missing or ambiguous."
    }
  },
  "overlap_resolved": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Are potential overlaps between cues addressed?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Overlaps are ruled out or explicitly managed.",
      "false": "A possible overlap is unaddressed."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0125. Stem Delivery Sentinel

ID: music-stem-delivery-sentinel
Sub-discipline: Mix delivery
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste stem specifications and session notes; Jev checks independent delivery conditions, which code combines into a ready-to-export decision.

Why typed decisions: Typed validation is repeatable across deliveries and highlights concrete omissions before export.

TAM: $4B audio production software
SAM: $500M professional delivery workflow tools
SOM: $6M studios and freelance mixers

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Stem Delivery Sentinel" 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 stem specifications and session notes; Jev checks independent delivery conditions, which code combines into a ready-to-export decision.
Discipline: Music & Sound Design (Mix delivery).
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: Typed validation is repeatable across deliveries and highlights concrete omissions before export.

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": <Stem list, export requirements, and session 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)
{
  "all_stems_named": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Are all required stems named and accounted for?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Each required stem has a corresponding entry.",
      "false": "At least one required stem is absent or unnamed."
    }
  },
  "format_matches_spec": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Do the stated export settings match the delivery specification?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Format, bit depth, and sample rate match.",
      "false": "A setting conflicts with or is missing from the specification."
    }
  },
  "tails_handled": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Are effect tails and ending lengths handled consistently?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Tail handling is specified for the delivery.",
      "false": "Tail behavior is missing or inconsistent."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0126. Rehearsal Friction Finder

ID: music-rehearsal-friction-finder
Sub-discipline: Music rehearsal
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste rehearsal notes and song sections; Jev checks independent friction signals, which code combines into a prioritized practice queue.

Why typed decisions: Independent typed flags turn messy notes into sortable practice priorities without rewriting them.

TAM: $1B music education and rehearsal software
SAM: $120M band rehearsal management
SOM: $2M active ensembles

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Rehearsal Friction Finder" 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 rehearsal notes and song sections; Jev checks independent friction signals, which code combines into a prioritized practice queue.
Discipline: Music & Sound Design (Music rehearsal).
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: Independent typed flags turn messy notes into sortable practice priorities without rewriting them.

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": <Rehearsal notes, song sections, and upcoming date>, "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)
{
  "repeat_issue": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is the same performance issue reported more than once?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "A recurring issue appears across notes or sections.",
      "false": "No recurring issue is evident."
    }
  },
  "timing_issue": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Do the notes indicate a timing or synchronization problem?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Timing drift or coordination trouble is described.",
      "false": "No timing problem is described."
    }
  },
  "deadline_urgent": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is the issue relevant to an imminent performance deadline?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The notes connect it to a near-term performance.",
      "false": "No imminent performance connection is stated."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0127. Lyric Meter Monitor

ID: music-lyric-meter-monitor
Sub-discipline: Songwriting craft
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste lyric lines and a meter or melody guide; Jev checks independent fit conditions, which code combines into lines to revisit.

Why typed decisions: Separate semantic checks support targeted editing while preserving the writer’s words and intent.

TAM: $2B songwriting and composition software
SAM: $160M lyric and melody workflow tools
SOM: $2M independent writers

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Lyric Meter Monitor" 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 lyric lines and a meter or melody guide; Jev checks independent fit conditions, which code combines into lines to revisit.
Discipline: Music & Sound Design (Songwriting craft).
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: Separate semantic checks support targeted editing while preserving the writer’s words and intent.

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": <Lyric lines, syllable guide, and melody phrasing 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)
{
  "syllable_fit": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does each line appear to fit its stated syllable pattern?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The described syllable counts fit the guide.",
      "false": "A line conflicts with or lacks a usable syllable guide."
    }
  },
  "stress_fit": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Do stressed words appear to align with strong musical beats?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The stated emphasis aligns with the beat pattern.",
      "false": "A likely stress mismatch or missing beat pattern is present."
    }
  },
  "phrase_boundary_fit": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Do lyric phrase boundaries fit the supplied melody phrasing?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Line breaks and phrase endings align with the melody notes.",
      "false": "A phrase boundary conflicts with or is absent from the notes."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0128. Playlist Sequence Auditor

ID: music-playlist-sequence-auditor
Sub-discipline: Music programming
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste a playlist with track tags and event goals; Jev checks independent sequencing conditions, which code combines into a reorder warning.

Why typed decisions: Explicit flags make sequencing criteria transparent and consistently applicable across playlists.

TAM: $2B music programming and playlist tools
SAM: $220M professional playlist curation
SOM: $3M independent curators

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Playlist Sequence Auditor" 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 playlist with track tags and event goals; Jev checks independent sequencing conditions, which code combines into a reorder warning.
Discipline: Music & Sound Design (Music programming).
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 flags make sequencing criteria transparent and consistently applicable across playlists.

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": <Ordered tracks, mood tags, and listening context>, "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)
{
  "opening_matches_context": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the opening track suit the stated listening context?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Its described energy and character fit the context.",
      "false": "The opener conflicts with or lacks context information."
    }
  },
  "adjacent_shift_managed": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Are large changes between neighboring tracks intentional or managed?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Potential shifts are supported by a stated transition or arc.",
      "false": "A jarring shift appears unaddressed."
    }
  },
  "ending_supports_goal": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the ending support the playlist’s stated purpose?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The final track fits the intended close or handoff.",
      "false": "The ending conflicts with or lacks a stated purpose."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0129. Plugin Chain Riskcheck

ID: music-plugin-chain-riskcheck
Sub-discipline: Audio production
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste a plugin-chain inventory and session goal; Jev checks independent chain risks, which code combines into warnings before a session is shared.

Why typed decisions: Typed risk flags give engineers predictable checks without prescribing subjective processing choices.

TAM: $5B music production software
SAM: $350M session handoff and project QA
SOM: $4M studios and collaborators

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Plugin Chain Riskcheck" 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 plugin-chain inventory and session goal; Jev checks independent chain risks, which code combines into warnings before a session is shared.
Discipline: Music & Sound Design (Audio production).
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: Typed risk flags give engineers predictable checks without prescribing subjective processing choices.

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": <Plugin order, routing notes, and session goal>, "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)
{
  "routing_documented": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is the signal routing understandable from the supplied notes?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Inputs, buses, and outputs are identifiable.",
      "false": "A routing path is missing or ambiguous."
    }
  },
  "external_dependency_known": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Are external or unavailable plugin dependencies identified?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Dependencies are listed or none are indicated.",
      "false": "A required dependency may be unavailable or is unclear."
    }
  },
  "processing_matches_goal": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the described processing conflict with the stated session goal?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The chain appears compatible with the goal.",
      "false": "The chain appears to undermine or be unrelated to the goal."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0130. Field Recording Triage

ID: music-field-recording-triage
Sub-discipline: Field recording
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste recording logs and sound descriptions; Jev checks independent asset-use conditions, which code combines into keep, inspect, or exclude labels.

Why typed decisions: Typed checks separate practical asset risks from artistic judgment and make large libraries easier to review.

TAM: $1B sound library and audio asset tools
SAM: $140M field recording management
SOM: $2M sound libraries

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Field Recording Triage" 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 recording logs and sound descriptions; Jev checks independent asset-use conditions, which code combines into keep, inspect, or exclude labels.
Discipline: Music & Sound Design (Field recording).
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: Typed checks separate practical asset risks from artistic judgment and make large libraries easier to review.

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": <Recording log, sound description, and intended use>, "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)
{
  "usable_context_recorded": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is the recording context documented well enough to identify the asset?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Location or source, date, and take context are sufficiently noted.",
      "false": "Key context is absent or ambiguous."
    }
  },
  "unwanted_noise_present": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the description indicate unwanted noise that may compromise the intended use?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Noise is described as intrusive for the intended use.",
      "false": "No intrusive noise is described."
    }
  },
  "permission_uncertain": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is permission or ownership uncertain for the intended use?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The notes indicate unresolved permission or ownership.",
      "false": "Permission is documented or not in question."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0131. Score Preparation Check

ID: music-score-preparation-check
Sub-discipline: Orchestration
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste score annotations and ensemble requirements; Jev checks independent preparation conditions, which code combines into a readiness checklist.

Why typed decisions: Binary semantic checks flag practical score gaps without attempting to compose or alter the music.

TAM: $1B notation and composition software
SAM: $100M score preparation tools
SOM: $1M orchestras and ensembles

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Score Preparation Check" 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 score annotations and ensemble requirements; Jev checks independent preparation conditions, which code combines into a readiness checklist.
Discipline: Music & Sound Design (Orchestration).
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: Binary semantic checks flag practical score gaps without attempting to compose or alter the music.

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": <Score notes, instrumentation, and rehearsal requirements>, "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)
{
  "parts_accounted": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Are all required instrumental parts accounted for?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Every required instrument has a part or explicit doubling note.",
      "false": "A required part is missing or unaccounted for."
    }
  },
  "performance_markings_clear": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Are essential tempo, articulation, and dynamic markings clear?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The notes identify the essential markings unambiguously.",
      "false": "A key marking is absent or ambiguous."
    }
  },
  "page_turn_risk_addressed": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Are known page-turn constraints addressed?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Relevant page turns are manageable or noted.",
      "false": "A difficult page turn is identified or remains unclear."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0132. Sync License Gate

ID: music-sync-license-gate
Sub-discipline: Music supervision
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste a track’s rights notes and brief requirements; Jev checks independent sync-fit conditions, which code combines into a clear, review, or blocked status.

Why typed decisions: Typed gates distinguish missing deal information from creative suitability and avoid invented licensing claims.

TAM: $3B music rights and sync licensing
SAM: $260M sync placement workflows
SOM: $4M music supervisors

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Sync License 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 track’s rights notes and brief requirements; Jev checks independent sync-fit conditions, which code combines into a clear, review, or blocked status.
Discipline: Music & Sound Design (Music supervision).
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: Typed gates distinguish missing deal information from creative suitability and avoid invented licensing claims.

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": <Track rights notes, brief, territory, and media use>, "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)
{
  "master_rights_clear": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Are master-use rights documented for the requested use?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The notes document master permission for the stated use.",
      "false": "Permission is missing, restricted, or unclear."
    }
  },
  "publishing_rights_clear": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Are publishing rights documented for the requested use?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The notes document publishing permission for the stated use.",
      "false": "Permission is missing, restricted, or unclear."
    }
  },
  "brief_fit": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the track description fit the brief’s stated musical needs?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Its described qualities match the brief.",
      "false": "It conflicts with or lacks enough information about the brief."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0133. Sound Palette Consistency

ID: music-sound-palette-consistency
Sub-discipline: Game audio
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste an audio asset list and game-world style guide; Jev checks independent palette conditions, which code combines into assets to review.

Why typed decisions: Typed consistency checks keep a shared sound palette coherent while preserving designers’ creative control.

TAM: $4B game audio tools
SAM: $300M game sound design workflows
SOM: $5M indie game studios

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Sound Palette Consistency" 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 an audio asset list and game-world style guide; Jev checks independent palette conditions, which code combines into assets to review.
Discipline: Music & Sound Design (Game audio).
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: Typed consistency checks keep a shared sound palette coherent while preserving designers’ creative control.

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": <Asset descriptions, world style guide, and scene roles>, "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)
{
  "asset_fits_world": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does each asset description fit the established world style?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The described sound supports the stated world.",
      "false": "It clashes with or lacks enough context to judge the world style."
    }
  },
  "role_distinguishable": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is the asset’s gameplay or scene role distinguishable from nearby assets?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Its described role is meaningfully distinct.",
      "false": "Its role overlaps confusingly or is unspecified."
    }
  },
  "variation_coverage": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the asset set cover the stated variation needs?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The listed variants cover the documented contexts.",
      "false": "A stated context lacks a suitable variant."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0134. Podcast Bed Matcher

ID: music-podcast-bed-matcher
Sub-discipline: Podcast music editing
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste episode segment notes and a music-bed catalog; Jev checks independent bed-fit conditions, which code combines into candidate filtering flags.

Why typed decisions: Independent fit checks filter choices consistently without generating music or editorial copy.

TAM: $2B podcast production software
SAM: $180M podcast music workflow tools
SOM: $3M podcast teams

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Podcast Bed Matcher" 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 episode segment notes and a music-bed catalog; Jev checks independent bed-fit conditions, which code combines into candidate filtering flags.
Discipline: Music & Sound Design (Podcast music editing).
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: Independent fit checks filter choices consistently without generating music or editorial copy.

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": <Segment notes, bed descriptions, and usage constraints>, "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)
{
  "mood_compatible": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the bed’s described mood suit the segment?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The described mood supports the segment’s intent.",
      "false": "It conflicts with or lacks enough information about the segment."
    }
  },
  "dialogue_space_suitable": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is the bed described as suitable beneath dialogue?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Its texture leaves room for the stated dialogue.",
      "false": "It may mask dialogue or has no relevant mix notes."
    }
  },
  "rights_usable": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Are usage rights suitable for the episode’s distribution?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The notes permit the stated distribution.",
      "false": "Rights are restricted, absent, or unclear."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0135. Ad Music Fit Filter

ID: music-ad-music-fit-filter
Sub-discipline: Commercial music production
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste a campaign brief and licensed track descriptions; Jev checks independent music-fit conditions, which code combines into a shortlist filter.

Why typed decisions: Typed fit flags let teams apply brief requirements uniformly without fabricating creative rationales.

TAM: $2B commercial music licensing
SAM: $170M ad music selection tools
SOM: $2M agencies and production houses

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Ad Music Fit Filter" 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 campaign brief and licensed track descriptions; Jev checks independent music-fit conditions, which code combines into a shortlist filter.
Discipline: Music & Sound Design (Commercial music production).
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: Typed fit flags let teams apply brief requirements uniformly without fabricating creative rationales.

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": <Campaign brief, track descriptions, and usage terms>, "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)
{
  "brand_tone_fit": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the track’s described character fit the brand tone?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Its stated qualities support the tone in the brief.",
      "false": "It conflicts with or lacks information about the brand tone."
    }
  },
  "duration_editable": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Can the track accommodate the required spot duration or edit?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The supplied structure supports the stated duration.",
      "false": "The duration or edit requirement appears infeasible or unclear."
    }
  },
  "campaign_rights_fit": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Do the stated rights cover the campaign’s media and territory?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The notes cover both the intended media and territory.",
      "false": "Coverage is missing, restricted, or unclear."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0136. Mastering Brief Validator

ID: music-mastering-brief-validator
Sub-discipline: Audio mastering
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste mastering instructions and release specifications; Jev checks independent brief-completeness conditions, which code combines into a start-work decision.

Why typed decisions: Typed validation catches ambiguous technical requirements before paid work begins.

TAM: $3B mastering and audio post tools
SAM: $220M mastering workflow software
SOM: $3M mastering engineers

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Mastering Brief Validator" 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 mastering instructions and release specifications; Jev checks independent brief-completeness conditions, which code combines into a start-work decision.
Discipline: Music & Sound Design (Audio mastering).
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: Typed validation catches ambiguous technical requirements before paid work begins.

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": <Mastering brief, reference notes, and delivery specs>, "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)
{
  "target_reference_identified": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is the intended reference or sonic direction identified?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "A reference or clear sonic direction is given.",
      "false": "Both are absent or too vague to guide work."
    }
  },
  "loudness_target_clear": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is a relevant loudness target or platform constraint supplied?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "A target or applicable constraint is stated.",
      "false": "No usable target or constraint is stated."
    }
  },
  "deliverables_specified": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Are required output formats and versions specified?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The needed formats and versions are listed.",
      "false": "A required format or version is missing."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0137. Orchestra Session Planner

ID: music-orchestra-session-planner
Sub-discipline: Recording session planning
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste a score excerpt, player roster, and session limits; Jev checks independent orchestration logistics, which code combines into staffing flags.

Why typed decisions: Typed checks expose staffing conflicts early without making subjective musical decisions for the arranger.

TAM: $1B recording production tools
SAM: $90M orchestral session planning
SOM: $1M composers and contractors

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Orchestra Session Planner" 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 score excerpt, player roster, and session limits; Jev checks independent orchestration logistics, which code combines into staffing flags.
Discipline: Music & Sound Design (Recording session planning).
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: Typed checks expose staffing conflicts early without making subjective musical decisions for the arranger.

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": <Instrumentation, player roster, score notes, and session limits>, "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)
{
  "parts_covered_by_roster": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Can the roster cover the required parts as listed?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Every required part has an assigned player or documented doubling.",
      "false": "A part lacks coverage or assignments are unclear."
    }
  },
  "doubling_feasible": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Are the stated doublings feasible within the session constraints?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The notes show compatible parts and changeover time.",
      "false": "A doubling conflicts with timing or player availability."
    }
  },
  "setup_time_sufficient": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is setup time sufficient for the listed instrument changes?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The plan allows for the documented changes.",
      "false": "A change lacks time or setup information."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0138. Remix Brief Decoder

ID: music-remix-brief-decoder
Sub-discipline: Remix production
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste a remix brief and source-track notes; Jev checks independent brief-compliance conditions, which code combines into a direction-fit report.

Why typed decisions: Several explicit flags make creative constraints verifiable while leaving the remix itself entirely to the producer.

TAM: $2B remix and music production tools
SAM: $130M remix collaboration workflows
SOM: $2M independent producers

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Remix Brief Decoder" 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 remix brief and source-track notes; Jev checks independent brief-compliance conditions, which code combines into a direction-fit report.
Discipline: Music & Sound Design (Remix production).
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: Several explicit flags make creative constraints verifiable while leaving the remix itself entirely to the producer.

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": <Remix brief, source-track notes, and delivery requirements>, "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)
{
  "required_element_preserved": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the plan preserve each explicitly required source element?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Every required element appears in the plan.",
      "false": "A required element is omitted or unaccounted for."
    }
  },
  "creative_direction_followed": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the proposed direction fit the brief’s stated creative constraints?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The plan aligns with the stated constraints.",
      "false": "It conflicts with or lacks information about a constraint."
    }
  },
  "delivery_scope_clear": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Are remix deliverables and usage limits clear?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Required versions and usage limits are specified.",
      "false": "A deliverable or usage limit is missing or ambiguous."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0139. Instrument Repair Log

ID: music-instrument-repair-log
Sub-discipline: Instrument maintenance
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste instrument condition notes and upcoming session details; Jev checks independent readiness risks, which code combines into service priorities.

Why typed decisions: Typed condition flags create a consistent maintenance queue without replacing a technician’s diagnosis.

TAM: $1B music equipment service software
SAM: $100M instrument maintenance management
SOM: $1M schools and rental houses

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Instrument Repair Log" 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 instrument condition notes and upcoming session details; Jev checks independent readiness risks, which code combines into service priorities.
Discipline: Music & Sound Design (Instrument maintenance).
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: Typed condition flags create a consistent maintenance queue without replacing a technician’s diagnosis.

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": <Instrument notes, maintenance history, and next-use date>, "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)
{
  "fault_affects_playability": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Do the notes describe a fault that could affect playability?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "A functional issue is described.",
      "false": "No playability issue is described."
    }
  },
  "issue_recurring": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the maintenance history indicate a recurring issue?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The same issue appears in prior records.",
      "false": "No repeat issue is indicated."
    }
  },
  "needed_before_use": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the issue need attention before the next planned use?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The notes connect the issue to the upcoming use.",
      "false": "It is not identified as a pre-use concern or timing is unknown."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0140. Ear Training Session Builder

ID: music-ear-training-session-builder
Sub-discipline: Music education
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste a learner’s practice log and current goals; Jev checks independent exercise-fit conditions, which code combines into a practice selection queue.

Why typed decisions: Typed checks map learner needs to existing exercises transparently without generating lessons or replacing teachers.

TAM: $3B music education technology
SAM: $180M ear training and practice tools
SOM: $2M music teachers and learners

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Ear Training Session Builder" 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 learner’s practice log and current goals; Jev checks independent exercise-fit conditions, which code combines into a practice selection queue.
Discipline: Music & Sound Design (Music education).
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: Typed checks map learner needs to existing exercises transparently without generating lessons or replacing teachers.

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": <Practice log, learning goals, and exercise catalog>, "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)
{
  "exercise_matches_goal": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the exercise target a stated learning goal?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Its described skill matches a current goal.",
      "false": "It does not match or the goal is unspecified."
    }
  },
  "difficulty_appropriate": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the exercise fit the learner’s stated difficulty level?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Its prerequisites fit the learner’s current level.",
      "false": "It appears too difficult, too easy, or level information is missing."
    }
  },
  "practice_need_current": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the practice log indicate a current need for this exercise?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Recent notes identify this skill as needing practice.",
      "false": "The need is not current or is not documented."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0141. Audition Triage Desk

ID: music-audition-triage-desk
Sub-discipline: Sample library curation
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste sample names, tags, and notes, and Jev scores each candidate for fit with your brief, sonic distinctiveness, and production readiness so you can rank what to audition first.

Why typed decisions: Comparable dimension scores make a sortable shortlist more useful than generated descriptions.

TAM: $2B–4B global sample-content market
SAM: $300M–700M producer-focused segment
SOM: $1M–5M reachable early market

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Audition Triage Desk" 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 sample names, tags, and notes, and Jev scores each candidate for fit with your brief, sonic distinctiveness, and production readiness so you can rank what to audition first.
Discipline: Music & Sound Design (Sample library curation).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: Comparable dimension scores make a sortable shortlist more useful than generated descriptions.

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": <Brief plus candidate sample metadata>, "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)
{
  "brief_fit": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How well does this sample fit the stated brief?",
    "criteria": [
      "0: Conflicts with the brief",
      "1: Weak fit",
      "2: Partial fit",
      "3: Strong fit",
      "4: Exact fit"
    ]
  },
  "sonic_distinctiveness": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How distinctive is this sample relative to the other candidates?",
    "criteria": [
      "0: Generic",
      "1: Familiar",
      "2: Somewhat distinctive",
      "3: Clearly distinctive",
      "4: Highly singular"
    ]
  },
  "production_readiness": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How ready is this sample to use in a production?",
    "criteria": [
      "0: Major issues",
      "1: Significant cleanup needed",
      "2: Some editing needed",
      "3: Nearly ready",
      "4: Ready to use"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0142. Setlist Mood Sorter

ID: music-setlist-mood-sorter
Sub-discipline: Live performance planning
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste a setlist with song notes and your desired audience arc, and Jev scores each song for mood fit, energy contribution, and transition potential.

Why typed decisions: Ranked scores expose useful setlist tradeoffs without asking performers to interpret free-form suggestions.

TAM: $1B–3B live-music planning tools
SAM: $100M–300M independent artist segment
SOM: $500K–3M reachable early market

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Setlist Mood Sorter" 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 setlist with song notes and your desired audience arc, and Jev scores each song for mood fit, energy contribution, and transition potential.
Discipline: Music & Sound Design (Live performance planning).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: Ranked scores expose useful setlist tradeoffs without asking performers to interpret free-form suggestions.

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": <Audience arc plus song list and 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)
{
  "mood_fit": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How well does this song support the requested mood at its set position?",
    "criteria": [
      "0: Undermines it",
      "1: Weakly supports it",
      "2: Neutral or mixed",
      "3: Strongly supports it",
      "4: Defines the intended mood"
    ]
  },
  "energy_contribution": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How well does this song contribute to the desired energy arc?",
    "criteria": [
      "0: Opposite energy",
      "1: Poor contribution",
      "2: Acceptable contribution",
      "3: Strong contribution",
      "4: Ideal energy move"
    ]
  },
  "transition_potential": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How naturally can this song connect to its neighboring songs?",
    "criteria": [
      "0: Abrupt mismatch",
      "1: Difficult transition",
      "2: Workable transition",
      "3: Smooth transition",
      "4: Exceptionally natural transition"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0143. Cue Sheet Scout

ID: music-cue-sheet-scout
Sub-discipline: Film sound spotting
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste scene descriptions and a cue list, and Jev scores each cue for scene fit, emotional alignment, and timing suitability.

Why typed decisions: Consistent per-cue scores help editors prioritize candidates faster than subjective prose summaries.

TAM: $2B–5B film and TV post-production tools
SAM: $200M–600M music-supervision segment
SOM: $1M–4M reachable early market

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Cue Sheet Scout" 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 scene descriptions and a cue list, and Jev scores each cue for scene fit, emotional alignment, and timing suitability.
Discipline: Music & Sound Design (Film sound spotting).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: Consistent per-cue scores help editors prioritize candidates faster than subjective prose summaries.

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": <Scene descriptions plus cue metadata>, "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)
{
  "scene_fit": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How well does this cue fit the described scene?",
    "criteria": [
      "0: Incompatible",
      "1: Weak fit",
      "2: Partial fit",
      "3: Strong fit",
      "4: Precise fit"
    ]
  },
  "emotional_alignment": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How well does the cue support the intended emotional effect?",
    "criteria": [
      "0: Opposes the effect",
      "1: Barely supports it",
      "2: Mixed or neutral",
      "3: Clearly supports it",
      "4: Intensifies it precisely"
    ]
  },
  "timing_suitability": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How suitable is this cue's duration and development for the scene timing?",
    "criteria": [
      "0: Unworkable",
      "1: Poorly matched",
      "2: Needs adjustment",
      "3: Well matched",
      "4: Fits naturally"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0144. Patch Bay Picker

ID: music-patch-bay-picker
Sub-discipline: Synthesizer sound design
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste a sound target and candidate synth patch descriptions, and Jev scores each patch for timbral fit, modifiable potential, and mix placement.

Why typed decisions: Comparable scores help sound designers choose a starting patch without relying on generated patch prose.

TAM: $1B–3B virtual-instrument market
SAM: $100M–400M sound-design workflow segment
SOM: $500K–2M reachable early market

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Patch Bay Picker" 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 sound target and candidate synth patch descriptions, and Jev scores each patch for timbral fit, modifiable potential, and mix placement.
Discipline: Music & Sound Design (Synthesizer sound design).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: Comparable scores help sound designers choose a starting patch without relying on generated patch prose.

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": <Sound target plus patch descriptions>, "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)
{
  "timbral_fit": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How closely does this patch match the requested timbre?",
    "criteria": [
      "0: Unrelated timbre",
      "1: Distant resemblance",
      "2: Partial match",
      "3: Strong match",
      "4: Near-exact match"
    ]
  },
  "modification_potential": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How promising is this patch as a starting point for shaping the target sound?",
    "criteria": [
      "0: Poor starting point",
      "1: Few useful controls",
      "2: Some useful potential",
      "3: Highly adaptable",
      "4: Ideal foundation"
    ]
  },
  "mix_placement": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How suitable is this patch's described spectral and spatial character for the intended mix role?",
    "criteria": [
      "0: Unsuitable",
      "1: Likely clashes",
      "2: Usable with work",
      "3: Fits well",
      "4: Naturally occupies the role"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0145. Lyric Meter Lens

ID: music-lyric-meter-lens
Sub-discipline: Songwriting craft
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste lyric lines with a melody or syllable pattern, and Jev scores each line for meter fit, singability, and emotional consistency.

Why typed decisions: A ranked line review is actionable while preserving the songwriter's authorship and wording.

TAM: $500M–1.5B songwriting tools
SAM: $50M–200M lyric-craft segment
SOM: $250K–1.5M reachable early market

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Lyric Meter Lens" 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 lyric lines with a melody or syllable pattern, and Jev scores each line for meter fit, singability, and emotional consistency.
Discipline: Music & Sound Design (Songwriting craft).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: A ranked line review is actionable while preserving the songwriter's authorship and wording.

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": <Lyric lines plus melody and intent 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)
{
  "meter_fit": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How well does this line fit the supplied rhythmic or syllabic pattern?",
    "criteria": [
      "0: Does not fit",
      "1: Major mismatch",
      "2: Fits with changes",
      "3: Fits well",
      "4: Fits precisely"
    ]
  },
  "singability": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How naturally does this line appear to sing with the supplied melody?",
    "criteria": [
      "0: Awkward to sing",
      "1: Many obstacles",
      "2: Some awkwardness",
      "3: Mostly natural",
      "4: Effortless phrasing"
    ]
  },
  "emotional_consistency": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How well does this line match the song's stated emotional intent?",
    "criteria": [
      "0: Contradicts it",
      "1: Weakly related",
      "2: Partly aligned",
      "3: Strongly aligned",
      "4: Exactly aligned"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0146. Mix Note Prioritizer

ID: music-mix-note-prioritizer
Sub-discipline: Mix engineering
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste a mix brief and engineer notes, and Jev scores each proposed revision for brief impact, audible importance, and implementation risk.

Why typed decisions: Weighted rankings turn subjective notes into a practical revision queue without rewriting them.

TAM: $1B–3B mixing and mastering software
SAM: $100M–300M engineer workflow segment
SOM: $500K–2M reachable early market

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Mix Note Prioritizer" 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 mix brief and engineer notes, and Jev scores each proposed revision for brief impact, audible importance, and implementation risk.
Discipline: Music & Sound Design (Mix engineering).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: Weighted rankings turn subjective notes into a practical revision queue without rewriting them.

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": <Mix brief plus proposed revision 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)
{
  "brief_impact": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How much would this revision improve the mix against the brief?",
    "criteria": [
      "0: No benefit or harmful",
      "1: Minor benefit",
      "2: Moderate benefit",
      "3: Major benefit",
      "4: Essential improvement"
    ]
  },
  "audible_importance": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How perceptually important is this issue to listeners?",
    "criteria": [
      "0: Inaudible",
      "1: Subtle",
      "2: Noticeable in context",
      "3: Prominent",
      "4: Dominates the experience"
    ]
  },
  "implementation_risk": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How low-risk is this revision to implement without creating new problems?",
    "criteria": [
      "0: High risk",
      "1: Significant risk",
      "2: Manageable risk",
      "3: Low risk",
      "4: Very safe"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0147. Rehearsal Passage Finder

ID: music-rehearsal-passage-finder
Sub-discipline: Ensemble rehearsal
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste a score outline, rehearsal notes, and passage candidates, and Jev scores each passage for ensemble difficulty, payoff, and urgency.

Why typed decisions: A transparent ranking helps rehearsal leaders allocate limited time to the passages that matter most.

TAM: $500M–2B ensemble music education tools
SAM: $50M–200M professional and school ensembles
SOM: $250K–1M reachable early market

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Rehearsal Passage Finder" 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 score outline, rehearsal notes, and passage candidates, and Jev scores each passage for ensemble difficulty, payoff, and urgency.
Discipline: Music & Sound Design (Ensemble rehearsal).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: A transparent ranking helps rehearsal leaders allocate limited time to the passages that matter most.

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": <Rehearsal notes plus passage descriptions>, "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)
{
  "ensemble_difficulty": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How challenging is this passage for the ensemble described?",
    "criteria": [
      "0: Trivial",
      "1: Slight challenge",
      "2: Moderate challenge",
      "3: Difficult",
      "4: Exceptionally difficult"
    ]
  },
  "musical_payoff": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How much musical improvement could focused rehearsal produce here?",
    "criteria": [
      "0: Little payoff",
      "1: Small payoff",
      "2: Moderate payoff",
      "3: Large payoff",
      "4: Transformative payoff"
    ]
  },
  "urgency": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How urgent is it to rehearse this passage before the next performance?",
    "criteria": [
      "0: Not urgent",
      "1: Low priority",
      "2: Worth addressing",
      "3: High priority",
      "4: Critical"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0148. Foley Prop Index

ID: music-foley-prop-index
Sub-discipline: Foley sound design
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste scene action and available prop descriptions, and Jev scores each prop for acoustic plausibility, controllability, and scene match.

Why typed decisions: Scores let Foley artists compare practical recording options without treating prose as a final answer.

TAM: $500M–2B film and game sound tools
SAM: $50M–200M Foley and post-production segment
SOM: $250K–1M reachable early market

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Foley Prop Index" 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 scene action and available prop descriptions, and Jev scores each prop for acoustic plausibility, controllability, and scene match.
Discipline: Music & Sound Design (Foley sound design).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: Scores let Foley artists compare practical recording options without treating prose as a final answer.

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": <Scene actions plus prop inventory>, "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)
{
  "acoustic_plausibility": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How plausibly could this prop produce the required sound?",
    "criteria": [
      "0: Implausible",
      "1: Unlikely",
      "2: Possible with processing",
      "3: Plausible",
      "4: Naturally convincing"
    ]
  },
  "recording_controllability": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How controllable is this prop for repeatable recording?",
    "criteria": [
      "0: Uncontrollable",
      "1: Difficult",
      "2: Somewhat controllable",
      "3: Easy to control",
      "4: Highly repeatable"
    ]
  },
  "scene_match": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How well does the prop's likely sound match the scene action?",
    "criteria": [
      "0: Poor match",
      "1: Weak match",
      "2: Partial match",
      "3: Strong match",
      "4: Exact match"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0149. Stem Delivery Checker

ID: music-stem-delivery-checker
Sub-discipline: Audio post-production
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste delivery specs and stem descriptions, and Jev scores each stem for spec alignment, separation quality, and handoff completeness.

Why typed decisions: Structured scores help teams catch weak deliverables consistently before a handoff.

TAM: $1B–3B audio post-production software
SAM: $100M–300M delivery workflow segment
SOM: $500K–2M reachable early market

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Stem Delivery Checker" 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 delivery specs and stem descriptions, and Jev scores each stem for spec alignment, separation quality, and handoff completeness.
Discipline: Music & Sound Design (Audio post-production).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: Structured scores help teams catch weak deliverables consistently before a handoff.

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": <Delivery requirements plus stem metadata>, "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)
{
  "spec_alignment": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How well does this stem align with the supplied delivery specifications?",
    "criteria": [
      "0: Violates key specs",
      "1: Major deviations",
      "2: Partial compliance",
      "3: Nearly compliant",
      "4: Fully compliant"
    ]
  },
  "separation_quality": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How clearly is this stem separated for its intended role?",
    "criteria": [
      "0: Not separable",
      "1: Heavy overlap",
      "2: Some overlap",
      "3: Clear separation",
      "4: Cleanly isolated"
    ]
  },
  "handoff_completeness": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How complete is the information needed to use this stem in the handoff?",
    "criteria": [
      "0: Missing essentials",
      "1: Major gaps",
      "2: Some gaps",
      "3: Mostly complete",
      "4: Complete and clear"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0150. Preset Palette Curator

ID: music-preset-palette-curator
Sub-discipline: Instrument preset management
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste a project brief and preset descriptions, and Jev scores each preset for stylistic fit, mix utility, and creative range.

Why typed decisions: A weighted shortlist makes large preset collections easier to navigate than generated recommendations.

TAM: $1B–3B virtual instrument and preset market
SAM: $100M–400M preset discovery segment
SOM: $500K–2M reachable early market

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Preset Palette Curator" 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 project brief and preset descriptions, and Jev scores each preset for stylistic fit, mix utility, and creative range.
Discipline: Music & Sound Design (Instrument preset management).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: A weighted shortlist makes large preset collections easier to navigate than generated recommendations.

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": <Project brief plus preset metadata>, "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)
{
  "style_fit": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How well does this preset fit the project's stated style?",
    "criteria": [
      "0: Wrong style",
      "1: Weak fit",
      "2: Partial fit",
      "3: Strong fit",
      "4: Ideal fit"
    ]
  },
  "mix_utility": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How useful is this preset likely to be in the intended mix role?",
    "criteria": [
      "0: Unsuitable",
      "1: Likely problematic",
      "2: Usable with work",
      "3: Mix-ready",
      "4: Ideal for the role"
    ]
  },
  "creative_range": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How much useful variation does this preset offer for the project?",
    "criteria": [
      "0: No useful range",
      "1: Very limited",
      "2: Some variation",
      "3: Broad useful range",
      "4: Exceptional flexibility"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0151. Sync Cue Shortlist

ID: music-sync-cue-shortlist
Sub-discipline: Music licensing
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste a sync brief and track metadata, and Jev scores each track for brief fit, editability, and licensing readiness.

Why typed decisions: Comparable rankings help music supervisors narrow a catalog using practical selection criteria.

TAM: $2B–6B music licensing market
SAM: $200M–700M sync discovery segment
SOM: $1M–5M reachable early market

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Sync Cue Shortlist" 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 sync brief and track metadata, and Jev scores each track for brief fit, editability, and licensing readiness.
Discipline: Music & Sound Design (Music licensing).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: Comparable rankings help music supervisors narrow a catalog using practical selection criteria.

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": <Sync brief plus track and rights metadata>, "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)
{
  "brief_fit": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How well does this track match the sync brief?",
    "criteria": [
      "0: Incompatible",
      "1: Weak match",
      "2: Partial match",
      "3: Strong match",
      "4: Exact match"
    ]
  },
  "editability": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How readily could this track be edited to the described scene length and structure?",
    "criteria": [
      "0: Very difficult",
      "1: Difficult",
      "2: Possible with work",
      "3: Easy to edit",
      "4: Naturally adaptable"
    ]
  },
  "licensing_readiness": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How ready is the track's supplied rights information for a licensing decision?",
    "criteria": [
      "0: Unknown or conflicting",
      "1: Major gaps",
      "2: Some details missing",
      "3: Nearly clear",
      "4: Clear and complete"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0152. Ambience Bed Selector

ID: music-ambience-bed-selector
Sub-discipline: Environmental sound design
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste a scene setting and ambience candidates, and Jev scores each bed for environmental authenticity, tonal fit, and loop suitability.

Why typed decisions: Per-candidate scores provide a practical comparison when several beds seem plausible.

TAM: $500M–2B sound-effects and ambience market
SAM: $50M–200M sound designer segment
SOM: $250K–1M reachable early market

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Ambience Bed Selector" 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 scene setting and ambience candidates, and Jev scores each bed for environmental authenticity, tonal fit, and loop suitability.
Discipline: Music & Sound Design (Environmental sound design).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: Per-candidate scores provide a practical comparison when several beds seem plausible.

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": <Scene setting plus ambience metadata>, "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)
{
  "environmental_authenticity": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How authentic is this ambience for the described environment?",
    "criteria": [
      "0: Implausible",
      "1: Weakly plausible",
      "2: Partly convincing",
      "3: Convincing",
      "4: Highly authentic"
    ]
  },
  "tonal_fit": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How well does the ambience's tonal character suit the scene?",
    "criteria": [
      "0: Conflicts strongly",
      "1: Poor fit",
      "2: Neutral or mixed",
      "3: Good fit",
      "4: Ideal fit"
    ]
  },
  "loop_suitability": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How suitable is this recording for a seamless or unobtrusive loop?",
    "criteria": [
      "0: Unsuitable",
      "1: Obvious problems",
      "2: Needs significant editing",
      "3: Mostly suitable",
      "4: Seamless potential"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0153. Orchestration Balance Board

ID: music-orchestration-balance-board
Sub-discipline: Orchestration
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste a passage summary and instrument assignments, and Jev scores each assignment for register fit, ensemble balance, and playable practicality.

Why typed decisions: Comparable scores flag promising assignments while leaving artistic decisions with the orchestrator.

TAM: $500M–2B notation and orchestration tools
SAM: $50M–200M composer workflow segment
SOM: $250K–1M reachable early market

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Orchestration Balance Board" 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 passage summary and instrument assignments, and Jev scores each assignment for register fit, ensemble balance, and playable practicality.
Discipline: Music & Sound Design (Orchestration).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: Comparable scores flag promising assignments while leaving artistic decisions with the orchestrator.

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": <Passage summary plus instrument assignments>, "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)
{
  "register_fit": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How well does the assigned part sit in the instrument's effective register?",
    "criteria": [
      "0: Unworkable register",
      "1: Poor register",
      "2: Usable with compromise",
      "3: Comfortable register",
      "4: Ideal register"
    ]
  },
  "ensemble_balance": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How well will this assignment balance with the other described parts?",
    "criteria": [
      "0: Severely unbalanced",
      "1: Likely obscured or overpowering",
      "2: Mixed balance",
      "3: Well balanced",
      "4: Excellent balance"
    ]
  },
  "playable_practicality": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How practical is this assignment for the stated performer level?",
    "criteria": [
      "0: Impractical",
      "1: Very difficult",
      "2: Challenging but possible",
      "3: Practical",
      "4: Highly idiomatic"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0154. Mastering Target Board

ID: music-mastering-target-board
Sub-discipline: Mastering engineering
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste a release brief and candidate masters' technical summaries, and Jev scores each version for target alignment, translation confidence, and dynamic suitability.

Why typed decisions: Numeric comparison supports mastering choices more reliably than a generated verdict.

TAM: $1B–3B mastering tools and services
SAM: $100M–300M independent mastering segment
SOM: $500K–2M reachable early market

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Mastering Target Board" 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 release brief and candidate masters' technical summaries, and Jev scores each version for target alignment, translation confidence, and dynamic suitability.
Discipline: Music & Sound Design (Mastering engineering).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: Numeric comparison supports mastering choices more reliably than a generated verdict.

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": <Release brief plus master measurements and 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)
{
  "target_alignment": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How well does this master align with the release's stated sonic target?",
    "criteria": [
      "0: Opposite target",
      "1: Weak alignment",
      "2: Partial alignment",
      "3: Strong alignment",
      "4: Exact alignment"
    ]
  },
  "translation_confidence": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How likely is this master to translate well across the stated playback contexts?",
    "criteria": [
      "0: Poor prospects",
      "1: Significant concerns",
      "2: Mixed prospects",
      "3: Good prospects",
      "4: Very robust"
    ]
  },
  "dynamic_suitability": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How suitable is this master’s dynamic character for the intended release?",
    "criteria": [
      "0: Unsuitable",
      "1: Poorly matched",
      "2: Acceptable",
      "3: Well matched",
      "4: Ideal"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0155. Podcast Music Matcher

ID: music-podcast-music-matcher
Sub-discipline: Podcast scoring
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste an episode segment summary and music cue candidates, and Jev scores each cue for narrative fit, speech compatibility, and tonal continuity.

Why typed decisions: A consistent ranking helps producers choose cues without generating replacement music or copy.

TAM: $500M–2B podcast production tools
SAM: $50M–200M music and sound workflow segment
SOM: $250K–1M reachable early market

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Podcast Music Matcher" 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 an episode segment summary and music cue candidates, and Jev scores each cue for narrative fit, speech compatibility, and tonal continuity.
Discipline: Music & Sound Design (Podcast scoring).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: A consistent ranking helps producers choose cues without generating replacement music or copy.

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": <Episode segment plus cue metadata>, "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)
{
  "narrative_fit": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How well does this cue support the segment's narrative role?",
    "criteria": [
      "0: Undermines it",
      "1: Weak support",
      "2: Partial support",
      "3: Strong support",
      "4: Precisely supports it"
    ]
  },
  "speech_compatibility": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How compatible is the cue with intelligible speech in the described context?",
    "criteria": [
      "0: Masks speech",
      "1: Strong conflict",
      "2: Usable with careful mixing",
      "3: Speech-friendly",
      "4: Naturally leaves room for speech"
    ]
  },
  "tonal_continuity": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How well does this cue maintain the episode's stated tonal continuity?",
    "criteria": [
      "0: Jarring break",
      "1: Weak continuity",
      "2: Neutral",
      "3: Strong continuity",
      "4: Seamless continuity"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0156. Concert Hall Match

ID: music-concert-hall-match
Sub-discipline: Acoustic venue planning
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste ensemble requirements and venue descriptions, and Jev scores each venue for acoustic suitability, stage practicality, and audience fit.

Why typed decisions: Weighted venue scores let organizers compare nuanced acoustic and logistical tradeoffs at a glance.

TAM: $1B–3B live event planning market
SAM: $100M–300M music venue selection segment
SOM: $250K–1M reachable early market

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Concert Hall Match" 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 ensemble requirements and venue descriptions, and Jev scores each venue for acoustic suitability, stage practicality, and audience fit.
Discipline: Music & Sound Design (Acoustic venue planning).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: Weighted venue scores let organizers compare nuanced acoustic and logistical tradeoffs at a glance.

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": <Ensemble requirements plus venue descriptions>, "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)
{
  "acoustic_suitability": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How suitable is this venue's described acoustic for the ensemble and repertoire?",
    "criteria": [
      "0: Unsuitable",
      "1: Poor match",
      "2: Workable with adjustments",
      "3: Good match",
      "4: Ideal match"
    ]
  },
  "stage_practicality": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How practical is the stage setup for the described performers?",
    "criteria": [
      "0: Unworkable",
      "1: Major compromises",
      "2: Manageable constraints",
      "3: Practical",
      "4: Excellent fit"
    ]
  },
  "audience_fit": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How well does this venue fit the intended audience experience?",
    "criteria": [
      "0: Poor fit",
      "1: Weak fit",
      "2: Adequate fit",
      "3: Strong fit",
      "4: Excellent fit"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0157. Sound Logo Evaluator

ID: music-sound-logo-evaluator
Sub-discipline: Audio branding
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste a brand brief and candidate sonic-logo descriptions, and Jev scores each for brand alignment, memorability, and cross-context usability.

Why typed decisions: Ranked dimensions make brand reviews easier to discuss than open-ended generated opinions.

TAM: $1B–4B audio branding and sonic identity
SAM: $100M–400M agency and brand segment
SOM: $500K–2M reachable early market

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Sound Logo Evaluator" 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 brand brief and candidate sonic-logo descriptions, and Jev scores each for brand alignment, memorability, and cross-context usability.
Discipline: Music & Sound Design (Audio branding).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: Ranked dimensions make brand reviews easier to discuss than open-ended generated opinions.

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": <Brand brief plus sonic-logo descriptions>, "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)
{
  "brand_alignment": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How well does this sound concept express the stated brand qualities?",
    "criteria": [
      "0: Contradicts them",
      "1: Weakly expresses them",
      "2: Partially expresses them",
      "3: Clearly expresses them",
      "4: Precisely expresses them"
    ]
  },
  "memorability": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How likely is the concept to be recognizable and remembered?",
    "criteria": [
      "0: Forgettable",
      "1: Slightly distinctive",
      "2: Moderately memorable",
      "3: Highly memorable",
      "4: Instantly distinctive"
    ]
  },
  "context_usability": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How well can this concept work across the listed playback contexts?",
    "criteria": [
      "0: Very limited",
      "1: Major limitations",
      "2: Usable in some contexts",
      "3: Broadly usable",
      "4: Works naturally across contexts"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0158. Arrangement Change Queue

ID: music-arrangement-change-queue
Sub-discipline: Arrangement and production
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste a song brief and proposed arrangement changes, and Jev scores each change for impact, style consistency, and effort-to-benefit value.

Why typed decisions: A weighted queue distinguishes high-value revisions from merely interesting ideas.

TAM: $1B–3B music production software
SAM: $100M–400M arranger and producer workflow segment
SOM: $500K–2M reachable early market

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Arrangement Change Queue" 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 song brief and proposed arrangement changes, and Jev scores each change for impact, style consistency, and effort-to-benefit value.
Discipline: Music & Sound Design (Arrangement and production).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: A weighted queue distinguishes high-value revisions from merely interesting ideas.

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": <Song brief plus proposed changes>, "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)
{
  "musical_impact": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How much could this change improve the song's intended effect?",
    "criteria": [
      "0: No improvement",
      "1: Minor improvement",
      "2: Moderate improvement",
      "3: Major improvement",
      "4: Defining improvement"
    ]
  },
  "style_consistency": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How consistent is this change with the song's stated style?",
    "criteria": [
      "0: Contradicts the style",
      "1: Weakly consistent",
      "2: Partly consistent",
      "3: Strongly consistent",
      "4: Completely coherent"
    ]
  },
  "effort_to_benefit": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How favorable is the expected benefit relative to the effort required?",
    "criteria": [
      "0: Poor tradeoff",
      "1: Unfavorable",
      "2: Acceptable",
      "3: Favorable",
      "4: Exceptional value"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0159. Field Recording Scout

ID: music-field-recording-scout
Sub-discipline: Field recording
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste a sound brief and field-recording metadata, and Jev scores each recording for target resemblance, usable signal quality, and location relevance.

Why typed decisions: Normalized candidate scores speed discovery across large archives without replacing human listening.

TAM: $500M–2B audio archive and field recording tools
SAM: $50M–200M sound effects discovery segment
SOM: $250K–1M reachable early market

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Field Recording Scout" 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 sound brief and field-recording metadata, and Jev scores each recording for target resemblance, usable signal quality, and location relevance.
Discipline: Music & Sound Design (Field recording).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: Normalized candidate scores speed discovery across large archives without replacing human listening.

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": <Sound brief plus recording metadata>, "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)
{
  "target_resemblance": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How closely does this recording resemble the requested sound?",
    "criteria": [
      "0: Unrelated",
      "1: Distant resemblance",
      "2: Partial resemblance",
      "3: Strong resemblance",
      "4: Near-exact resemblance"
    ]
  },
  "usable_signal_quality": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How usable is the described recording quality for the intended production?",
    "criteria": [
      "0: Unusable",
      "1: Severe problems",
      "2: Salvageable with processing",
      "3: Clean enough to use",
      "4: Excellent signal quality"
    ]
  },
  "location_relevance": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How relevant is the recorded location to the brief?",
    "criteria": [
      "0: Irrelevant",
      "1: Weakly related",
      "2: Partially relevant",
      "3: Relevant",
      "4: Exactly relevant"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0160. Game Audio Event Sorter

ID: music-game-audio-event-sorter
Sub-discipline: Game audio implementation
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste gameplay event descriptions and candidate sound events, and Jev scores each for player feedback clarity, gameplay fit, and implementation suitability.

Why typed decisions: Typed rankings help audio teams triage event assets against design needs consistently.

TAM: $2B–5B game audio tools and services
SAM: $200M–700M game sound workflow segment
SOM: $1M–4M reachable early market

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Game Audio Event Sorter" 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 gameplay event descriptions and candidate sound events, and Jev scores each for player feedback clarity, gameplay fit, and implementation suitability.
Discipline: Music & Sound Design (Game audio implementation).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: Typed rankings help audio teams triage event assets against design needs consistently.

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": <Gameplay events plus candidate sound metadata>, "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)
{
  "feedback_clarity": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How clearly would this sound communicate the gameplay event to a player?",
    "criteria": [
      "0: Misleading or unclear",
      "1: Hard to interpret",
      "2: Somewhat clear",
      "3: Clear",
      "4: Instantly legible"
    ]
  },
  "gameplay_fit": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How well does this sound fit the game's stated aesthetic and moment?",
    "criteria": [
      "0: Incompatible",
      "1: Weak fit",
      "2: Partial fit",
      "3: Strong fit",
      "4: Exact fit"
    ]
  },
  "implementation_suitability": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How suitable is this asset for the described implementation constraints?",
    "criteria": [
      "0: Unworkable",
      "1: Major technical issues",
      "2: Needs adaptation",
      "3: Fits well",
      "4: Fits cleanly"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0161. Lyric Hook Finder

ID: music-lyric-hook-finder
Sub-discipline: Songwriting workflow
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: A songwriter pastes lyric drafts, and Jev selects the existing line that best works as a chorus hook or chooses none.

Why typed decisions: Selecting a line preserves the writer’s exact wording instead of risking an unwanted rewrite.

TAM: $1B–$3B global songwriting software market
SAM: $150M–$400M digital lyric-writing tools
SOM: $1M–$5M early-career songwriter subscriptions

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Lyric Hook Finder" 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
A songwriter pastes lyric drafts, and Jev selects the existing line that best works as a chorus hook or chooses none.
Discipline: Music & Sound Design (Songwriting workflow).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: Selecting a line preserves the writer’s exact wording instead of risking an unwanted rewrite.

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": <Lyric lines with stanza positions>, "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)
{
  "hook_line": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which extracted line is the strongest chorus hook?",
    "criteria": {
      "candidate_1": "A memorable, repeatable line with a clear central idea",
      "candidate_2": "A line with strong imagery but limited hook potential",
      "candidate_3": "A line that works better as supporting verse material",
      "none": "No extracted line is a convincing hook"
    }
  },
  "hook_ready": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Could the selected line plausibly anchor a chorus?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "It is concise, memorable, and central to the song",
      "false": "It lacks a clear or repeatable hook idea"
    }
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0162. Setlist Mood Sorter

ID: music-setlist-mood-sorter-1
Sub-discipline: Live performance planning
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: A performer pastes song notes and setlist entries, and Jev selects the existing mood label or description that best fits each song.

Why typed decisions: Choosing a supplied label keeps the artist’s own language intact and makes classifications consistent.

TAM: $500M–$1.5B live music planning software market
SAM: $50M–$150M setlist and rehearsal tools
SOM: $500K–$3M independent performer subscriptions

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Setlist Mood Sorter" 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
A performer pastes song notes and setlist entries, and Jev selects the existing mood label or description that best fits each song.
Discipline: Music & Sound Design (Live performance planning).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: Choosing a supplied label keeps the artist’s own language intact and makes classifications consistent.

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": <Song titles, notes, and extracted mood phrases>, "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)
{
  "mood_phrase": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which extracted phrase best describes this song’s mood?",
    "criteria": {
      "candidate_1": "A phrase indicating a high-energy or celebratory mood",
      "candidate_2": "A phrase indicating a reflective or subdued mood",
      "candidate_3": "A phrase indicating tension or dramatic intensity",
      "none": "No extracted phrase accurately describes the mood"
    }
  },
  "mood_confidence": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How clearly do the notes establish a mood?",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Notes provide little or conflicting mood evidence",
      "2: Some mood evidence, but the interpretation is uncertain",
      "3: Clear, consistent mood cues",
      "4: Strong and unambiguous mood identity"
    ]
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0163. Cue Sheet Matchdesk

ID: music-cue-sheet-matchdesk
Sub-discipline: Music supervision
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: A music supervisor pastes scene descriptions and cue-sheet notes, and Jev selects the existing cue description that best matches each scene.

Why typed decisions: Selecting from approved descriptions avoids inventing credits or misrepresenting a cue’s intended use.

TAM: $1B–$4B music supervision and sync software market
SAM: $100M–$300M cue and rights workflow tools
SOM: $1M–$6M independent supervisor subscriptions

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Cue Sheet Matchdesk" 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
A music supervisor pastes scene descriptions and cue-sheet notes, and Jev selects the existing cue description that best matches each scene.
Discipline: Music & Sound Design (Music supervision).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: Selecting from approved descriptions avoids inventing credits or misrepresenting a cue’s intended use.

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": <Scene summaries, cue notes, and candidate descriptions>, "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)
{
  "cue_match": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which extracted cue description best matches the scene?",
    "criteria": {
      "candidate_1": "Description aligns with the scene’s emotional function",
      "candidate_2": "Description aligns with the scene’s pacing or action",
      "candidate_3": "Description aligns with its setting or period",
      "none": "No candidate description fits the scene"
    }
  },
  "sync_fit": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the selected cue appear suitable for this scene’s stated function?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The notes support a clear functional match",
      "false": "The match is weak, conflicting, or unsupported"
    }
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0164. Preset Note Matcher

ID: music-preset-note-matcher
Sub-discipline: Sound design
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: A sound designer pastes preset notes and project briefs, and Jev selects the existing note that best matches the requested sound.

Why typed decisions: Choosing documented preset language helps users find a real preset without fabricated descriptions.

TAM: $2B–$6B virtual instrument and preset market
SAM: $200M–$600M preset discovery and sound-design tools
SOM: $1M–$5M creator subscriptions

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Preset Note Matcher" 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
A sound designer pastes preset notes and project briefs, and Jev selects the existing note that best matches the requested sound.
Discipline: Music & Sound Design (Sound design).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: Choosing documented preset language helps users find a real preset without fabricated descriptions.

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": <Preset notes, project brief, and extracted phrases>, "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)
{
  "preset_note": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which extracted preset note best matches the brief?",
    "criteria": {
      "candidate_1": "Note describes the requested timbre or texture",
      "candidate_2": "Note describes a similar sound with a different role",
      "candidate_3": "Note describes a related effect or modulation",
      "none": "No note describes a suitable preset"
    }
  },
  "match_strength": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How close is the selected note to the requested sound?",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Little meaningful similarity",
      "2: Partial match with a major mismatch",
      "3: Strong match with minor differences",
      "4: Direct match to the stated sound"
    ]
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0165. Sample Tag Picker

ID: music-sample-tag-picker
Sub-discipline: Sample library management
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: A producer pastes sample descriptions and session notes, and Jev selects the existing tag that best classifies each sample.

Why typed decisions: Selecting a known tag keeps a library searchable and prevents synonym-filled, inconsistent metadata.

TAM: $1B–$3B music sample and sound library market
SAM: $100M–$350M sample cataloging tools
SOM: $500K–$3M producer and library-owner subscriptions

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Sample Tag Picker" 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
A producer pastes sample descriptions and session notes, and Jev selects the existing tag that best classifies each sample.
Discipline: Music & Sound Design (Sample library management).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: Selecting a known tag keeps a library searchable and prevents synonym-filled, inconsistent metadata.

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 notes and controlled-vocabulary tags>, "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)
{
  "sample_tag": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which existing tag best classifies this sample?",
    "criteria": {
      "candidate_1": "Tag describes the sample’s primary sound source",
      "candidate_2": "Tag describes its musical role or use",
      "candidate_3": "Tag describes its mood or texture",
      "none": "No candidate tag is sufficiently accurate"
    }
  },
  "tag_confidence": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How clearly does the sample evidence support the tag?",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Evidence is ambiguous",
      "2: Tag is plausible but indirect",
      "3: Tag is well supported",
      "4: Tag is unmistakably correct"
    ]
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0166. Takekeeper Select

ID: music-takekeeper-select
Sub-discipline: Recording session management
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: An engineer pastes take logs and producer comments, and Jev selects the existing comment that identifies the intended keeper take.

Why typed decisions: Choosing the original note preserves session intent and avoids generating a misleading take instruction.

TAM: $1B–$3B recording studio workflow software market
SAM: $100M–$300M take and session management tools
SOM: $500K–$3M studio subscriptions

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Takekeeper Select" 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
An engineer pastes take logs and producer comments, and Jev selects the existing comment that identifies the intended keeper take.
Discipline: Music & Sound Design (Recording session management).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: Choosing the original note preserves session intent and avoids generating a misleading take instruction.

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": <Take IDs and extracted engineer or producer comments>, "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)
{
  "keeper_comment": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which extracted comment most clearly identifies the keeper take?",
    "criteria": {
      "candidate_1": "Comment explicitly marks a take as preferred or final",
      "candidate_2": "Comment praises a specific performance detail",
      "candidate_3": "Comment rejects or qualifies another take",
      "none": "No comment establishes a keeper"
    }
  },
  "keeper_clear": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is there enough evidence to identify a keeper take?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "A comment clearly favors a specific take",
      "false": "Notes are ambiguous or do not favor any take"
    }
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0167. Mix Note Router

ID: music-mix-note-router
Sub-discipline: Mix engineering
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: A mix engineer pastes client feedback and track names, and Jev selects the existing track or bus label most likely referenced by each note.

Why typed decisions: Selecting a real session label reduces mistaken routing while leaving the client’s exact feedback untouched.

TAM: $1B–$3B audio mixing software and services market
SAM: $100M–$300M mix-feedback workflow tools
SOM: $500K–$3M engineer subscriptions

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Mix Note Router" 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
A mix engineer pastes client feedback and track names, and Jev selects the existing track or bus label most likely referenced by each note.
Discipline: Music & Sound Design (Mix engineering).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: Selecting a real session label reduces mistaken routing while leaving the client’s exact feedback untouched.

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": <Track labels and extracted client-note phrases>, "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)
{
  "target_track": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which existing track label does this note refer to?",
    "criteria": {
      "candidate_1": "Label matches the named instrument or source",
      "candidate_2": "Label matches the described frequency or processing role",
      "candidate_3": "Label matches a related subgroup or bus",
      "none": "No track label is supported by the note"
    }
  },
  "routing_confidence": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How certain is the track reference?",
    "criteria": [
      "1: No reliable link to a track",
      "2: Several plausible tracks",
      "3: One likely track with some ambiguity",
      "4: One explicit, unambiguous track"
    ]
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0168. Patchbay Label Audit

ID: music-patchbay-label-audit
Sub-discipline: Studio systems engineering
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: A studio technician pastes patchbay documentation and equipment notes, and Jev selects the existing port description that matches each connection.

Why typed decisions: Selecting a documented port prevents invented labels from causing physical routing errors.

TAM: $500M–$2B studio infrastructure and workflow market
SAM: $50M–$200M patchbay and signal documentation tools
SOM: $250K–$2M studio subscriptions

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Patchbay Label Audit" 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
A studio technician pastes patchbay documentation and equipment notes, and Jev selects the existing port description that matches each connection.
Discipline: Music & Sound Design (Studio systems engineering).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: Selecting a documented port prevents invented labels from causing physical routing errors.

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": <Port names, equipment notes, and connection descriptions>, "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)
{
  "port_match": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which existing port description matches this connection?",
    "criteria": {
      "candidate_1": "Description matches the source equipment and output",
      "candidate_2": "Description matches the destination equipment and input",
      "candidate_3": "Description matches the documented signal path",
      "none": "No port description supports this connection"
    }
  },
  "connection_valid": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the selected description support a valid documented connection?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Source, destination, and signal path agree",
      "false": "The documentation conflicts or is incomplete"
    }
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0169. Score Excerpt Locator

ID: music-score-excerpt-locator
Sub-discipline: Composition workflow
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: A composer pastes rehearsal notes and score annotations, and Jev selects the existing measure reference that best matches each requested change.

Why typed decisions: Choosing a supplied measure reference avoids fabricated bar numbers and preserves precise notation context.

TAM: $500M–$2B music notation and composition software market
SAM: $50M–$200M score collaboration tools
SOM: $250K–$2M composer subscriptions

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Score Excerpt Locator" 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
A composer pastes rehearsal notes and score annotations, and Jev selects the existing measure reference that best matches each requested change.
Discipline: Music & Sound Design (Composition workflow).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: Choosing a supplied measure reference avoids fabricated bar numbers and preserves precise notation context.

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": <Extracted measure references and rehearsal comments>, "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)
{
  "measure_ref": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which extracted measure reference best matches this comment?",
    "criteria": {
      "candidate_1": "Reference is explicitly named in the comment",
      "candidate_2": "Reference matches the described musical event",
      "candidate_3": "Reference matches the surrounding section label",
      "none": "No extracted reference is supported"
    }
  },
  "reference_certainty": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How clearly does the comment identify a location?",
    "criteria": [
      "1: No identifiable location",
      "2: Broad section only",
      "3: Likely measure or short passage",
      "4: Exact measure is explicit"
    ]
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0170. Stem Role Sorter

ID: music-stem-role-sorter
Sub-discipline: Audio post-production
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: An editor pastes stem filenames and delivery notes, and Jev selects the existing role label that best identifies each stem.

Why typed decisions: Selecting a standard role label improves handoffs without renaming files or guessing at their contents.

TAM: $1B–$4B audio post-production software market
SAM: $100M–$350M stem delivery and metadata tools
SOM: $500K–$3M post-production team subscriptions

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Stem Role Sorter" 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
An editor pastes stem filenames and delivery notes, and Jev selects the existing role label that best identifies each stem.
Discipline: Music & Sound Design (Audio post-production).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: Selecting a standard role label improves handoffs without renaming files or guessing at their contents.

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": <Stem filenames, delivery notes, and role labels>, "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)
{
  "stem_role": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which existing role label best fits this stem?",
    "criteria": {
      "candidate_1": "Label identifies dialogue, lead, or primary source",
      "candidate_2": "Label identifies music, harmony, or accompaniment",
      "candidate_3": "Label identifies effects, ambience, or texture",
      "none": "No role label is supported by the filename or notes"
    }
  },
  "role_confidence": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How clear is the stem’s intended role?",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Role is unknown",
      "2: Role is only weakly suggested",
      "3: Role is reasonably clear",
      "4: Role is explicit and unambiguous"
    ]
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0171. Rehearsal Note Sorter

ID: music-rehearsal-note-sorter
Sub-discipline: Ensemble rehearsal planning
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: A bandleader pastes rehearsal notes and instrument lists, and Jev selects the existing instrument or section label each note concerns.

Why typed decisions: Choosing from the ensemble’s real labels directs notes accurately without paraphrasing musicians’ comments.

TAM: $500M–$1.5B music rehearsal and ensemble software market
SAM: $50M–$150M rehearsal coordination tools
SOM: $250K–$1.5M ensemble subscriptions

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Rehearsal Note Sorter" 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
A bandleader pastes rehearsal notes and instrument lists, and Jev selects the existing instrument or section label each note concerns.
Discipline: Music & Sound Design (Ensemble rehearsal planning).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: Choosing from the ensemble’s real labels directs notes accurately without paraphrasing musicians’ comments.

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": <Instrument labels and extracted rehearsal-note clauses>, "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)
{
  "section_label": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which existing section label does this note concern?",
    "criteria": {
      "candidate_1": "Label matches an instrument named in the note",
      "candidate_2": "Label matches the musical part or register described",
      "candidate_3": "Label matches a named ensemble section",
      "none": "No section label is clearly implicated"
    }
  },
  "note_actionable": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the note clearly apply to a specific section?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "A section is directly named or strongly indicated",
      "false": "The note is general or too ambiguous to route"
    }
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0172. Mastering Target Picker

ID: music-mastering-target-picker
Sub-discipline: Mastering engineering
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: A mastering engineer pastes client briefs and delivery specifications, and Jev selects the existing target value or instruction that applies.

Why typed decisions: Selecting a supplied specification avoids hallucinated loudness targets and keeps delivery decisions auditable.

TAM: $500M–$2B mastering and audio delivery software market
SAM: $50M–$200M mastering specification tools
SOM: $250K–$2M mastering engineer subscriptions

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Mastering Target Picker" 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
A mastering engineer pastes client briefs and delivery specifications, and Jev selects the existing target value or instruction that applies.
Discipline: Music & Sound Design (Mastering engineering).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: Selecting a supplied specification avoids hallucinated loudness targets and keeps delivery decisions auditable.

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": <Client brief, extracted target values, and delivery formats>, "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)
{
  "target_value": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which extracted target or instruction applies to this deliverable?",
    "criteria": {
      "candidate_1": "Value explicitly matches the requested platform or format",
      "candidate_2": "Value matches the client’s stated preference",
      "candidate_3": "Value matches the project’s documented standard",
      "none": "No extracted target is clearly applicable"
    }
  },
  "spec_complete": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is the selected target sufficiently specified for delivery?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The relevant value and format are both clear",
      "false": "A required value or format is missing or conflicting"
    }
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0173. Foley Asset Matcher

ID: music-foley-asset-matcher
Sub-discipline: Foley and sound effects
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: A sound editor pastes scene action notes and asset-library descriptions, and Jev selects the existing asset description that best fits the action.

Why typed decisions: Selecting a catalogued asset lets the editor audition a real recording instead of relying on generated sound descriptions.

TAM: $1B–$3B sound effects and post-production asset market
SAM: $100M–$350M Foley and SFX library tools
SOM: $500K–$3M sound editor subscriptions

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Foley Asset Matcher" 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
A sound editor pastes scene action notes and asset-library descriptions, and Jev selects the existing asset description that best fits the action.
Discipline: Music & Sound Design (Foley and sound effects).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: Selecting a catalogued asset lets the editor audition a real recording instead of relying on generated sound descriptions.

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": <Scene action and extracted library asset descriptions>, "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)
{
  "asset_description": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which existing asset description best fits the scene action?",
    "criteria": {
      "candidate_1": "Description matches the action’s source and movement",
      "candidate_2": "Description matches its timing or surface interaction",
      "candidate_3": "Description matches a plausible secondary detail",
      "none": "No catalogued description is a suitable match"
    }
  },
  "audition_priority": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How strong is the case for auditioning the selected asset?",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Weak or speculative fit",
      "2: Possible fit with substantial uncertainty",
      "3: Good fit worth auditioning",
      "4: Direct match to the described action"
    ]
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0174. Arrangement Marker Finder

ID: music-arrangement-marker-finder
Sub-discipline: Music production
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: A producer pastes arrangement notes and section markers, and Jev selects the existing marker that best corresponds to each note.

Why typed decisions: Selecting an existing marker preserves the project’s naming scheme and avoids creating inaccurate sections.

TAM: $1B–$3B digital audio workstation and production market
SAM: $100M–$300M arrangement and project navigation tools
SOM: $500K–$3M producer subscriptions

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Arrangement Marker Finder" 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
A producer pastes arrangement notes and section markers, and Jev selects the existing marker that best corresponds to each note.
Discipline: Music & Sound Design (Music production).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: Selecting an existing marker preserves the project’s naming scheme and avoids creating inaccurate sections.

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": <Arrangement markers and extracted note phrases>, "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)
{
  "arrangement_marker": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which existing marker best matches this note?",
    "criteria": {
      "candidate_1": "Marker matches the named song section",
      "candidate_2": "Marker matches the described build, drop, or transition",
      "candidate_3": "Marker matches the referenced musical event",
      "none": "No marker clearly matches the note"
    }
  },
  "marker_match": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How confidently does the marker align with the note?",
    "criteria": [
      "1: No meaningful alignment",
      "2: Approximate alignment",
      "3: Clear alignment with some uncertainty",
      "4: Exact or explicitly named alignment"
    ]
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0175. Instrument Credit Matcher

ID: music-instrument-credit-matcher
Sub-discipline: Music metadata
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: A label coordinator pastes liner notes and contributor records, and Jev selects the existing instrument credit that best matches each contributor’s role.

Why typed decisions: Selecting an existing credit protects contributor wording and reduces unsupported metadata changes.

TAM: $1B–$3B music metadata and rights administration market
SAM: $100M–$300M contributor credit management tools
SOM: $500K–$3M label and studio subscriptions

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Instrument Credit Matcher" 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
A label coordinator pastes liner notes and contributor records, and Jev selects the existing instrument credit that best matches each contributor’s role.
Discipline: Music & Sound Design (Music metadata).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: Selecting an existing credit protects contributor wording and reduces unsupported metadata changes.

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": <Contributor records and extracted instrument-credit phrases>, "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)
{
  "instrument_credit": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which existing credit phrase best matches this contributor’s documented role?",
    "criteria": {
      "candidate_1": "Phrase names the primary instrument played",
      "candidate_2": "Phrase names a secondary or auxiliary instrument",
      "candidate_3": "Phrase describes a documented production or performance role",
      "none": "No candidate credit is supported"
    }
  },
  "credit_supported": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is the selected credit supported by the supplied records?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "A source explicitly or consistently supports the role",
      "false": "The role is inferred without adequate evidence"
    }
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0176. Playlist Slot Matcher

ID: music-playlist-slot-matcher
Sub-discipline: Music programming
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: A radio programmer pastes show notes and track metadata, and Jev selects the existing track description that best fits a requested playlist slot.

Why typed decisions: Choosing from actual track metadata prevents fabricated titles or descriptions from entering a playlist.

TAM: $1B–$3B music programming and streaming tools market
SAM: $100M–$300M independent radio and playlist programming tools
SOM: $500K–$3M programmer subscriptions

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Playlist Slot Matcher" 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
A radio programmer pastes show notes and track metadata, and Jev selects the existing track description that best fits a requested playlist slot.
Discipline: Music & Sound Design (Music programming).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: Choosing from actual track metadata prevents fabricated titles or descriptions from entering a playlist.

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": <Slot brief and extracted track metadata candidates>, "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)
{
  "track_candidate": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which existing track description best fits this slot?",
    "criteria": {
      "candidate_1": "Track matches the requested energy or mood",
      "candidate_2": "Track matches the stated genre or era",
      "candidate_3": "Track matches the transition or audience need",
      "none": "No available track description fits"
    }
  },
  "slot_fit": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How well does the selected track fit the slot brief?",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Poor fit",
      "2: Partial fit with a notable mismatch",
      "3: Strong fit",
      "4: Ideal fit across the stated criteria"
    ]
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0177. Podcast Music Cue Picker

ID: music-podcast-music-cue-picker
Sub-discipline: Podcast audio production
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: A podcast editor pastes episode notes and licensed cue descriptions, and Jev selects the existing cue description that fits each segment.

Why typed decisions: Selecting a cleared cue description keeps the editor within the licensed catalog and avoids invented asset references.

TAM: $1B–$4B podcast production software market
SAM: $100M–$350M podcast music and cue management tools
SOM: $500K–$3M podcast studio subscriptions

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Podcast Music Cue Picker" 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
A podcast editor pastes episode notes and licensed cue descriptions, and Jev selects the existing cue description that fits each segment.
Discipline: Music & Sound Design (Podcast audio production).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: Selecting a cleared cue description keeps the editor within the licensed catalog and avoids invented asset references.

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": <Episode segment notes and cleared cue descriptions>, "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)
{
  "licensed_cue": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which existing cleared cue best fits this segment?",
    "criteria": {
      "candidate_1": "Cue matches the segment’s emotional tone",
      "candidate_2": "Cue matches its pacing or transition function",
      "candidate_3": "Cue matches the stated setting or subject",
      "none": "No cleared cue is a suitable match"
    }
  },
  "cue_clearance": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is the selected cue explicitly present in the cleared-cue list?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The cue appears in the supplied cleared catalog",
      "false": "The cue is absent or its clearance is uncertain"
    }
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0178. Ambience Bed Selector

ID: music-ambience-bed-selector-1
Sub-discipline: Game audio design
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: A game audio designer pastes level notes and ambience-library descriptions, and Jev selects the existing ambience bed that best matches the environment.

Why typed decisions: Selecting a real library entry gives designers an auditable asset to audition rather than a fabricated sound concept.

TAM: $2B–$6B game audio and interactive sound market
SAM: $200M–$600M game ambience and asset management tools
SOM: $1M–$5M game audio team subscriptions

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Ambience Bed Selector" 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
A game audio designer pastes level notes and ambience-library descriptions, and Jev selects the existing ambience bed that best matches the environment.
Discipline: Music & Sound Design (Game audio design).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: Selecting a real library entry gives designers an auditable asset to audition rather than a fabricated sound concept.

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": <Level descriptions and extracted ambience asset 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)
{
  "ambience_bed": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which existing ambience description best fits this environment?",
    "criteria": {
      "candidate_1": "Description matches the location or environment",
      "candidate_2": "Description matches the dominant texture or background activity",
      "candidate_3": "Description matches the scene’s emotional atmosphere",
      "none": "No existing bed fits the level notes"
    }
  },
  "loop_suitability": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How suitable is the selected bed for sustained use?",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Strong mismatch or likely distraction",
      "2: Usable only with major adaptation",
      "3: Suitable with modest adaptation",
      "4: Clearly suitable as a sustained ambience"
    ]
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0179. Effect Chain Note Picker

ID: music-effect-chain-note-picker
Sub-discipline: Audio effects design
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: A producer pastes effect-chain notes and plugin documentation, and Jev selects the existing documented setting note that best matches a desired processing role.

Why typed decisions: Choosing a documented setting keeps the result reproducible and avoids inventing plugin parameters.

TAM: $2B–$6B music effects and plugin market
SAM: $100M–$400M plugin preset and documentation tools
SOM: $500K–$3M producer subscriptions

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Effect Chain Note Picker" 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
A producer pastes effect-chain notes and plugin documentation, and Jev selects the existing documented setting note that best matches a desired processing role.
Discipline: Music & Sound Design (Audio effects design).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: Choosing a documented setting keeps the result reproducible and avoids inventing plugin parameters.

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": <Plugin documentation, setting notes, and processing brief>, "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)
{
  "setting_note": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which existing setting note best matches the requested processing role?",
    "criteria": {
      "candidate_1": "Note matches the intended tonal change",
      "candidate_2": "Note matches the requested dynamics or space treatment",
      "candidate_3": "Note matches a documented creative effect",
      "none": "No setting note supports the requested role"
    }
  },
  "setting_relevant": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the selected note describe a setting documented for this plugin?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The note is present in the supplied documentation",
      "false": "The note is unsupported or belongs to another context"
    }
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0180. Library Duplicate Scout

ID: music-library-duplicate-scout
Sub-discipline: Digital asset management
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: A sample librarian pastes asset descriptions and filename records, and Jev selects the existing entry most likely to describe the same recording.

Why typed decisions: Selecting a catalogued duplicate candidate lets a human verify the actual files without manufacturing a new asset record.

TAM: $1B–$3B music asset and sample library market
SAM: $100M–$300M audio asset cataloging tools
SOM: $500K–$3M library-owner subscriptions

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Library Duplicate Scout" 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
A sample librarian pastes asset descriptions and filename records, and Jev selects the existing entry most likely to describe the same recording.
Discipline: Music & Sound Design (Digital asset management).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: Selecting a catalogued duplicate candidate lets a human verify the actual files without manufacturing a new asset record.

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": <Asset filenames and extracted descriptions>, "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)
{
  "duplicate_candidate": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which existing entry is most likely the same recording?",
    "criteria": {
      "candidate_1": "Entry shares distinctive source and take details",
      "candidate_2": "Entry shares a source but may be a different performance",
      "candidate_3": "Entry shares naming or session context only",
      "none": "No likely duplicate appears in the candidates"
    }
  },
  "duplicate_likelihood": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How strong is the evidence that the entries are duplicates?",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Little evidence of duplication",
      "2: Some shared traits but likely distinct",
      "3: Strong candidate requiring file verification",
      "4: Near-explicit duplicate based on unique identifiers"
    ]
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0181. Session Stem Auditor

ID: music-session-stem-auditor
Sub-discipline: Audio session quality control
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Producers paste a stem manifest and delivery requirements, and Jev verifies each stem claim, classifies its issue, scores severity, and routes uncertain checks to human review.

Why typed decisions: Typed verdicts map directly to pass, issue category, and severity fields without asking a person to interpret generated prose.

TAM: TAM: $1.5B global music production software
SAM: SAM: $300M studio delivery tooling
SOM: SOM: $3M reachable indie studios

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Session Stem Auditor" 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
Producers paste a stem manifest and delivery requirements, and Jev verifies each stem claim, classifies its issue, scores severity, and routes uncertain checks to human review.
Discipline: Music & Sound Design (Audio session quality control).
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 verdicts map directly to pass, issue category, and severity fields without asking a person to interpret generated prose.

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": <Stem manifest, delivery spec, and file metadata>, "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)
{
  "requirement_met": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the supplied evidence verify that this stem meets the stated requirement?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Metadata or manifest evidence directly supports compliance.",
      "false": "Evidence shows a mismatch or is insufficient to verify compliance."
    }
  },
  "issue_type": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "If there is a concern, which issue best fits the evidence?",
    "criteria": {
      "missing_stem": "A required stem is absent.",
      "format_mismatch": "File format or sample rate conflicts with the spec.",
      "naming_mismatch": "Stem naming conflicts with the naming rules.",
      "duration_mismatch": "The stem duration or alignment conflicts with the spec."
    }
  },
  "severity": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How severe is the verified delivery issue?",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Cosmetic or negligible",
      "2: Minor, easy to correct",
      "3: Material delivery risk",
      "4: Critical or blocking"
    ]
  }
}

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

---

## 0182. Sample Rights Desk

ID: music-sample-rights-desk
Sub-discipline: Sample clearance workflows
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Producers paste sample logs, source notes, and license records, and Jev verifies each clearance claim, classifies the evidence gap, and sends uncertain cases to a reviewer.

Why typed decisions: A typed verification status and gap category are safer to route than free-form legal-sounding text.

TAM: TAM: $2B music rights administration
SAM: SAM: $250M sample and sync clearance tools
SOM: SOM: $2M independent producer teams

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Sample Rights Desk" 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
Producers paste sample logs, source notes, and license records, and Jev verifies each clearance claim, classifies the evidence gap, and sends uncertain cases to a reviewer.
Discipline: Music & Sound Design (Sample clearance workflows).
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: A typed verification status and gap category are safer to route than free-form legal-sounding text.

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 log, source notes, and license excerpts>, "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)
{
  "clearance_verified": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the provided evidence verify the stated sample-use clearance?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "A supplied license or permission record supports the stated use.",
      "false": "The record conflicts with the claim or does not establish the stated use."
    }
  },
  "evidence_gap": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "What is the main clearance evidence gap?",
    "criteria": {
      "no_record": "No license or permission evidence is supplied.",
      "scope_unclear": "The record does not clearly cover the intended use.",
      "source_unclear": "The sample's source or ownership is unclear.",
      "metadata_mismatch": "The sample log and rights record do not match."
    }
  },
  "review_priority": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How urgently should a person review this clearance record?",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Low; evidence is nearly complete",
      "2: Moderate; one detail needs checking",
      "3: High; scope or source is uncertain",
      "4: Critical; release may be blocked"
    ]
  }
}

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

---

## 0183. Setlist Flow Checker

ID: music-setlist-flow-checker
Sub-discipline: Live set programming
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Artists paste a setlist, venue constraints, and track notes, and Jev verifies each transition claim, labels likely flow issues, and queues uncertain judgments for human review.

Why typed decisions: A discrete transition verdict is easier to use in rehearsal planning than a generated critique.

TAM: TAM: $900M live music planning software
SAM: SAM: $120M setlist and show-prep tools
SOM: SOM: $1.5M independent touring acts

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Setlist Flow Checker" 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
Artists paste a setlist, venue constraints, and track notes, and Jev verifies each transition claim, labels likely flow issues, and queues uncertain judgments for human review.
Discipline: Music & Sound Design (Live set programming).
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: A discrete transition verdict is easier to use in rehearsal planning than a generated critique.

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": <Setlist, track notes, and venue constraints>, "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)
{
  "transition_supported": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the supplied evidence support that this adjacent-track transition works for the stated set goal?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Track notes and stated goals support the transition.",
      "false": "Notes conflict with the goal or do not provide enough evidence."
    }
  },
  "flow_issue": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which transition concern best matches the evidence?",
    "criteria": {
      "energy_drop": "The transition may undermine the stated energy arc.",
      "tempo_gap": "The tempo relationship may be difficult to perform.",
      "key_clash": "The stated keys suggest a harmonic concern.",
      "no_clear_issue": "No specific concern is evidenced."
    }
  },
  "transition_risk": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How disruptive is the supported transition concern?",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Negligible",
      "2: Noticeable but manageable",
      "3: Likely to interrupt the set",
      "4: Serious performance risk"
    ]
  }
}

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

---

## 0184. Cue Sheet Sentinel

ID: music-cue-sheet-sentinel
Sub-discipline: Music cue documentation
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Composers paste cue sheets alongside spotting notes, and Jev verifies each cue field against its evidence, identifies mismatch types, and escalates uncertain entries for review.

Why typed decisions: Typed field-level checks make missing or conflicting cue data actionable without producing replacement text.

TAM: TAM: $700M post-production music tools
SAM: SAM: $90M cue-sheet workflow software
SOM: SOM: $1M boutique scoring teams

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Cue Sheet Sentinel" 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
Composers paste cue sheets alongside spotting notes, and Jev verifies each cue field against its evidence, identifies mismatch types, and escalates uncertain entries for review.
Discipline: Music & Sound Design (Music cue documentation).
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 field-level checks make missing or conflicting cue data actionable without producing replacement text.

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": <Cue sheet, spotting notes, and timing references>, "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)
{
  "cue_field_verified": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the evidence verify this cue-sheet field?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The field agrees with the supplied spotting or timing evidence.",
      "false": "The field conflicts with evidence or lacks support."
    }
  },
  "mismatch_type": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "What kind of cue-sheet problem is present?",
    "criteria": {
      "timecode": "Cue timing conflicts with the reference.",
      "cue_id": "Cue identifier is missing or inconsistent.",
      "duration": "Cue duration is unsupported or inconsistent.",
      "usage": "Cue usage or scene reference conflicts with the notes."
    }
  },
  "impact": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How consequential is this field discrepancy?",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Cosmetic",
      "2: Minor administrative fix",
      "3: Could cause a handoff error",
      "4: Could affect delivery or licensing"
    ]
  }
}

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

---

## 0185. Mix Note Verifier

ID: music-mix-note-verifier
Sub-discipline: Mix review coordination
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Mix engineers paste client notes and session-change records, and Jev verifies whether each note is evidenced as addressed, tags its status, and routes uncertain matches to a human.

Why typed decisions: A typed completion decision links each request to a specific recorded change instead of generating subjective summaries.

TAM: TAM: $1.2B audio production collaboration
SAM: SAM: $180M mix revision management
SOM: SOM: $2M independent mix engineers

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Mix Note Verifier" 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
Mix engineers paste client notes and session-change records, and Jev verifies whether each note is evidenced as addressed, tags its status, and routes uncertain matches to a human.
Discipline: Music & Sound Design (Mix review coordination).
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: A typed completion decision links each request to a specific recorded change instead of generating subjective summaries.

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": <Client notes, revision log, and mix change metadata>, "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)
{
  "change_verified": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the change record verify that this client request was addressed?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "A recorded change directly corresponds to the request.",
      "false": "No matching change is recorded or the evidence conflicts."
    }
  },
  "request_status": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which status best fits the evidence?",
    "criteria": {
      "addressed": "A corresponding change is recorded.",
      "partially_addressed": "Some but not all of the request is evidenced.",
      "unaddressed": "No corresponding change is evidenced.",
      "ambiguous": "The note or change record is too unclear to match."
    }
  },
  "follow_up": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How much follow-up is warranted?",
    "criteria": [
      "1: None evident",
      "2: Quick confirmation",
      "3: Engineer review needed",
      "4: Client approval or rework likely needed"
    ]
  }
}

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

---

## 0186. Patchbay Safety Review

ID: music-patchbay-safety-review
Sub-discipline: Modular synthesis routing
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Synth performers paste patch descriptions and module specifications, and Jev verifies routing claims, classifies potential conflicts, and escalates uncertain connections before patching.

Why typed decisions: Typed connection and risk decisions can be checked against module limits without relying on generated instructions.

TAM: TAM: $500M synthesizer and modular tools
SAM: SAM: $80M patch design software
SOM: SOM: $800K modular studios and performers

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Patchbay Safety Review" 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
Synth performers paste patch descriptions and module specifications, and Jev verifies routing claims, classifies potential conflicts, and escalates uncertain connections before patching.
Discipline: Music & Sound Design (Modular synthesis routing).
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 connection and risk decisions can be checked against module limits without relying on generated instructions.

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": <Patch description, module specs, and voltage ranges>, "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)
{
  "connection_safe": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Do the supplied specs verify this connection is within the stated operating limits?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Input, output, and range evidence support the connection.",
      "false": "Specs indicate a conflict or do not establish safe compatibility."
    }
  },
  "conflict_type": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "What connection concern is evidenced?",
    "criteria": {
      "voltage_range": "Signal range may exceed an input's stated range.",
      "direction": "Input/output roles appear incompatible.",
      "connector": "Connector or cable compatibility is uncertain.",
      "no_conflict_evident": "No specific conflict is supported by the supplied specs."
    }
  },
  "risk_level": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How serious is the supported patching risk?",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Minimal",
      "2: Minor compatibility concern",
      "3: Potential equipment or performance issue",
      "4: Stop and verify before connecting"
    ]
  }
}

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

---

## 0187. Metadata Match Bench

ID: music-metadata-match-bench
Sub-discipline: Music catalog metadata
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Labels paste release metadata and source documents, and Jev verifies each field against its evidence, classifies discrepancies, and sends low-confidence fields to a review queue.

Why typed decisions: Field-level typed decisions prevent a fluent summary from obscuring the exact metadata mismatch.

TAM: TAM: $1B music metadata operations
SAM: SAM: $200M label catalog tooling
SOM: SOM: $2M independent labels

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Metadata Match Bench" 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
Labels paste release metadata and source documents, and Jev verifies each field against its evidence, classifies discrepancies, and sends low-confidence fields to a review queue.
Discipline: Music & Sound Design (Music catalog metadata).
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: Field-level typed decisions prevent a fluent summary from obscuring the exact metadata mismatch.

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": <Release metadata and supplied source documents>, "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)
{
  "field_supported": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the source evidence verify this metadata field?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The supplied source directly supports the field value.",
      "false": "The source conflicts with the value or is insufficient."
    }
  },
  "field_issue": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "What is the primary issue with this field?",
    "criteria": {
      "missing": "A required value is absent.",
      "conflict": "Sources disagree about the value.",
      "format": "The value does not follow the required format.",
      "unsupported": "No supplied source supports the value."
    }
  },
  "correction_urgency": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How urgently should this metadata field be reviewed?",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Low",
      "2: Review before catalog update",
      "3: Review before release delivery",
      "4: Immediate release-blocking review"
    ]
  }
}

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

---

## 0188. Rehearsal Readiness Board

ID: music-rehearsal-readiness-board
Sub-discipline: Ensemble rehearsal planning
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Ensemble leaders paste part notes, attendance, and rehearsal goals, and Jev verifies readiness claims, categorizes blockers, and escalates uncertain part assessments to people.

Why typed decisions: Typed readiness and blocker labels make rehearsal allocation concrete without inventing coaching advice.

TAM: TAM: $600M ensemble and rehearsal software
SAM: SAM: $100M rehearsal coordination tools
SOM: SOM: $1M community and semi-pro ensembles

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Rehearsal Readiness Board" 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
Ensemble leaders paste part notes, attendance, and rehearsal goals, and Jev verifies readiness claims, categorizes blockers, and escalates uncertain part assessments to people.
Discipline: Music & Sound Design (Ensemble rehearsal planning).
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 readiness and blocker labels make rehearsal allocation concrete without inventing coaching advice.

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": <Part notes, attendance, and rehearsal goals>, "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)
{
  "part_ready": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the supplied evidence verify that this part is ready for the stated rehearsal goal?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Notes or check results support readiness for that goal.",
      "false": "Evidence shows a gap or does not establish readiness."
    }
  },
  "blocker": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which readiness blocker is best supported?",
    "criteria": {
      "missing_material": "Required part or reference is absent.",
      "technical_passage": "Notes identify a specific execution difficulty.",
      "coordination": "Evidence indicates an ensemble alignment issue.",
      "no_blocker_evident": "No blocker is supported by the supplied evidence."
    }
  },
  "rehearsal_priority": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How much rehearsal attention does this part need?",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Minimal",
      "2: Brief check",
      "3: Focused rehearsal time",
      "4: Priority rehearsal blocker"
    ]
  }
}

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

---

## 0189. Delivery Spec Gate

ID: music-delivery-spec-gate
Sub-discipline: Audio mastering delivery
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Mastering engineers paste delivery specs and render reports, and Jev verifies each technical claim, classifies failures, and sends uncertain measurements to human review.

Why typed decisions: Typed pass/fail and failure categories can drive delivery gates more reliably than prose.

TAM: TAM: $1B mastering and audio delivery
SAM: SAM: $160M mastering quality-control tools
SOM: SOM: $2M independent mastering houses

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Delivery Spec 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
Mastering engineers paste delivery specs and render reports, and Jev verifies each technical claim, classifies failures, and sends uncertain measurements to human review.
Discipline: Music & Sound Design (Audio mastering delivery).
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 pass/fail and failure categories can drive delivery gates more reliably than prose.

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": <Delivery spec, render report, and file measurements>, "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)
{
  "spec_compliant": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the supplied measurement evidence verify compliance with this delivery requirement?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The reported measurement falls within the specified requirement.",
      "false": "It falls outside the requirement or evidence is insufficient."
    }
  },
  "failure_category": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which delivery requirement is at issue?",
    "criteria": {
      "loudness": "Integrated or peak loudness requirement.",
      "sample_rate": "Sample rate or bit-depth requirement.",
      "channel_layout": "Channel count or layout requirement.",
      "file_integrity": "File presence, duration, or integrity requirement."
    }
  },
  "delivery_risk": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How serious is the potential delivery failure?",
    "criteria": [
      "1: No meaningful risk",
      "2: Minor correction",
      "3: Delivery likely to be rejected",
      "4: Critical release or broadcast blocker"
    ]
  }
}

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

---

## 0190. Library Tag Auditor

ID: music-library-tag-auditor
Sub-discipline: Sound effects cataloging
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Sound designers paste asset descriptions, existing tags, and recording notes, and Jev verifies each tag against the evidence, identifies tag errors, and queues uncertain items for review.

Why typed decisions: Typed tag validation supports searchable catalogs while keeping ambiguous sound interpretation with a human.

TAM: TAM: $800M sound library software
SAM: SAM: $140M audio asset management
SOM: SOM: $1M sound design teams

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Library Tag Auditor" 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
Sound designers paste asset descriptions, existing tags, and recording notes, and Jev verifies each tag against the evidence, identifies tag errors, and queues uncertain items for review.
Discipline: Music & Sound Design (Sound effects cataloging).
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 tag validation supports searchable catalogs while keeping ambiguous sound interpretation with a human.

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": <Asset descriptions, tags, and recording 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)
{
  "tag_evidenced": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the supplied evidence support this catalog tag?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Description or recording notes substantiate the tag.",
      "false": "Evidence conflicts with or does not substantiate the tag."
    }
  },
  "tag_issue": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "What best describes the tag issue?",
    "criteria": {
      "incorrect": "The tag conflicts with the asset evidence.",
      "too_broad": "The tag is less specific than the evidence allows.",
      "missing": "A required tag is absent.",
      "duplicate": "The tag duplicates another catalog label."
    }
  },
  "catalog_impact": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How much does this issue impair asset retrieval?",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Negligible",
      "2: Minor search friction",
      "3: Asset may be difficult to find",
      "4: Major misclassification"
    ]
  }
}

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

---

## 0191. Score Cue Matcher

ID: music-score-cue-matcher
Sub-discipline: Orchestral score preparation
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Composers paste score annotations, part lists, and session plans, and Jev verifies each instrumentation claim, classifies mismatches, and escalates uncertain assignments to an orchestrator.

Why typed decisions: Typed instrument and part checks expose concrete preparation gaps without producing a rewritten score.

TAM: TAM: $700M notation and scoring software
SAM: SAM: $120M score-preparation workflows
SOM: SOM: $1M boutique composition studios

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Score Cue Matcher" 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
Composers paste score annotations, part lists, and session plans, and Jev verifies each instrumentation claim, classifies mismatches, and escalates uncertain assignments to an orchestrator.
Discipline: Music & Sound Design (Orchestral score preparation).
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 instrument and part checks expose concrete preparation gaps without producing a rewritten score.

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": <Score annotations, part list, and session plan>, "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)
{
  "instrumentation_verified": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the evidence verify this instrumentation or part assignment?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The score and part-list evidence agree with the assignment.",
      "false": "They conflict or do not establish the assignment."
    }
  },
  "part_issue": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which preparation issue is best supported?",
    "criteria": {
      "missing_part": "A required part is absent from the list.",
      "duplicate_assignment": "An instrument or player assignment is duplicated.",
      "range_concern": "Supplied range evidence suggests a concern.",
      "notation_mismatch": "Score annotation and part description disagree."
    }
  },
  "preparation_risk": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How consequential is the supported preparation issue?",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Cosmetic",
      "2: Minor correction",
      "3: Could disrupt the session",
      "4: Session-blocking"
    ]
  }
}

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

---

## 0192. Podcast Music Clearance

ID: music-podcast-music-clearance
Sub-discipline: Podcast music licensing
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Podcast producers paste episode cue logs and license records, and Jev verifies each usage claim, categorizes evidence gaps, and routes uncertain cues to a clearance reviewer.

Why typed decisions: A typed usage verification status makes release checks auditable without generating legal guidance.

TAM: TAM: $1.3B podcast production tools
SAM: SAM: $180M podcast rights workflows
SOM: SOM: $2M independent podcast networks

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Podcast Music Clearance" 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
Podcast producers paste episode cue logs and license records, and Jev verifies each usage claim, categorizes evidence gaps, and routes uncertain cues to a clearance reviewer.
Discipline: Music & Sound Design (Podcast music licensing).
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: A typed usage verification status makes release checks auditable without generating legal guidance.

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": <Episode cue log, license records, and usage 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)
{
  "usage_verified": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the supplied record verify the stated music use for this episode?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The license evidence supports the stated usage context.",
      "false": "The evidence conflicts with or does not establish that use."
    }
  },
  "clearance_gap": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "What is the primary evidence gap?",
    "criteria": {
      "territory": "Territory coverage is not established.",
      "term": "License duration is not established.",
      "platform": "Distribution platform coverage is unclear.",
      "cue_identity": "The logged cue does not match the license record."
    }
  },
  "release_risk": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How urgently does this cue need human clearance review?",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Low",
      "2: Confirm one detail",
      "3: Review before publication",
      "4: Potential publication blocker"
    ]
  }
}

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

---

## 0193. Room Tone Inspector

ID: music-room-tone-inspector
Sub-discipline: Dialogue recording continuity
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Editors paste take logs, room-tone notes, and session metadata, and Jev verifies continuity claims, classifies mismatches, and queues ambiguous comparisons for human listening.

Why typed decisions: Typed evidence checks can identify which continuity claim needs listening without pretending to replace the editor's ear.

TAM: TAM: $900M audio post-production software
SAM: SAM: $130M dialogue editing tools
SOM: SOM: $1.5M independent post houses

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Room Tone Inspector" 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
Editors paste take logs, room-tone notes, and session metadata, and Jev verifies continuity claims, classifies mismatches, and queues ambiguous comparisons for human listening.
Discipline: Music & Sound Design (Dialogue recording continuity).
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 checks can identify which continuity claim needs listening without pretending to replace the editor's ear.

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": <Take logs, room-tone notes, and session metadata>, "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)
{
  "continuity_supported": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the supplied evidence support the stated room-tone continuity claim?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Notes and metadata support the stated continuity.",
      "false": "They indicate a mismatch or lack evidence to verify it."
    }
  },
  "continuity_issue": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which continuity concern is supported?",
    "criteria": {
      "room_change": "Notes indicate a recording-space change.",
      "mic_change": "Microphone or placement metadata differs.",
      "noise_change": "Noise conditions are recorded as different.",
      "no_issue_evident": "No specific concern is supported."
    }
  },
  "edit_attention": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How much editorial attention does this transition warrant?",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Minimal",
      "2: Quick check",
      "3: Compare takes",
      "4: Human listening required before edit"
    ]
  }
}

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

---

## 0194. Plugin Preset Librarian

ID: music-plugin-preset-librarian
Sub-discipline: Preset library management
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Producers paste preset notes, plugin metadata, and session references, and Jev verifies preset labels against evidence, classifies mismatches, and escalates ambiguous entries for review.

Why typed decisions: Typed labels and validation decisions keep preset libraries consistent without generating descriptions users must verify.

TAM: TAM: $1B music production software
SAM: SAM: $150M preset and sound library tools
SOM: SOM: $1M producer collectives

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Plugin Preset Librarian" 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
Producers paste preset notes, plugin metadata, and session references, and Jev verifies preset labels against evidence, classifies mismatches, and escalates ambiguous entries for review.
Discipline: Music & Sound Design (Preset library management).
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 labels and validation decisions keep preset libraries consistent without generating descriptions users must verify.

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": <Preset notes, plugin metadata, and session references>, "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)
{
  "preset_label_verified": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the supplied evidence support this preset label?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Preset notes or session references support the label.",
      "false": "Evidence conflicts with the label or is insufficient."
    }
  },
  "label_issue": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "What is the main preset catalog issue?",
    "criteria": {
      "category_mismatch": "The category conflicts with the evidence.",
      "plugin_mismatch": "The plugin reference does not match.",
      "duplicate_name": "The label duplicates another entry.",
      "missing_attributes": "Required catalog attributes are absent."
    }
  },
  "cleanup_priority": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How much cleanup attention does this entry need?",
    "criteria": [
      "1: None or minimal",
      "2: Minor cleanup",
      "3: Likely to hinder browsing",
      "4: Major library integrity issue"
    ]
  }
}

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

---

## 0195. Broadcast Loudness Gate

ID: music-broadcast-loudness-gate
Sub-discipline: Broadcast audio compliance
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Audio teams paste delivery limits and loudness reports, and Jev verifies each compliance claim, categorizes deviations, and sends borderline readings to a human reviewer.

Why typed decisions: Typed threshold decisions can gate delivery while uncertain measurements remain subject to human verification.

TAM: TAM: $1.1B broadcast audio tooling
SAM: SAM: $170M loudness compliance software
SOM: SOM: $1M independent broadcast vendors

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Broadcast Loudness 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
Audio teams paste delivery limits and loudness reports, and Jev verifies each compliance claim, categorizes deviations, and sends borderline readings to a human reviewer.
Discipline: Music & Sound Design (Broadcast audio compliance).
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 threshold decisions can gate delivery while uncertain measurements remain subject to human verification.

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": <Loudness report, delivery limits, and program metadata>, "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)
{
  "limit_met": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the supplied measurement verify compliance with this loudness limit?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The reported value is within the supplied limit.",
      "false": "The value is outside the limit or evidence is insufficient."
    }
  },
  "deviation_type": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which measurement issue is indicated?",
    "criteria": {
      "integrated_level": "Integrated loudness is out of range.",
      "true_peak": "True peak is out of range.",
      "measurement_scope": "Measurement scope or program segment is unclear.",
      "report_conflict": "Supplied reports disagree."
    }
  },
  "broadcast_risk": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How serious is the potential compliance deviation?",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Within tolerance",
      "2: Minor deviation",
      "3: Likely to require correction",
      "4: Delivery may be rejected"
    ]
  }
}

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

---

## 0196. Live Input Auditor

ID: music-live-input-auditor
Sub-discipline: Live sound preparation
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Live engineers paste stage plots, input lists, and rider notes, and Jev verifies each channel claim, identifies mismatches, and routes uncertain stage requirements to a person.

Why typed decisions: Typed mismatch categories translate directly into preparation tasks and avoid ambiguous generated summaries.

TAM: TAM: $1.4B live sound software
SAM: SAM: $220M stage and rider planning
SOM: SOM: $2M independent production crews

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Live Input Auditor" 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
Live engineers paste stage plots, input lists, and rider notes, and Jev verifies each channel claim, identifies mismatches, and routes uncertain stage requirements to a person.
Discipline: Music & Sound Design (Live sound preparation).
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 mismatch categories translate directly into preparation tasks and avoid ambiguous generated summaries.

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": <Stage plot, input list, and rider 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)
{
  "channel_verified": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the supplied evidence verify this input-list channel?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The stage plot and rider support the channel entry.",
      "false": "They conflict or do not establish the entry."
    }
  },
  "channel_issue": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "What is the main input-list discrepancy?",
    "criteria": {
      "missing_input": "A required source is absent.",
      "channel_conflict": "Channel assignments disagree.",
      "phantom_power": "Power requirement evidence is unclear or conflicting.",
      "monitor_requirement": "Monitor or routing requirement is missing or inconsistent."
    }
  },
  "show_impact": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How much could this discrepancy affect show preparation?",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Negligible",
      "2: Minor advance clarification",
      "3: Significant setup change",
      "4: Potential show-critical blocker"
    ]
  }
}

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

---

## 0197. Music Brief Fit

ID: music-music-brief-fit
Sub-discipline: Production brief validation
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Producers paste a music brief, track attributes, and client constraints, and Jev verifies each fit claim, labels conflicts, and escalates subjective or weakly evidenced matches to a human.

Why typed decisions: Typed fit decisions let teams shortlist tracks consistently while keeping uncertain creative judgments reviewable.

TAM: TAM: $1B music supervision and production
SAM: SAM: $180M music brief and search tools
SOM: SOM: $1M boutique music supervisors

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Music Brief Fit" 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
Producers paste a music brief, track attributes, and client constraints, and Jev verifies each fit claim, labels conflicts, and escalates subjective or weakly evidenced matches to a human.
Discipline: Music & Sound Design (Production brief validation).
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 fit decisions let teams shortlist tracks consistently while keeping uncertain creative judgments reviewable.

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": <Music brief, track attributes, and client constraints>, "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)
{
  "fit_evidenced": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the supplied evidence support this track's stated fit to the brief?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Track attributes directly support the stated brief requirement.",
      "false": "Attributes conflict with or do not establish the requirement."
    }
  },
  "fit_issue": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which requirement is the main source of mismatch?",
    "criteria": {
      "tempo": "Tempo evidence conflicts with the brief.",
      "mood": "Recorded mood attributes conflict with the brief.",
      "instrumentation": "Instrumentation conflicts with the stated requirement.",
      "usage_constraint": "Duration, editability, or usage constraint is not met."
    }
  },
  "fit_strength": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How strongly do the evidenced attributes support the brief?",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Little support",
      "2: Partial support",
      "3: Strong support with a caveat",
      "4: Strong support across stated requirements"
    ]
  }
}

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

---

## 0198. Acoustic Treatment Planner

ID: music-acoustic-treatment-planner
Sub-discipline: Studio room planning
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Studio owners paste room measurements, treatment inventory, and design targets, and Jev verifies each suitability claim, classifies evidence gaps, and queues uncertain recommendations for an acoustician.

Why typed decisions: Typed evidence and confidence fields help separate documented constraints from judgments needing specialist review.

TAM: TAM: $700M studio design and acoustic tools
SAM: SAM: $110M small-studio planning software
SOM: SOM: $900K independent recording studios

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Acoustic Treatment Planner" 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
Studio owners paste room measurements, treatment inventory, and design targets, and Jev verifies each suitability claim, classifies evidence gaps, and queues uncertain recommendations for an acoustician.
Discipline: Music & Sound Design (Studio room planning).
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 and confidence fields help separate documented constraints from judgments needing specialist review.

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": <Room measurements, treatment inventory, and design targets>, "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)
{
  "treatment_claim_verified": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the supplied evidence verify this treatment suitability claim?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Measurements and product data support the stated suitability.",
      "false": "Evidence conflicts with the claim or is insufficient."
    }
  },
  "evidence_gap": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which evidence gap most limits this assessment?",
    "criteria": {
      "room_measurement": "Relevant room measurements are missing.",
      "product_spec": "Treatment product specifications are missing.",
      "target_unclear": "The acoustic target is not defined clearly.",
      "installation_constraint": "Placement or installation constraints are unclear."
    }
  },
  "assessment_confidence": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How strongly does the evidence support the suitability assessment?",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Very weak support",
      "2: Partial support",
      "3: Strong support with an open question",
      "4: Strong support from supplied evidence"
    ]
  }
}

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

---

## 0199. Royalty Split Checker

ID: music-royalty-split-checker
Sub-discipline: Music royalty administration
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Artists paste split sheets, contributor records, and catalog entries, and Jev verifies each ownership claim, categorizes discrepancies, and escalates uncertain shares for human review.

Why typed decisions: Typed ownership checks can flag concrete record conflicts without generating legal interpretations.

TAM: TAM: $2B music royalty administration
SAM: SAM: $250M independent rights operations
SOM: SOM: $2M artist managers and small labels

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Royalty Split Checker" 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
Artists paste split sheets, contributor records, and catalog entries, and Jev verifies each ownership claim, categorizes discrepancies, and escalates uncertain shares for human review.
Discipline: Music & Sound Design (Music royalty administration).
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 ownership checks can flag concrete record conflicts without generating legal interpretations.

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": <Split sheets, contributor records, and catalog entries>, "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)
{
  "share_verified": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the supplied evidence verify this contributor's stated share?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The supplied split documentation supports the stated share.",
      "false": "Documentation conflicts or does not establish the share."
    }
  },
  "split_issue": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "What kind of split discrepancy is evidenced?",
    "criteria": {
      "share_conflict": "Records state different share values.",
      "missing_contributor": "A documented contributor is absent from the catalog.",
      "identity_mismatch": "Contributor identity details do not match.",
      "total_mismatch": "Recorded shares do not reconcile to the stated total."
    }
  },
  "administrative_risk": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How consequential is this discrepancy for administration?",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Minor record cleanup",
      "2: Confirm before next update",
      "3: Payment or registration may be affected",
      "4: Material ownership dispute risk"
    ]
  }
}

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

---

## 0200. Ambience Continuity Board

ID: music-ambience-continuity-board
Sub-discipline: Game audio implementation
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Game audio teams paste ambience design notes, asset manifests, and scene requirements, and Jev verifies continuity claims, categorizes implementation gaps, and sends uncertain scene matches to human review.

Why typed decisions: Typed scene-level decisions make implementation issues trackable without generating new creative assets or descriptions.

TAM: TAM: $1.2B game audio production tools
SAM: SAM: $200M audio implementation management
SOM: SOM: $1.5M indie game audio teams

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Ambience Continuity Board" 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
Game audio teams paste ambience design notes, asset manifests, and scene requirements, and Jev verifies continuity claims, categorizes implementation gaps, and sends uncertain scene matches to human review.
Discipline: Music & Sound Design (Game audio implementation).
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 scene-level decisions make implementation issues trackable without generating new creative assets or descriptions.

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": <Ambience notes, asset manifest, and scene requirements>, "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)
{
  "scene_coverage_verified": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the supplied evidence verify that this scene has the required ambience coverage?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The manifest and notes support coverage for the stated scene requirement.",
      "false": "Coverage conflicts with the requirement or cannot be established."
    }
  },
  "implementation_gap": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which ambience implementation gap is best supported?",
    "criteria": {
      "asset_missing": "A required ambience asset is absent.",
      "trigger_unclear": "Activation or transition conditions are unclear.",
      "looping_issue": "Looping requirement is unmet or undocumented.",
      "scene_mapping": "Asset-to-scene mapping conflicts with the notes."
    }
  },
  "implementation_severity": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How much does this gap affect the stated scene requirement?",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Negligible",
      "2: Minor polish issue",
      "3: Noticeable scene coverage gap",
      "4: Critical implementation blocker"
    ]
  }
}

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

---

# Discipline: Visual Art

Audience: painters, illustrators, generative artists, gallerists
Market anchor: the global art market (~$65B; >300K working visual artists)

## 0201. Portfolio Fit Router

ID: visual-art-portfolio-fit-router
Sub-discipline: Illustration commissions
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: Paste a client brief and portfolio samples, and Jev routes the brief to an illustration specialty while judging style fit and scope clarity.

Why typed decisions: A specialty choice and calibrated fit score make commission triage consistent without relying on subjective generated advice.

TAM: Global illustration services: ~$45B/yr
SAM: Online commission discovery: ~$5B/yr
SOM: Initial reachable marketplace: ~$25M/yr

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Portfolio Fit Router" 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 client brief and portfolio samples, and Jev routes the brief to an illustration specialty while judging style fit and scope clarity.
Discipline: Visual Art (Illustration commissions).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: A specialty choice and calibrated fit score make commission triage consistent without relying on subjective generated advice.

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": <Portfolio tags and commission availability>, "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)
{
  "specialty": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which illustration specialty should handle this brief?",
    "criteria": {
      "editorial": "Concept-led images for articles or publications",
      "publishing": "Book covers or interior narrative illustration",
      "commercial": "Brand, product, or advertising illustration",
      "sequential": "Comics, storyboards, or panel-based work"
    }
  },
  "style_fit": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How closely does the portfolio match the brief's requested visual style?",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Little or no visible match",
      "2 — Some relevant traits, but major gaps",
      "3 — Strong match with minor gaps",
      "4 — Direct, repeated match"
    ]
  },
  "scope_clear": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is the brief sufficiently specific to estimate the illustration work?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Deliverables, usage, and key requirements are clear",
      "false": "Important deliverables, usage, or requirements are missing"
    }
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0202. Gallery Intake Compass

ID: visual-art-gallery-intake-compass
Sub-discipline: Gallery operations
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: Paste an artwork submission and gallery program notes, and Jev routes it to a curatorial track while assessing program fit and submission completeness.

Why typed decisions: Fixed tracks and explicit fit judgments let galleries sort submissions repeatably at intake scale.

TAM: Global art gallery sector: ~$60B/yr
SAM: Digital gallery submissions: ~$2B/yr
SOM: Initial reachable gallery software: ~$15M/yr

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Gallery Intake Compass" 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 an artwork submission and gallery program notes, and Jev routes it to a curatorial track while assessing program fit and submission completeness.
Discipline: Visual Art (Gallery operations).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: Fixed tracks and explicit fit judgments let galleries sort submissions repeatably at intake scale.

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": <Gallery program and submission checklist>, "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)
{
  "curatorial_track": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which gallery track best fits this submission?",
    "criteria": {
      "emerging": "Early-career artists and experimental practices",
      "painting": "Two-dimensional painting-led exhibitions",
      "sculpture": "Object, installation, or spatial work",
      "photo_media": "Photography, video, or lens-based work",
      "works_on_paper": "Drawing, printmaking, or paper-based work"
    }
  },
  "program_fit": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How closely does the submission align with the gallery's stated program?",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Contradicts the program",
      "2 — Weak alignment",
      "3 — Clear alignment",
      "4 — Strong, distinctive alignment"
    ]
  },
  "submission_complete": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the submission contain the materials required for review?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Required images, artist details, and supporting information are present",
      "false": "One or more required materials are absent"
    }
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0203. Palette Provenance Desk

ID: visual-art-palette-provenance-desk
Sub-discipline: Painting materials
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: Paste a materials list and conservation notes, and Jev routes the work to a risk category while flagging incompatible or uncertain materials.

Why typed decisions: Categorical risk routing and a binary incompatibility check are easier to act on than a prose materials summary.

TAM: Global art conservation market: ~$5B/yr
SAM: Independent studio materials tools: ~$300M/yr
SOM: Initial reachable conservation subscriptions: ~$5M/yr

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Palette Provenance Desk" 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 materials list and conservation notes, and Jev routes the work to a risk category while flagging incompatible or uncertain materials.
Discipline: Visual Art (Painting materials).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: Categorical risk routing and a binary incompatibility check are easier to act on than a prose materials summary.

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": <Studio material inventory and review thresholds>, "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)
{
  "material_route": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which materials-review path should receive this list?",
    "criteria": {
      "oil": "Oil paints and oil-compatible supports",
      "acrylic": "Acrylic paints, mediums, or grounds",
      "water_media": "Watercolor, gouache, or water-based media",
      "mixed_media": "Multiple or layered material families"
    }
  },
  "compatibility_risk": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How concerning is the listed material combination for the stated support and use?",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — No notable compatibility concern",
      "2 — Minor concern; routine review",
      "3 — Significant concern; specialist review",
      "4 — High or poorly understood risk"
    ]
  },
  "materials_identified": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Are the materials identified well enough for a meaningful review?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Products or material families are sufficiently specified",
      "false": "Key materials are unknown or too vaguely named"
    }
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0204. Open Call Sorter

ID: visual-art-open-call-sorter
Sub-discipline: Artist opportunities
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: Paste an open-call notice and an artist profile, and Jev routes the opportunity to a discipline category while scoring eligibility and profile fit.

Why typed decisions: A fixed category plus eligibility judgments quickly identifies actionable calls without inventing application guidance.

TAM: Global artist opportunities and services: ~$10B/yr
SAM: Opportunity discovery software: ~$500M/yr
SOM: Initial reachable artist subscriptions: ~$8M/yr

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Open Call Sorter" 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 an open-call notice and an artist profile, and Jev routes the opportunity to a discipline category while scoring eligibility and profile fit.
Discipline: Visual Art (Artist opportunities).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: A fixed category plus eligibility judgments quickly identifies actionable calls without inventing application guidance.

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": <Artist profile and opportunity preferences>, "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)
{
  "opportunity_type": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which opportunity category best describes this call?",
    "criteria": {
      "exhibition": "Exhibition, residency, or curatorial selection",
      "grant": "Grant, prize, or funded project",
      "public_art": "Commission or public-space project",
      "market": "Fair, retail, or commercial showcase"
    }
  },
  "eligible": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the artist profile meet the call's stated eligibility rules?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "No stated eligibility rule appears to exclude the artist",
      "false": "At least one stated rule appears unmet"
    }
  },
  "profile_fit": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How well does the opportunity match the artist's practice and goals?",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Poor match",
      "2 — Partial match",
      "3 — Good match",
      "4 — Excellent, specific match"
    ]
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0205. Critique Queue Studio

ID: visual-art-critique-queue-studio
Sub-discipline: Art education
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: Paste a student artwork description and critique-session goals, and Jev routes it to a critique focus while gauging readiness and feedback specificity.

Why typed decisions: Consistent focus routing and readiness scoring help instructors structure critiques without generating canned comments.

TAM: Global arts education: ~$80B/yr
SAM: Digital critique and classroom tools: ~$1B/yr
SOM: Initial reachable art programs: ~$10M/yr

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Critique Queue Studio" 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 student artwork description and critique-session goals, and Jev routes it to a critique focus while gauging readiness and feedback specificity.
Discipline: Visual Art (Art education).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: Consistent focus routing and readiness scoring help instructors structure critiques without generating canned comments.

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": <Class objectives and student-selected goals>, "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)
{
  "critique_focus": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which critique focus best serves this work and session?",
    "criteria": {
      "composition": "Layout, visual hierarchy, or framing",
      "color_value": "Color relationships, value, or contrast",
      "craft_process": "Technique, materials, or execution",
      "concept_narrative": "Idea, meaning, or visual storytelling"
    }
  },
  "feedback_readiness": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How ready is the work for focused critique against the stated goal?",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Goal or work context is unclear",
      "2 — Some context, but focus is diffuse",
      "3 — Clear focus with useful context",
      "4 — Specific goal and reviewable evidence"
    ]
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0206. Fair Booth Planner

ID: visual-art-fair-booth-planner
Sub-discipline: Art fair exhibiting
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: Paste a booth plan, artwork list, and fair constraints, and Jev routes the layout to a display strategy while checking constraint fit and readiness.

Why typed decisions: Discrete display strategies and constraint checks support fast planning decisions better than open-ended design prose.

TAM: Global art fairs and events: ~$10B/yr
SAM: Exhibitor planning tools: ~$300M/yr
SOM: Initial reachable independent exhibitors: ~$4M/yr

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Fair Booth Planner" 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 booth plan, artwork list, and fair constraints, and Jev routes the layout to a display strategy while checking constraint fit and readiness.
Discipline: Visual Art (Art fair exhibiting).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: Discrete display strategies and constraint checks support fast planning decisions better than open-ended design prose.

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": <Fair rules, booth specs, and available inventory>, "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)
{
  "display_strategy": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which display strategy best fits this booth plan?",
    "criteria": {
      "wall_led": "Prioritize wall-hung work and clear sightlines",
      "table_led": "Prioritize prints, books, or small works on tables",
      "object_led": "Prioritize sculpture or freestanding objects",
      "mixed_gallery": "Balance several media in a gallery-like layout"
    }
  },
  "constraint_fit": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How well does the proposed plan fit the fair's physical and display rules?",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Major conflicts",
      "2 — Several unresolved constraints",
      "3 — Mostly compliant",
      "4 — Clearly compliant and practical"
    ]
  },
  "inventory_ready": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is the artwork list detailed enough to plan the booth?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Sizes, formats, and display needs are supplied",
      "false": "Key inventory details are missing"
    }
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0207. Image Rights Switchboard

ID: visual-art-image-rights-switchboard
Sub-discipline: Art licensing
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: Paste an artwork description and proposed usage terms, and Jev routes the request to a licensing path while flagging rights clarity and usage risk.

Why typed decisions: A fixed rights route and explicit risk flag help prevent misrouted requests and ambiguous usage decisions.

TAM: Global image licensing: ~$5B/yr
SAM: Independent artist licensing tools: ~$400M/yr
SOM: Initial reachable artist tools: ~$6M/yr

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Image Rights Switchboard" 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 an artwork description and proposed usage terms, and Jev routes the request to a licensing path while flagging rights clarity and usage risk.
Discipline: Visual Art (Art licensing).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: A fixed rights route and explicit risk flag help prevent misrouted requests and ambiguous usage decisions.

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": <Rights ownership records and licensing policy>, "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)
{
  "license_route": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which licensing path best matches the proposed use?",
    "criteria": {
      "editorial": "News, education, or editorial publication",
      "advertising": "Promotional, packaging, or commercial campaign",
      "merchandise": "Products or reproductions for sale",
      "display": "Venue, exhibition, or internal display use"
    }
  },
  "rights_clear": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Are ownership and requested usage terms clear enough to review?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Rights holder, media, territory, and duration are identifiable",
      "false": "Ownership or key usage terms are unclear"
    }
  },
  "usage_risk": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How much review risk does the proposed use present under the stated policy?",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Routine and low risk",
      "2 — Minor clarification needed",
      "3 — Material terms need review",
      "4 — High risk or outside policy"
    ]
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0208. Studio Critter Sorter

ID: visual-art-studio-critter-sorter
Sub-discipline: Creative asset management
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: Paste artwork captions or file notes, and Jev routes each item to an archive collection while scoring metadata completeness and search value.

Why typed decisions: Structured collection choices make archives filterable, while scores expose records that need attention.

TAM: Global digital asset management: ~$7B/yr
SAM: Solo-creator archive tools: ~$500M/yr
SOM: Initial reachable artist subscriptions: ~$7M/yr

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Studio Critter Sorter" 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 artwork captions or file notes, and Jev routes each item to an archive collection while scoring metadata completeness and search value.
Discipline: Visual Art (Creative asset management).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: Structured collection choices make archives filterable, while scores expose records that need attention.

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": <Archive schema and artist collection definitions>, "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)
{
  "archive_collection": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which collection should contain this artwork record?",
    "criteria": {
      "finished": "Completed, portfolio-ready work",
      "process": "Studies, sketches, or work in progress",
      "commissioned": "Client or commissioned work",
      "personal": "Personal experiments and private projects"
    }
  },
  "metadata_quality": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How useful and complete is the supplied metadata for later retrieval?",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Almost no searchable detail",
      "2 — Limited identifying detail",
      "3 — Most useful details present",
      "4 — Rich, specific, searchable record"
    ]
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0209. Mural Site Match

ID: visual-art-mural-site-match
Sub-discipline: Public art commissions
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: Paste a site brief and muralist portfolio profile, and Jev routes the project to a mural specialty while scoring site fit and access readiness.

Why typed decisions: Specialty routing and practical readiness checks help match artists to sites using repeatable criteria.

TAM: Global public art market: ~$8B/yr
SAM: Mural commission coordination: ~$600M/yr
SOM: Initial reachable municipalities and studios: ~$6M/yr

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Mural Site Match" 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 site brief and muralist portfolio profile, and Jev routes the project to a mural specialty while scoring site fit and access readiness.
Discipline: Visual Art (Public art commissions).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: Specialty routing and practical readiness checks help match artists to sites using repeatable criteria.

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": <Artist capabilities and site constraint checklist>, "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)
{
  "mural_specialty": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which mural specialty best fits this project?",
    "criteria": {
      "community": "Community-led or participatory mural",
      "architectural": "Large-scale architectural wall treatment",
      "illustrative": "Narrative, figurative, or illustrative mural",
      "abstract": "Abstract, pattern, or color-field mural"
    }
  },
  "site_fit": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How well does the artist profile fit the site's scale, audience, and brief?",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Poor match",
      "2 — Partial match",
      "3 — Strong match",
      "4 — Exceptional, relevant experience"
    ]
  },
  "access_ready": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Are access and site conditions sufficiently defined to assess feasibility?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Surface, access, and major site constraints are stated",
      "false": "Critical site or access details are missing"
    }
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0210. Print Edition Gate

ID: visual-art-print-edition-gate
Sub-discipline: Printmaking
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: Paste an edition plan and process notes, and Jev routes it to a printmaking workflow while checking edition consistency and production readiness.

Why typed decisions: A stable process category and graded readiness decision help catch production issues before an edition is committed.

TAM: Global printmaking and fine-art prints: ~$6B/yr
SAM: Artist edition workflow tools: ~$250M/yr
SOM: Initial reachable print studios: ~$3M/yr

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Print Edition 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 an edition plan and process notes, and Jev routes it to a printmaking workflow while checking edition consistency and production readiness.
Discipline: Visual Art (Printmaking).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: A stable process category and graded readiness decision help catch production issues before an edition is committed.

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": <Shop equipment, materials, and edition standards>, "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)
{
  "print_process": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which production workflow best fits this edition?",
    "criteria": {
      "relief": "Woodcut, linocut, or other relief process",
      "intaglio": "Etching, engraving, or related intaglio process",
      "lithography": "Lithography or planographic process",
      "digital_screen": "Digital output, screenprint, or hybrid workflow"
    }
  },
  "edition_consistency": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the plan define a consistent edition and proofing approach?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Edition size, proofs, and variations are distinguished",
      "false": "Edition or proofing details are ambiguous"
    }
  },
  "production_readiness": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How ready is the plan for production with the stated resources?",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Key steps or resources are missing",
      "2 — Significant preparation needed",
      "3 — Mostly ready",
      "4 — Ready to produce"
    ]
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0211. Colorway Approval Desk

ID: visual-art-colorway-approval-desk
Sub-discipline: Art reproduction
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: Paste an artwork reproduction brief and color notes, and Jev routes it to a proofing path while scoring color-match risk and approval completeness.

Why typed decisions: A fixed proofing route and risk score produce actionable production states rather than subjective written impressions.

TAM: Global art reproduction and printing: ~$12B/yr
SAM: Fine-art proofing tools: ~$500M/yr
SOM: Initial reachable print labs and artists: ~$5M/yr

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Colorway Approval Desk" 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 an artwork reproduction brief and color notes, and Jev routes it to a proofing path while scoring color-match risk and approval completeness.
Discipline: Visual Art (Art reproduction).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: A fixed proofing route and risk score produce actionable production states rather than subjective written impressions.

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": <Color references, print profiles, and approval workflow>, "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)
{
  "proofing_path": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which proofing path is appropriate for this reproduction?",
    "criteria": {
      "screen": "Digital screen review only",
      "contract": "Contract proof required before production",
      "press_check": "Press-side approval required",
      "specialist": "Specialist review for unusual surface or color"
    }
  },
  "color_risk": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How likely is the reproduction to diverge materially from the artwork's intended color?",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Low risk; references are clear",
      "2 — Some manageable uncertainty",
      "3 — Significant color challenge",
      "4 — High risk; specialist color review needed"
    ]
  },
  "approval_complete": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Are the color reference and reproduction specifications sufficient for approval?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Reference and output specs are available",
      "false": "Essential color or output details are absent"
    }
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0212. Residency Fit Finder

ID: visual-art-residency-fit-finder
Sub-discipline: Artist residencies
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: Paste a residency call and artist practice profile, and Jev routes it to a residency format while assessing eligibility and working-condition fit.

Why typed decisions: Eligibility and fit decisions can be screened consistently before an artist spends time on an application.

TAM: Global artist residency ecosystem: ~$2B/yr
SAM: Residency discovery and screening: ~$150M/yr
SOM: Initial reachable artist memberships: ~$2M/yr

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Residency Fit Finder" 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 residency call and artist practice profile, and Jev routes it to a residency format while assessing eligibility and working-condition fit.
Discipline: Visual Art (Artist residencies).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: Eligibility and fit decisions can be screened consistently before an artist spends time on an application.

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": <Artist preferences and residency call requirements>, "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)
{
  "residency_format": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which residency format best matches this opportunity?",
    "criteria": {
      "studio": "Primarily studio-based independent practice",
      "production": "Production-focused access to equipment or facilities",
      "community": "Community engagement or collaborative practice",
      "research": "Research, archive, or concept development"
    }
  },
  "eligible": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the artist meet the stated residency eligibility requirements?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "No listed requirement appears unmet",
      "false": "At least one listed requirement appears unmet"
    }
  },
  "conditions_fit": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How well do the duration, facilities, and expectations suit the artist?",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Poor practical fit",
      "2 — Several substantial compromises",
      "3 — Good fit with manageable tradeoffs",
      "4 — Strong fit across stated needs"
    ]
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0213. Artwork Condition Lane

ID: visual-art-artwork-condition-lane
Sub-discipline: Collection care
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: Paste an artwork condition report, and Jev routes it to a conservation specialty while grading urgency and checking documentation adequacy.

Why typed decisions: Urgency levels and specialist categories support consistent escalation without pretending to replace a conservator.

TAM: Global conservation services: ~$5B/yr
SAM: Digital condition-triage tools: ~$250M/yr
SOM: Initial reachable galleries and collections: ~$4M/yr

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Artwork Condition Lane" 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 an artwork condition report, and Jev routes it to a conservation specialty while grading urgency and checking documentation adequacy.
Discipline: Visual Art (Collection care).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: Urgency levels and specialist categories support consistent escalation without pretending to replace a conservator.

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": <Collection records and conservator escalation thresholds>, "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)
{
  "conservation_specialty": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which conservation specialty should review this report?",
    "criteria": {
      "paintings": "Canvas, panel, or painted surface",
      "paper": "Prints, drawings, photographs, or documents",
      "objects": "Three-dimensional or mixed-material objects",
      "textiles": "Fabric, fiber, or wearable artwork"
    }
  },
  "urgency": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How urgent is professional review based on the reported condition?",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Stable; routine monitoring",
      "2 — Non-urgent review recommended",
      "3 — Prompt assessment needed",
      "4 — Immediate attention indicated"
    ]
  },
  "report_adequate": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the report contain enough detail for initial triage?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Condition, location, and supporting observations are described",
      "false": "Key observations or identifying details are missing"
    }
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0214. Art Fair Application Check

ID: visual-art-art-fair-application-check
Sub-discipline: Gallery sales
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: Paste an art fair application and gallery inventory summary, and Jev routes it to a fair category while scoring program fit and application completeness.

Why typed decisions: Consistent fit and completeness decisions help galleries prioritize applications across many fairs.

TAM: Global art fair sales: ~$10B/yr
SAM: Gallery fair-planning tools: ~$300M/yr
SOM: Initial reachable galleries: ~$5M/yr

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Art Fair Application Check" 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 an art fair application and gallery inventory summary, and Jev routes it to a fair category while scoring program fit and application completeness.
Discipline: Visual Art (Gallery sales).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: Consistent fit and completeness decisions help galleries prioritize applications across many fairs.

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": <Gallery profile and fair application requirements>, "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)
{
  "fair_category": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which fair category best fits this gallery's presentation?",
    "criteria": {
      "contemporary": "Contemporary gallery presentation",
      "design": "Collectible design or applied arts",
      "works_on_paper": "Prints, drawings, or works on paper",
      "emerging": "Emerging galleries or first-time exhibitors"
    }
  },
  "program_fit": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How closely does the gallery's inventory fit the fair's stated audience and focus?",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Poor alignment",
      "2 — Limited alignment",
      "3 — Good alignment",
      "4 — Strong, distinctive alignment"
    ]
  },
  "application_complete": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Are the required application materials present and usable?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Required images, details, and documents are supplied",
      "false": "Required materials are missing or unusable"
    }
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0215. Sketchbook Signal Sorter

ID: visual-art-sketchbook-signal-sorter
Sub-discipline: Illustrator research
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: Paste sketchbook entry notes and project goals, and Jev routes each study to a research category while scoring relevance and follow-through readiness.

Why typed decisions: A fixed research taxonomy makes informal creative exploration searchable and helps surface studies ready for development.

TAM: Global illustration and concept art tools: ~$8B/yr
SAM: Creative research organization: ~$300M/yr
SOM: Initial reachable independent artists: ~$4M/yr

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Sketchbook Signal Sorter" 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 sketchbook entry notes and project goals, and Jev routes each study to a research category while scoring relevance and follow-through readiness.
Discipline: Visual Art (Illustrator research).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: A fixed research taxonomy makes informal creative exploration searchable and helps surface studies ready for development.

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": <Current projects and personal research categories>, "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)
{
  "research_category": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which research category best fits this sketchbook entry?",
    "criteria": {
      "observation": "Direct observation, field notes, or visual reference",
      "character": "Character, figure, or expression exploration",
      "environment": "Setting, architecture, or world-building study",
      "technique": "Material, mark-making, or style experiment"
    }
  },
  "project_relevance": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How relevant is this study to the artist's stated active project?",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Unrelated",
      "2 — Indirect connection",
      "3 — Clearly relevant",
      "4 — Directly useful to a key project need"
    ]
  },
  "developable": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the entry contain a usable idea or visual direction to develop further?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "A discernible idea or visual direction is present",
      "false": "No clear direction is identifiable yet"
    }
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0216. Installation Safety Gate

ID: visual-art-installation-safety-gate
Sub-discipline: Installation art
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: Paste an installation proposal and venue constraints, and Jev routes it to an installation review path while assessing safety concern and feasibility readiness.

Why typed decisions: Typed risk and feasibility decisions help teams escalate concerns consistently before installation begins.

TAM: Global exhibition installation services: ~$4B/yr
SAM: Installation planning software: ~$200M/yr
SOM: Initial reachable museums and galleries: ~$3M/yr

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Installation Safety 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 an installation proposal and venue constraints, and Jev routes it to an installation review path while assessing safety concern and feasibility readiness.
Discipline: Visual Art (Installation art).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: Typed risk and feasibility decisions help teams escalate concerns consistently before installation begins.

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": <Venue specifications and institutional safety rules>, "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)
{
  "installation_path": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which review path best fits this installation proposal?",
    "criteria": {
      "wall_mount": "Wall-mounted or suspended work",
      "floor_object": "Floor-based sculpture or freestanding object",
      "interactive": "Audience interaction, sensors, or moving elements",
      "environmental": "Room-scale, light, soundless projection, or material environment"
    }
  },
  "safety_concern": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How significant are the apparent safety concerns in the proposal?",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — No notable concern identified",
      "2 — Minor controls may be needed",
      "3 — Substantial review required",
      "4 — High concern; do not proceed without specialist review"
    ]
  },
  "feasibility_ready": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Are venue, dimensions, and installation needs sufficiently specified?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Key spatial and installation requirements are stated",
      "false": "Critical venue or installation details are missing"
    }
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0217. Commission Scope Beacon

ID: visual-art-commission-scope-beacon
Sub-discipline: Artist commissions
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: Paste a commission proposal and artist practice profile, and Jev routes it to a commission type while assessing scope clarity and practice fit.

Why typed decisions: Standardized routing and confidence levels help artists decide which requests merit follow-up or negotiation.

TAM: Global art commissions: ~$20B/yr
SAM: Commission management tools: ~$1B/yr
SOM: Initial reachable artists and studios: ~$8M/yr

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Commission Scope Beacon" 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 commission proposal and artist practice profile, and Jev routes it to a commission type while assessing scope clarity and practice fit.
Discipline: Visual Art (Artist commissions).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: Standardized routing and confidence levels help artists decide which requests merit follow-up or negotiation.

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": <Artist practice, availability, and commission boundaries>, "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)
{
  "commission_type": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which commission category best fits this request?",
    "criteria": {
      "portrait": "Portrait, likeness, or figure commission",
      "environment": "Mural, installation, or spatial artwork",
      "illustration": "Illustration for publication or campaign",
      "custom_artwork": "Original painting, sculpture, or one-off artwork"
    }
  },
  "scope_clear": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How clearly are deliverables, revisions, usage, and timing defined?",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Most scope terms are missing",
      "2 — Several important terms are unclear",
      "3 — Mostly defined; minor gaps remain",
      "4 — Clear, complete scope"
    ]
  },
  "practice_fit": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the request align with the artist's stated practice and working boundaries?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The medium, subject, and terms align with the profile",
      "false": "A mismatch or boundary conflict is apparent"
    }
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0218. Wall Label Route

ID: visual-art-wall-label-route
Sub-discipline: Museum interpretation
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: Paste an artwork record and exhibition plan, and Jev routes it to a label format while scoring source completeness and audience accessibility.

Why typed decisions: Selecting a predefined label format and scoring readiness keeps editorial workflows organized without generating label copy.

TAM: Global museum services: ~$50B/yr
SAM: Museum interpretation workflow tools: ~$500M/yr
SOM: Initial reachable institutions: ~$5M/yr

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Wall Label Route" 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 an artwork record and exhibition plan, and Jev routes it to a label format while scoring source completeness and audience accessibility.
Discipline: Visual Art (Museum interpretation).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: Selecting a predefined label format and scoring readiness keeps editorial workflows organized without generating label copy.

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": <Museum style guide and exhibition audience profile>, "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)
{
  "label_format": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which label format best suits this artwork and exhibition context?",
    "criteria": {
      "object": "Short object-identification label",
      "interpretive": "Expanded interpretive label",
      "accessible": "Plain-language or accessible-format label",
      "digital": "Extended digital or mobile label"
    }
  },
  "source_completeness": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How complete are the verified sources and artwork facts for label review?",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Essential facts are unverified or absent",
      "2 — Some facts available; major gaps remain",
      "3 — Most needed facts are sourced",
      "4 — Complete, verified record for review"
    ]
  },
  "audience_accessible": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the exhibition plan identify an audience and accessibility needs?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Audience and relevant access needs are stated",
      "false": "Audience or access needs are not defined"
    }
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0219. Generative Output Curator

ID: visual-art-generative-output-curator
Sub-discipline: Generative art
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: Paste a batch description and curation brief, and Jev routes each generative output to a selection category while scoring prompt adherence and novelty.

Why typed decisions: Fixed selection buckets and comparable scores make large output batches sortable without generating aesthetic commentary.

TAM: Global generative art tools: ~$2B/yr
SAM: Creative batch-curation software: ~$200M/yr
SOM: Initial reachable generative artists: ~$3M/yr

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Generative Output Curator" 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 batch description and curation brief, and Jev routes each generative output to a selection category while scoring prompt adherence and novelty.
Discipline: Visual Art (Generative art).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: Fixed selection buckets and comparable scores make large output batches sortable without generating aesthetic commentary.

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": <Project brief, selection standards, and batch context>, "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)
{
  "selection_bucket": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which selection category best fits this output?",
    "criteria": {
      "keep": "Strong candidate for the final set",
      "iterate": "Promising but needs another generation or edit",
      "reference": "Useful as a process reference, not final",
      "discard": "Does not serve the current brief"
    }
  },
  "brief_adherence": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How closely does the output satisfy the supplied visual brief?",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Misses core requirements",
      "2 — Meets a few requirements",
      "3 — Meets most requirements",
      "4 — Closely fulfills the brief"
    ]
  },
  "novelty": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How distinct is this output from the rest of the batch?",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Highly repetitive",
      "2 — Minor variation",
      "3 — Noticeably distinct",
      "4 — Unusually original within the batch"
    ]
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0220. Artwork Loan Ledger

ID: visual-art-artwork-loan-ledger
Sub-discipline: Gallery logistics
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: Paste an artwork loan request and collection record, and Jev routes it to a loan class while assessing record completeness and handling risk.

Why typed decisions: Typed loan categories and risk levels support dependable routing for time-sensitive collection decisions.

TAM: Global art logistics and services: ~$15B/yr
SAM: Loan workflow software: ~$400M/yr
SOM: Initial reachable galleries and museums: ~$4M/yr

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Artwork Loan Ledger" 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 an artwork loan request and collection record, and Jev routes it to a loan class while assessing record completeness and handling risk.
Discipline: Visual Art (Gallery logistics).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: Typed loan categories and risk levels support dependable routing for time-sensitive collection decisions.

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": <Collection loan policy and artwork handling records>, "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)
{
  "loan_class": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which loan class best fits this request?",
    "criteria": {
      "local": "Local loan with standard handling",
      "national": "Domestic or national institutional loan",
      "international": "Cross-border loan requiring added documentation",
      "special_handling": "Loan involving unusual handling or display needs"
    }
  },
  "record_complete": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the request include the information required for initial loan review?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Dates, venue, artwork, and logistics are specified",
      "false": "One or more essential review details are absent"
    }
  },
  "handling_risk": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How much handling or transport risk is indicated by the artwork and request?",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Routine handling",
      "2 — Some special care required",
      "3 — Significant handling controls needed",
      "4 — High risk; specialist review required"
    ]
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0221. Palette Risk Checker

ID: visual-art-palette-risk-checker
Sub-discipline: Painting
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste a palette and painting brief, and Jev checks for muddy mixtures, insufficient value separation, and clashes with the requested mood; code flags the palette only when two or more checks are true.

Why typed decisions: Independent yes/no judgments combine into a predictable warning without requiring prose advice.

TAM: Global painting supplies: ~$20B
SAM: Digital palette tools: ~$1B
SOM: Indie palette checker: ~$2M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Palette Risk Checker" 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 palette and painting brief, and Jev checks for muddy mixtures, insufficient value separation, and clashes with the requested mood; code flags the palette only when two or more checks are true.
Discipline: Visual Art (Painting).
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: Independent yes/no judgments combine into a predictable warning without requiring prose advice.

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": <Palette colors and painting brief>, "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)
{
  "muddy_mixture_risk": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is this palette likely to produce muddy mixtures in the described painting process?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The pigments or color relationships are likely to neutralize undesirably when mixed.",
      "false": "The palette is unlikely to produce undesirable muddy mixtures."
    }
  },
  "weak_value_separation": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the palette lack enough value separation for the intended composition?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The palette makes important forms or focal areas hard to distinguish by value.",
      "false": "The palette provides adequate value separation for the intended composition."
    }
  },
  "mood_mismatch": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the palette conflict with the mood requested in the brief?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The palette's dominant color character conflicts with the requested mood.",
      "false": "The palette is compatible with the requested mood."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0222. Reference Rights Gate

ID: visual-art-reference-rights-gate
Sub-discipline: Illustration licensing
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste an illustration brief and reference-source records, and Jev checks for unclear permission, commercial-use restrictions, and attribution requirements; code blocks a reference only if permission is unclear or commercial use is disallowed.

Why typed decisions: Separate binary checks make a cautious, auditable gate instead of relying on generated legal-sounding explanations.

TAM: Visual reference licensing: ~$3B
SAM: Illustrator rights workflow: ~$250M
SOM: Solo reference gate: ~$1M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Reference Rights 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 an illustration brief and reference-source records, and Jev checks for unclear permission, commercial-use restrictions, and attribution requirements; code blocks a reference only if permission is unclear or commercial use is disallowed.
Discipline: Visual Art (Illustration licensing).
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: Separate binary checks make a cautious, auditable gate instead of relying on generated legal-sounding explanations.

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": <Brief and reference-source records>, "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)
{
  "permission_unclear": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is permission to use this reference unclear from the supplied records?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The records do not clearly establish a permitted use.",
      "false": "The records clearly establish a permitted use."
    }
  },
  "commercial_use_restricted": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Do the records prohibit commercial use relevant to this brief?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Commercial use for this project is prohibited.",
      "false": "Commercial use for this project is permitted or not restricted."
    }
  },
  "attribution_required": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Do the records require attribution for this use?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Attribution is required by the supplied records.",
      "false": "Attribution is not required by the supplied records."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0223. Series Cohesion Scan

ID: visual-art-series-cohesion-scan
Sub-discipline: Illustration series
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste short descriptions of works in a series and its style brief, and Jev checks for palette drift, inconsistent line treatment, and subject continuity; code marks a series for review when at least two checks are true.

Why typed decisions: Independent consistency flags are easier to act on than an open-ended textual critique.

TAM: Illustration production software: ~$8B
SAM: Series planning tools: ~$400M
SOM: Independent series scan: ~$1.5M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Series Cohesion Scan" 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 short descriptions of works in a series and its style brief, and Jev checks for palette drift, inconsistent line treatment, and subject continuity; code marks a series for review when at least two checks are true.
Discipline: Visual Art (Illustration series).
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: Independent consistency flags are easier to act on than an open-ended textual critique.

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": <Artwork descriptions and style brief>, "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)
{
  "palette_drift": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Do the works show palette drift relative to the style brief?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Color choices vary enough to weaken the intended series identity.",
      "false": "Color choices remain consistent with the intended series identity."
    }
  },
  "line_treatment_drift": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is line treatment inconsistent across the described works?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Line quality or treatment changes in a way that weakens cohesion.",
      "false": "Line treatment is sufficiently consistent across the works."
    }
  },
  "subject_continuity": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is the intended subject continuity missing across the works?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The works lack the stated recurring subject or visual thread.",
      "false": "The works retain the stated recurring subject or visual thread."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0224. Gallery Fit Filter

ID: visual-art-gallery-fit-filter
Sub-discipline: Gallery curation
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste artwork metadata and a gallery's stated program, and Jev checks for medium fit, scale fit, and theme fit; code shortlists a work only when all three checks are true.

Why typed decisions: A consistent set of binary fit decisions supports screening without generating curator copy.

TAM: Gallery operations software: ~$2B
SAM: Gallery intake screening: ~$180M
SOM: Small gallery fit filter: ~$900K

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Gallery Fit Filter" 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 artwork metadata and a gallery's stated program, and Jev checks for medium fit, scale fit, and theme fit; code shortlists a work only when all three checks are true.
Discipline: Visual Art (Gallery curation).
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: A consistent set of binary fit decisions supports screening without generating curator copy.

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": <Artwork metadata and gallery program>, "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)
{
  "medium_fit": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the work's medium fit the gallery's stated program?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The medium matches the gallery's stated scope or accepted formats.",
      "false": "The medium falls outside the gallery's stated scope."
    }
  },
  "scale_fit": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the work's scale fit the gallery's stated display constraints?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The dimensions are compatible with the stated display constraints.",
      "false": "The dimensions conflict with the stated display constraints."
    }
  },
  "theme_fit": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the work fit the gallery's stated thematic focus?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The work aligns with the gallery's stated thematic focus.",
      "false": "The work does not align with the gallery's stated thematic focus."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0225. Commission Scope Alarm

ID: visual-art-commission-scope-alarm
Sub-discipline: Art commissions
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste a client brief and an artist's proposed scope, and Jev checks for deliverable gaps, revision ambiguity, and deadline mismatch; code raises a scope alarm if any check is true.

Why typed decisions: Specific yes/no contract-preparation flags are more dependable than a generated rewrite of the agreement.

TAM: Creative freelance management: ~$5B
SAM: Art commission workflow: ~$300M
SOM: Commission scope tool: ~$1.2M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Commission Scope Alarm" 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 client brief and an artist's proposed scope, and Jev checks for deliverable gaps, revision ambiguity, and deadline mismatch; code raises a scope alarm if any check is true.
Discipline: Visual Art (Art commissions).
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: Specific yes/no contract-preparation flags are more dependable than a generated rewrite of the agreement.

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": <Client brief and proposed scope>, "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)
{
  "deliverable_gap": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is a requested deliverable missing from the proposed scope?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The brief requests an output not covered by the proposed scope.",
      "false": "All requested outputs are covered by the proposed scope."
    }
  },
  "revision_ambiguity": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Are revision limits or approval steps ambiguous in the proposed scope?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The revision process or approval responsibility is not clearly bounded.",
      "false": "The revision process and approval responsibility are clearly bounded."
    }
  },
  "deadline_mismatch": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the proposed schedule conflict with the requested deadline?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The schedule cannot reasonably meet the stated deadline.",
      "false": "The schedule is compatible with the stated deadline."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0226. Print Proof Sentinel

ID: visual-art-print-proof-sentinel
Sub-discipline: Art print production
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste print specifications and a proof description, and Jev checks for resolution, crop, and color-profile problems; code sends a proof back for correction when any check is true.

Why typed decisions: Discrete preflight decisions can prevent costly production errors without a verbose report.

TAM: Print production software: ~$4B
SAM: Fine-art print preflight: ~$350M
SOM: Proof sentinel: ~$1.1M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Print Proof Sentinel" 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 print specifications and a proof description, and Jev checks for resolution, crop, and color-profile problems; code sends a proof back for correction when any check is true.
Discipline: Visual Art (Art print production).
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: Discrete preflight decisions can prevent costly production errors without a verbose report.

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": <Print specs and proof description>, "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)
{
  "resolution_insufficient": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is the supplied image resolution insufficient for the specified print size?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The resolution is likely too low for the intended print dimensions.",
      "false": "The resolution is adequate for the intended print dimensions."
    }
  },
  "crop_risk": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the proof show a likely unintended crop or loss of important content?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Important content is likely cut off or too close to the trim edge.",
      "false": "The crop appears safe for the specified trim."
    }
  },
  "profile_mismatch": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is the color-profile setup mismatched with the print requirements?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The supplied profile information conflicts with the printer's requirements.",
      "false": "The profile information is compatible with the printer's requirements."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0227. Installation Risk Map

ID: visual-art-installation-risk-map
Sub-discipline: Exhibition installation
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste a proposed installation plan and venue constraints, and Jev checks for sightline obstruction, handling risk, and environmental mismatch; code marks a plan high-risk when two or more checks are true.

Why typed decisions: Independent risk flags support a practical checklist and keep final decisions with the installation team.

TAM: Exhibition management tools: ~$1.5B
SAM: Gallery installation planning: ~$120M
SOM: Installation risk tool: ~$700K

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Installation Risk Map" 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 proposed installation plan and venue constraints, and Jev checks for sightline obstruction, handling risk, and environmental mismatch; code marks a plan high-risk when two or more checks are true.
Discipline: Visual Art (Exhibition installation).
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: Independent risk flags support a practical checklist and keep final decisions with the installation team.

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": <Installation plan and venue constraints>, "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)
{
  "sightline_obstruction": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is the proposed layout likely to obstruct important sightlines or circulation?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The layout blocks key views, access, or visitor circulation described in the constraints.",
      "false": "The layout preserves the stated sightlines and circulation."
    }
  },
  "handling_risk": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the plan create avoidable handling risk for the artworks?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The proposed placement or method exposes works to avoidable contact or damage.",
      "false": "The plan appears to manage the stated handling risks."
    }
  },
  "environment_mismatch": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the plan place works in an environment unsuitable for their materials?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The location conflicts with the materials' stated light, humidity, or temperature needs.",
      "false": "The location is compatible with the stated material needs."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0228. Portfolio Readiness Check

ID: visual-art-portfolio-readiness-check
Sub-discipline: Artist portfolios
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste portfolio entries and an application brief, and Jev checks for missing required work types, weak sequencing, and inconsistent presentation; code marks the portfolio ready only when all three checks are false.

Why typed decisions: A strict readiness gate gives artists actionable status without inventing evaluative prose.

TAM: Portfolio and application software: ~$3B
SAM: Visual artist portfolio tools: ~$220M
SOM: Readiness checker: ~$1M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Portfolio Readiness Check" 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 portfolio entries and an application brief, and Jev checks for missing required work types, weak sequencing, and inconsistent presentation; code marks the portfolio ready only when all three checks are false.
Discipline: Visual Art (Artist portfolios).
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: A strict readiness gate gives artists actionable status without inventing evaluative prose.

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": <Portfolio entries and application brief>, "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)
{
  "required_work_missing": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is a work type required by the application missing from the portfolio?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The application requires a work type not represented in the supplied portfolio.",
      "false": "All required work types are represented."
    }
  },
  "sequence_weak": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the supplied order undermine the portfolio's intended progression?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The sequence weakens the stated progression or delays its strongest work.",
      "false": "The sequence supports the stated progression."
    }
  },
  "presentation_inconsistent": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is presentation information inconsistent across portfolio entries?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Captions, images, dimensions, or documentation are presented inconsistently.",
      "false": "Presentation information is consistent across entries."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0229. Motif Clearance Sweep

ID: visual-art-motif-clearance-sweep
Sub-discipline: Visual research
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste a project description and a set of motif notes, and Jev checks for close resemblance to supplied protected references, culturally sensitive context, and unclear source provenance; code escalates any item with a true check for human review.

Why typed decisions: Separate screening flags help teams prioritize review without pretending to make a final rights or cultural determination.

TAM: Creative research tools: ~$2B
SAM: Visual research review: ~$160M
SOM: Motif sweep tool: ~$800K

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Motif Clearance Sweep" 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 project description and a set of motif notes, and Jev checks for close resemblance to supplied protected references, culturally sensitive context, and unclear source provenance; code escalates any item with a true check for human review.
Discipline: Visual Art (Visual research).
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: Separate screening flags help teams prioritize review without pretending to make a final rights or cultural determination.

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": <Project description and motif 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)
{
  "reference_resemblance": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does a motif closely resemble a supplied protected reference?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "A motif appears substantially similar to a supplied reference identified as protected.",
      "false": "No close resemblance to a supplied protected reference is apparent."
    }
  },
  "sensitive_context": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does a motif risk using a culturally sensitive element without context?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The notes indicate a potentially sensitive element with no relevant context or consultation.",
      "false": "No such contextual concern is evident in the notes."
    }
  },
  "source_provenance_unclear": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is the source provenance for a motif unclear?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The notes do not establish where a motif came from or its use status.",
      "false": "The source and relevant use status are established in the notes."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0230. Residency Match Gate

ID: visual-art-residency-match-gate
Sub-discipline: Artist residencies
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste an artist profile and residency criteria, and Jev checks for medium eligibility, location eligibility, and practice alignment; code marks a residency as a fit only when every check is true.

Why typed decisions: Eligibility flags can quickly rule opportunities in or out without generated application advice.

TAM: Artist opportunity platforms: ~$1B
SAM: Residency discovery and eligibility: ~$90M
SOM: Residency match gate: ~$500K

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Residency Match 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 an artist profile and residency criteria, and Jev checks for medium eligibility, location eligibility, and practice alignment; code marks a residency as a fit only when every check is true.
Discipline: Visual Art (Artist residencies).
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: Eligibility flags can quickly rule opportunities in or out without generated application advice.

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": <Artist profile and residency criteria>, "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)
{
  "medium_eligible": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is the artist's medium eligible under the residency criteria?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The profile's medium is explicitly eligible or fits the stated scope.",
      "false": "The profile's medium is excluded or unsupported by the stated scope."
    }
  },
  "location_eligible": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the artist meet the residency's location or citizenship requirements?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The profile meets the stated location or citizenship requirements.",
      "false": "The profile does not meet the stated requirements."
    }
  },
  "practice_aligned": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the artist's practice align with the residency's stated focus?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The profile's practice fits the residency's stated focus.",
      "false": "The profile's practice does not fit the stated focus."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0231. Wall Label Consistency

ID: visual-art-wall-label-consistency
Sub-discipline: Gallery interpretation
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste structured artwork records and draft wall-label fields, and Jev checks for metadata conflicts, unsupported material claims, and attribution mismatch; code sends a label for review if any check is true.

Why typed decisions: Typed verification flags are easier to audit against records than generated label text.

TAM: Museum and gallery collection systems: ~$5B
SAM: Wall-label review workflow: ~$250M
SOM: Label consistency checker: ~$1M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Wall Label Consistency" 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 structured artwork records and draft wall-label fields, and Jev checks for metadata conflicts, unsupported material claims, and attribution mismatch; code sends a label for review if any check is true.
Discipline: Visual Art (Gallery interpretation).
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: Typed verification flags are easier to audit against records than generated label text.

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": <Artwork records and wall-label fields>, "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)
{
  "metadata_conflict": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Do the label fields conflict with the supplied artwork record?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "At least one stated date, title, dimension, or medium conflicts with the record.",
      "false": "The label fields are consistent with the record."
    }
  },
  "unsupported_material_claim": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the label make a material claim unsupported by the supplied record?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "A material or technique claim lacks support in the record.",
      "false": "Material and technique claims are supported by the record."
    }
  },
  "attribution_mismatch": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the artist attribution conflict with the supplied record?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The named artist or attribution format conflicts with the record.",
      "false": "The attribution matches the record."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0232. Workshop Seat Sorter

ID: visual-art-workshop-seat-sorter
Sub-discipline: Art education
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste workshop descriptions and learner profiles, and Jev checks for skill-level fit, materials access, and prerequisite readiness; code recommends a seat only when all three checks are true.

Why typed decisions: Independent fit decisions help learners choose safely and appropriately without a conversational adviser.

TAM: Creative learning platforms: ~$6B
SAM: Visual art workshop discovery: ~$300M
SOM: Workshop seat sorter: ~$900K

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Workshop Seat Sorter" 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 workshop descriptions and learner profiles, and Jev checks for skill-level fit, materials access, and prerequisite readiness; code recommends a seat only when all three checks are true.
Discipline: Visual Art (Art education).
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: Independent fit decisions help learners choose safely and appropriately without a conversational adviser.

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": <Workshop descriptions and learner profiles>, "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)
{
  "skill_level_fit": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the workshop level fit the learner's stated experience?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The workshop level is appropriate for the learner's experience.",
      "false": "The learner's experience is substantially below or above the stated level."
    }
  },
  "materials_access": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Can the learner access the materials required for this workshop?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Required materials are available or practical for the learner to obtain.",
      "false": "A required material is inaccessible under the supplied profile."
    }
  },
  "prerequisite_ready": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the learner meet the workshop's stated prerequisites?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The profile indicates readiness for all stated prerequisites.",
      "false": "A stated prerequisite is unmet or unsupported by the profile."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0233. Art Fair Packing Check

ID: visual-art-art-fair-packing-check
Sub-discipline: Art fair operations
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste artwork inventory and booth packing plans, and Jev checks for fragile-work protection, display-hardware coverage, and inventory-to-plan gaps; code blocks dispatch if any check is true.

Why typed decisions: Boolean packing checks turn semantic logistics review into a clear dispatch gate.

TAM: Art fair operations: ~$1.2B
SAM: Artist logistics and packing: ~$140M
SOM: Packing check tool: ~$600K

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Art Fair Packing Check" 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 artwork inventory and booth packing plans, and Jev checks for fragile-work protection, display-hardware coverage, and inventory-to-plan gaps; code blocks dispatch if any check is true.
Discipline: Visual Art (Art fair operations).
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: Boolean packing checks turn semantic logistics review into a clear dispatch gate.

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": <Artwork inventory and packing plan>, "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)
{
  "fragile_protection_missing": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is protection missing for any fragile work in the inventory?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "A fragile item lacks suitable protection in the packing plan.",
      "false": "Fragile items have suitable protection in the plan."
    }
  },
  "hardware_missing": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is required display hardware missing from the packing plan?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The plan omits hardware needed for the listed display setup.",
      "false": "The plan includes the required display hardware."
    }
  },
  "inventory_plan_gap": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is an inventoried work absent from the packing or transport plan?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "At least one listed work has no corresponding packing or transport entry.",
      "false": "Every inventoried work is covered by the plan."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0234. Open Call Rule Scan

ID: visual-art-open-call-rule-scan
Sub-discipline: Open-call management
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste submission records and open-call rules, and Jev checks for format violations, eligibility failures, and anonymization breaches; code routes a submission to manual review if any check is true.

Why typed decisions: Consistent rule checks reduce administrative burden while preserving human oversight for borderline cases.

TAM: Art submission management: ~$1.8B
SAM: Open-call administration: ~$160M
SOM: Rule scan tool: ~$750K

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Open Call Rule Scan" 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 submission records and open-call rules, and Jev checks for format violations, eligibility failures, and anonymization breaches; code routes a submission to manual review if any check is true.
Discipline: Visual Art (Open-call management).
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: Consistent rule checks reduce administrative burden while preserving human oversight for borderline cases.

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": <Submission records and open-call rules>, "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)
{
  "format_violation": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the submission violate a stated file or format rule?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "A supplied file or format conflicts with an explicit rule.",
      "false": "The submission meets the stated file and format rules."
    }
  },
  "eligibility_failure": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the applicant fail a stated eligibility requirement?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The supplied applicant details conflict with an explicit eligibility rule.",
      "false": "The supplied details satisfy the eligibility rules."
    }
  },
  "anonymization_breach": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the submission reveal identity where anonymous review is required?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Identifying information is present in material intended for anonymous review.",
      "false": "No identifying information is apparent in anonymous-review material."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0235. Series Price Sanity

ID: visual-art-series-price-sanity
Sub-discipline: Art sales
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste artwork records and an artist's pricing rules, and Jev checks for inconsistent series pricing, unexplained size premiums, and edition-price conflicts; code flags a price list when two or more checks are true.

Why typed decisions: Transparent binary checks help spot anomalies without presenting a model's generated price as authoritative.

TAM: Art commerce platforms: ~$4B
SAM: Artist pricing workflow: ~$260M
SOM: Price sanity checker: ~$1M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Series Price Sanity" 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 artwork records and an artist's pricing rules, and Jev checks for inconsistent series pricing, unexplained size premiums, and edition-price conflicts; code flags a price list when two or more checks are true.
Discipline: Visual Art (Art sales).
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: Transparent binary checks help spot anomalies without presenting a model's generated price as authoritative.

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": <Artwork records and pricing rules>, "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)
{
  "series_price_inconsistent": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Are comparable works in a series priced inconsistently with the supplied rules?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Comparable works differ in price without a reason supported by the rules.",
      "false": "Series pricing is consistent with the supplied rules."
    }
  },
  "size_premium_unexplained": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is a size-based price difference unexplained by the supplied policy?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Size changes correspond to price differences not supported by the policy.",
      "false": "Size-based price differences follow the policy."
    }
  },
  "edition_price_conflict": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does an edition price conflict with the artist's stated pricing rules?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "An edition's price or tier violates the supplied pricing rules.",
      "false": "Edition pricing follows the supplied rules."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0236. Digital Asset Readiness

ID: visual-art-digital-asset-readiness
Sub-discipline: Digital art delivery
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste delivery requirements and an asset manifest, and Jev checks for missing formats, color-space mismatch, and licensing-file gaps; code marks a delivery complete only when all checks are false.

Why typed decisions: A typed completeness gate prevents overlooked requirements better than generated delivery notes.

TAM: Digital asset management: ~$7B
SAM: Creative asset delivery: ~$500M
SOM: Asset readiness tool: ~$1.3M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Digital Asset Readiness" 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 delivery requirements and an asset manifest, and Jev checks for missing formats, color-space mismatch, and licensing-file gaps; code marks a delivery complete only when all checks are false.
Discipline: Visual Art (Digital art delivery).
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: A typed completeness gate prevents overlooked requirements better than generated delivery notes.

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": <Delivery requirements and asset manifest>, "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)
{
  "format_missing": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is a required output format missing from the asset manifest?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The requirements list a format that the manifest does not include.",
      "false": "All required output formats are present."
    }
  },
  "color_space_mismatch": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does an asset's color space conflict with delivery requirements?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "An asset uses a color space incompatible with the requirements.",
      "false": "Asset color spaces meet the requirements."
    }
  },
  "license_file_missing": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is a required license or usage document missing?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The requirements call for a usage document absent from the manifest.",
      "false": "All required usage documents are present."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0237. Mural Site Suitability

ID: visual-art-mural-site-suitability
Sub-discipline: Public art
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste a mural proposal and site survey, and Jev checks for surface incompatibility, exposure risk, and access constraints; code labels a site unsuitable when any check is true.

Why typed decisions: Separate site-condition flags support early screening before artists invest in detailed designs.

TAM: Public art project services: ~$2B
SAM: Mural planning and site review: ~$180M
SOM: Mural suitability tool: ~$800K

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Mural Site Suitability" 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 mural proposal and site survey, and Jev checks for surface incompatibility, exposure risk, and access constraints; code labels a site unsuitable when any check is true.
Discipline: Visual Art (Public art).
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: Separate site-condition flags support early screening before artists invest in detailed designs.

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": <Mural proposal and site survey>, "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)
{
  "surface_incompatible": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is the surveyed surface incompatible with the proposed materials?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The surface condition or material conflicts with the proposed paint system.",
      "false": "The surface is compatible with the proposed materials."
    }
  },
  "exposure_risk": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the site's exposure threaten the proposed mural's durability?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Sun, moisture, or other stated exposure exceeds the materials' suitability.",
      "false": "The stated exposure is compatible with the materials."
    }
  },
  "access_constraint": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does site access prevent the proposed installation method?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The survey indicates the proposed equipment or process cannot access the site.",
      "false": "The site supports the proposed installation method."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0238. Collection Care Triage

ID: visual-art-collection-care-triage
Sub-discipline: Art conservation
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste condition notes and collection-care thresholds, and Jev checks for active deterioration, handling sensitivity, and storage mismatch; code prioritizes an item when any check is true.

Why typed decisions: Independent triage flags help staff sort cases while leaving conservation judgments to qualified professionals.

TAM: Collection care management: ~$3B
SAM: Small institution conservation triage: ~$200M
SOM: Care triage tool: ~$900K

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Collection Care Triage" 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 condition notes and collection-care thresholds, and Jev checks for active deterioration, handling sensitivity, and storage mismatch; code prioritizes an item when any check is true.
Discipline: Visual Art (Art conservation).
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: Independent triage flags help staff sort cases while leaving conservation judgments to qualified professionals.

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": <Condition notes and care thresholds>, "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)
{
  "active_deterioration": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Do the notes indicate active deterioration requiring prompt review?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The notes describe ongoing change or damage that meets the supplied threshold.",
      "false": "The notes do not indicate active deterioration meeting the threshold."
    }
  },
  "handling_sensitive": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is the item described as too handling-sensitive for routine movement?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The condition notes indicate special handling is needed.",
      "false": "The notes do not indicate special handling beyond routine care."
    }
  },
  "storage_mismatch": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the current storage conflict with the item's care thresholds?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Recorded storage conditions fall outside the supplied thresholds.",
      "false": "Recorded storage conditions meet the supplied thresholds."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0239. Generative Output Curator

ID: visual-art-generative-output-curator-1
Sub-discipline: Generative art
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste metadata for a batch of generative outputs and selection criteria, and Jev checks for near-duplicate composition, parameter outliers, and criterion fit; code keeps works only when fit is true and both other checks are false.

Why typed decisions: Independent decisions make batch curation repeatable while leaving aesthetic selection under the artist's control.

TAM: Generative design software: ~$2.5B
SAM: Generative art curation tools: ~$180M
SOM: Output curator: ~$850K

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Generative Output Curator" 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 metadata for a batch of generative outputs and selection criteria, and Jev checks for near-duplicate composition, parameter outliers, and criterion fit; code keeps works only when fit is true and both other checks are false.
Discipline: Visual Art (Generative art).
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: Independent decisions make batch curation repeatable while leaving aesthetic selection under the artist's control.

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": <Output metadata and selection criteria>, "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)
{
  "near_duplicate": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is this output compositionally too similar to another in the batch?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The output appears redundant relative to another candidate under the supplied criteria.",
      "false": "The output contributes a meaningfully distinct composition."
    }
  },
  "parameter_outlier": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is this output an unintended parameter outlier for the batch?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Its parameter values place it outside the intended batch range.",
      "false": "Its parameter values fit the intended batch range."
    }
  },
  "criterion_fit": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does this output meet the artist's stated selection criteria?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The output satisfies the supplied selection criteria.",
      "false": "The output fails one or more supplied selection criteria."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0240. Art Loan Match Check

ID: visual-art-art-loan-match-check
Sub-discipline: Art lending
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste artwork records and borrower requirements, and Jev checks for medium suitability, condition compatibility, and display-environment fit; code marks a loan as eligible only when all three checks are true.

Why typed decisions: Structured eligibility decisions clarify why a loan needs review without generated recommendations.

TAM: Art collection and lending systems: ~$2.2B
SAM: Artwork loan eligibility: ~$130M
SOM: Loan match checker: ~$650K

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Art Loan Match Check" 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 artwork records and borrower requirements, and Jev checks for medium suitability, condition compatibility, and display-environment fit; code marks a loan as eligible only when all three checks are true.
Discipline: Visual Art (Art lending).
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: Structured eligibility decisions clarify why a loan needs review without generated recommendations.

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": <Artwork records and borrower requirements>, "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)
{
  "medium_suitable": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is the artwork's medium suitable for the proposed loan context?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The medium is appropriate under the supplied borrower and lender requirements.",
      "false": "The medium conflicts with a stated loan requirement."
    }
  },
  "condition_compatible": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is the artwork's condition compatible with the requested loan duration and handling?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The condition record supports the requested duration and handling plan.",
      "false": "The condition record conflicts with the requested duration or handling."
    }
  },
  "display_environment_fit": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the proposed display environment meet the artwork's stated needs?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The environment satisfies the artwork's stated display requirements.",
      "false": "The environment conflicts with a stated display requirement."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0241. Portfolio Sequence Studio

ID: visual-art-portfolio-sequence-studio
Sub-discipline: Illustration portfolios
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste a portfolio’s artwork descriptions and target client brief, and Jev scores each piece for relevance, stylistic fit, and sequence potential so you can rank the strongest selections.

Why typed decisions: Comparable scores let artists tune the ranking to a client’s priorities instead of relying on a generated portfolio critique.

TAM: $3B global portfolio tools
SAM: $450M illustrator portfolio tools
SOM: $5M early reachable users

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Portfolio Sequence Studio" 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 portfolio’s artwork descriptions and target client brief, and Jev scores each piece for relevance, stylistic fit, and sequence potential so you can rank the strongest selections.
Discipline: Visual Art (Illustration portfolios).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: Comparable scores let artists tune the ranking to a client’s priorities instead of relying on a generated portfolio critique.

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": <Target client, brief, and portfolio entries>, "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)
{
  "brief_relevance": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score how directly this piece serves the target brief.",
    "criteria": [
      "No meaningful connection",
      "Loose or incidental connection",
      "Clear connection to a key brief need",
      "Directly addresses a central brief need"
    ]
  },
  "style_fit": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score how well this piece fits the requested visual style.",
    "criteria": [
      "Conflicts with the requested style",
      "Shares only a few style traits",
      "Mostly matches the requested style",
      "Strongly exemplifies the requested style"
    ]
  },
  "sequence_value": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score how much this piece strengthens the portfolio sequence.",
    "criteria": [
      "Weakens the sequence or feels redundant",
      "Adds little distinct value",
      "Adds a useful variation or transition",
      "Creates a compelling anchor or progression"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0242. Gallery Wall Curator

ID: visual-art-gallery-wall-curator
Sub-discipline: Gallery exhibitions
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste artwork entries and a gallery wall’s constraints, and Jev scores each work for theme fit, visual balance, and display suitability to help rank the hanging plan.

Why typed decisions: Separate comparable scores make the trade-offs between curatorial coherence and practical display needs explicit.

TAM: $8B global gallery services
SAM: $700M exhibition planning tools
SOM: $4M early reachable galleries

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Gallery Wall Curator" 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 artwork entries and a gallery wall’s constraints, and Jev scores each work for theme fit, visual balance, and display suitability to help rank the hanging plan.
Discipline: Visual Art (Gallery exhibitions).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: Separate comparable scores make the trade-offs between curatorial coherence and practical display needs explicit.

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": <Exhibition theme, wall constraints, and artwork entries>, "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)
{
  "theme_fit": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score how well this work supports the exhibition theme.",
    "criteria": [
      "Contradicts or distracts from the theme",
      "Has a weak or indirect connection",
      "Clearly supports the theme",
      "Embodies a central idea of the theme"
    ]
  },
  "visual_balance": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score how much this work improves the proposed wall’s visual balance.",
    "criteria": [
      "Creates a strong imbalance",
      "Adds little balance or repetition",
      "Provides useful contrast or rhythm",
      "Significantly improves the overall composition"
    ]
  },
  "display_suitability": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score how suitable this work is for the stated display constraints.",
    "criteria": [
      "Does not fit key constraints",
      "Fits only with major compromises",
      "Fits with minor compromises",
      "Fits the constraints especially well"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0243. Commission Matchboard

ID: visual-art-commission-matchboard
Sub-discipline: Art commissions
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste client briefs and artist portfolio summaries, and Jev scores each artist for brief fit, capability evidence, and aesthetic alignment to rank commission matches.

Why typed decisions: Weighted comparable scores help clients prioritize concrete fit factors rather than sift through persuasive but inconsistent prose.

TAM: $10B global commission market
SAM: $900M commission matching software
SOM: $6M early reachable users

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Commission Matchboard" 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 client briefs and artist portfolio summaries, and Jev scores each artist for brief fit, capability evidence, and aesthetic alignment to rank commission matches.
Discipline: Visual Art (Art commissions).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: Weighted comparable scores help clients prioritize concrete fit factors rather than sift through persuasive but inconsistent prose.

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": <Client brief, artist summaries, and matching priorities>, "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)
{
  "brief_fit": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score how well this artist's work fits the brief's subject and use.",
    "criteria": [
      "Poor fit for the brief",
      "Partial fit with major gaps",
      "Good fit with manageable gaps",
      "Excellent fit for the brief"
    ]
  },
  "capability_evidence": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score how clearly the portfolio demonstrates the required capabilities.",
    "criteria": [
      "Little evidence of required skills",
      "Some relevant evidence",
      "Strong evidence for most requirements",
      "Direct evidence across the requirements"
    ]
  },
  "aesthetic_alignment": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score the alignment between the artist's visual language and the client's direction.",
    "criteria": [
      "Strongly misaligned",
      "Some shared traits but notable mismatch",
      "Mostly aligned",
      "Closely aligned throughout"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0244. Open Call Sorter

ID: visual-art-open-call-sorter-1
Sub-discipline: Artist submissions
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste open-call criteria and submission summaries, and Jev scores each entry for eligibility fit, concept strength, and visual coherence to rank a review shortlist.

Why typed decisions: A common score scale supports transparent, adjustable triage while leaving final selection to the human panel.

TAM: $5B global arts funding ecosystem
SAM: $350M open-call management tools
SOM: $3M early reachable organizations

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Open Call Sorter" 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 open-call criteria and submission summaries, and Jev scores each entry for eligibility fit, concept strength, and visual coherence to rank a review shortlist.
Discipline: Visual Art (Artist submissions).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: A common score scale supports transparent, adjustable triage while leaving final selection to the human panel.

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": <Open-call criteria, submission summaries, and panel priorities>, "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)
{
  "eligibility_fit": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score how well the submission fits the stated call criteria.",
    "criteria": [
      "Misses most criteria",
      "Meets a few criteria",
      "Meets most criteria",
      "Directly meets the core criteria"
    ]
  },
  "concept_strength": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score the strength and clarity of the submission's artistic concept.",
    "criteria": [
      "Concept is unclear or unsupported",
      "Concept has limited clarity or development",
      "Concept is clear and considered",
      "Concept is distinctive and strongly developed"
    ]
  },
  "visual_coherence": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score how coherently the described work connects concept and visual approach.",
    "criteria": [
      "Little connection between concept and approach",
      "Connection is inconsistent",
      "Approach generally supports the concept",
      "Visual approach strongly realizes the concept"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0245. Palette Harmony Bench

ID: visual-art-palette-harmony-bench
Sub-discipline: Color and palette design
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste palette descriptions and a project mood or use case, and Jev scores each palette for mood match, color harmony, and practical range to rank options.

Why typed decisions: Dimension scores separate emotional fit from palette mechanics, making weighted selection more useful than an unstructured color critique.

TAM: $6B global digital art tools
SAM: $500M palette and color workflow tools
SOM: $4M early reachable users

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Palette Harmony Bench" 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 palette descriptions and a project mood or use case, and Jev scores each palette for mood match, color harmony, and practical range to rank options.
Discipline: Visual Art (Color and palette design).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: Dimension scores separate emotional fit from palette mechanics, making weighted selection more useful than an unstructured color critique.

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": <Project mood, intended use, and palette descriptions>, "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)
{
  "mood_match": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score how well this palette supports the intended mood.",
    "criteria": [
      "Works against the intended mood",
      "Suggests the mood weakly",
      "Supports the mood clearly",
      "Evokes the intended mood strongly"
    ]
  },
  "color_harmony": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score the palette's described internal color harmony.",
    "criteria": [
      "Colors feel strongly discordant",
      "Harmony is uneven",
      "Colors generally work together",
      "Colors form a cohesive, expressive system"
    ]
  },
  "practical_range": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score how well the palette covers the stated visual uses.",
    "criteria": [
      "Lacks colors needed for the uses",
      "Covers only a narrow set of uses",
      "Covers most stated uses",
      "Offers a versatile range without losing identity"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0246. Reference Image Scout

ID: visual-art-reference-image-scout
Sub-discipline: Visual research
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste a project brief and candidate reference descriptions, and Jev scores each reference for relevance, compositional usefulness, and originality risk to rank research material.

Why typed decisions: Comparable scores help artists find useful references while explicitly weighting relevance against overfamiliar or derivative imagery.

TAM: $4B global creative research tools
SAM: $300M visual reference tools
SOM: $3M early reachable users

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Reference Image Scout" 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 project brief and candidate reference descriptions, and Jev scores each reference for relevance, compositional usefulness, and originality risk to rank research material.
Discipline: Visual Art (Visual research).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: Comparable scores help artists find useful references while explicitly weighting relevance against overfamiliar or derivative imagery.

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": <Project brief, reference descriptions, and research priorities>, "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)
{
  "reference_relevance": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score how relevant this reference is to the project's subject or intent.",
    "criteria": [
      "Unrelated to the project",
      "Touches on a peripheral aspect",
      "Relevant to a clear project element",
      "Directly informs the central project intent"
    ]
  },
  "composition_usefulness": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score how useful this reference is for the stated compositional needs.",
    "criteria": [
      "Offers no useful compositional information",
      "Offers a limited cue",
      "Provides a useful compositional example",
      "Strongly clarifies the desired composition"
    ]
  },
  "originality_safety": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score how much this reference supports fresh interpretation rather than close imitation.",
    "criteria": [
      "Encourages near-copying or cliché",
      "Has substantial imitation risk",
      "Allows room for distinct interpretation",
      "Offers inspiration while clearly enabling originality"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0247. Print Run Selector

ID: visual-art-print-run-selector
Sub-discipline: Art print production
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste print descriptions, production options, and a buyer profile, and Jev scores each print for audience fit, format suitability, and edition appeal to rank a small run.

Why typed decisions: Weighted scores expose the balance between audience demand and production suitability without pretending to forecast exact sales.

TAM: $12B global art print market
SAM: $1B print planning and sales tools
SOM: $5M early reachable users

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Print Run Selector" 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 print descriptions, production options, and a buyer profile, and Jev scores each print for audience fit, format suitability, and edition appeal to rank a small run.
Discipline: Visual Art (Art print production).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: Weighted scores expose the balance between audience demand and production suitability without pretending to forecast exact sales.

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": <Buyer profile, production options, and print entries>, "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)
{
  "audience_fit": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score how well this print fits the intended buyer profile.",
    "criteria": [
      "Poor match for the audience",
      "Appeals to a narrow subset",
      "Fits the audience well",
      "Strongly matches the audience's stated interests"
    ]
  },
  "format_suitability": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score the work's suitability for the proposed print format.",
    "criteria": [
      "Format undermines the work",
      "Format presents notable compromises",
      "Format suits the work",
      "Format especially enhances the work"
    ]
  },
  "edition_appeal": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score the likely appeal of this edition proposition to the stated buyers.",
    "criteria": [
      "Proposition has little appeal",
      "Appeal is limited or unclear",
      "Proposition is appealing",
      "Proposition is especially compelling for this audience"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0248. Series Cohesion Finder

ID: visual-art-series-cohesion-finder
Sub-discipline: Illustrated series
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste descriptions of works in progress and a series concept, and Jev scores each piece for thematic fit, visual consistency, and distinct contribution to rank what belongs.

Why typed decisions: Separate scores help creators preserve a coherent series without discarding works that contribute useful variation.

TAM: $3B global creator workflow software
SAM: $250M series planning tools
SOM: $2M early reachable users

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Series Cohesion Finder" 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 descriptions of works in progress and a series concept, and Jev scores each piece for thematic fit, visual consistency, and distinct contribution to rank what belongs.
Discipline: Visual Art (Illustrated series).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: Separate scores help creators preserve a coherent series without discarding works that contribute useful variation.

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": <Series concept, work descriptions, and cohesion priorities>, "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)
{
  "series_theme_fit": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score how strongly this work connects to the series concept.",
    "criteria": [
      "Conflicts with the concept",
      "Connects only indirectly",
      "Clearly supports the concept",
      "Expresses a defining aspect of the concept"
    ]
  },
  "visual_consistency": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score how well the work fits the series' stated visual language.",
    "criteria": [
      "Strongly departs from the visual language",
      "Shares a few traits",
      "Mostly fits the visual language",
      "Feels fully at home in the visual language"
    ]
  },
  "distinct_contribution": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score how much this work adds something nonredundant to the series.",
    "criteria": [
      "Repeats existing work without benefit",
      "Adds little new information",
      "Adds a useful variation",
      "Adds a distinctive and valuable dimension"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0249. Mural Site Matcher

ID: visual-art-mural-site-matcher
Sub-discipline: Public art and murals
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste a mural brief, site description, and concept summaries, and Jev scores each concept for community fit, site compatibility, and visual legibility to rank proposals.

Why typed decisions: The score dimensions make competing civic, spatial, and visual priorities adjustable rather than hiding them in a single recommendation.

TAM: $9B global public art services
SAM: $600M mural project tools
SOM: $4M early reachable organizations

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Mural Site Matcher" 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 mural brief, site description, and concept summaries, and Jev scores each concept for community fit, site compatibility, and visual legibility to rank proposals.
Discipline: Visual Art (Public art and murals).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: The score dimensions make competing civic, spatial, and visual priorities adjustable rather than hiding them in a single recommendation.

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": <Mural brief, site description, and community priorities>, "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)
{
  "community_fit": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score how well the concept fits the stated community context and goals.",
    "criteria": [
      "Disregards or conflicts with the context",
      "Acknowledges context only superficially",
      "Responds meaningfully to the context",
      "Strongly reflects the stated community goals"
    ]
  },
  "site_compatibility": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score how well the concept suits the site's physical conditions.",
    "criteria": [
      "Conflicts with key site conditions",
      "Fits with major compromises",
      "Fits the site well",
      "Makes especially effective use of the site"
    ]
  },
  "visual_legibility": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score how legible the concept is from the expected viewing conditions.",
    "criteria": [
      "Unclear at expected viewing distance",
      "Legibility is inconsistent",
      "Generally legible",
      "Highly legible in the stated setting"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0250. Art Fair Booth Planner

ID: visual-art-art-fair-booth-planner
Sub-discipline: Art fairs and booths
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste artwork listings and booth dimensions or goals, and Jev scores each work for audience draw, booth coherence, and space efficiency to rank display candidates.

Why typed decisions: Comparable weighted scores support a deliberate mix of attention-grabbing work and practical booth constraints.

TAM: $7B global art fair market
SAM: $500M exhibitor planning tools
SOM: $3M early reachable galleries

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Art Fair Booth Planner" 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 artwork listings and booth dimensions or goals, and Jev scores each work for audience draw, booth coherence, and space efficiency to rank display candidates.
Discipline: Visual Art (Art fairs and booths).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: Comparable weighted scores support a deliberate mix of attention-grabbing work and practical booth constraints.

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": <Booth dimensions, fair audience, and artwork listings>, "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)
{
  "audience_draw": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score this work's likely ability to attract the stated fair audience.",
    "criteria": [
      "Unlikely to attract this audience",
      "May attract limited attention",
      "Likely to attract relevant visitors",
      "Strong potential to draw the target audience"
    ]
  },
  "booth_coherence": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score how well this work contributes to a coherent booth presentation.",
    "criteria": [
      "Disrupts the presentation",
      "Fits only loosely",
      "Supports the presentation",
      "Strengthens the booth's central visual story"
    ]
  },
  "space_efficiency": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score how well this work uses the available display space.",
    "criteria": [
      "Poor use of limited space",
      "Requires substantial space for limited impact",
      "Uses space effectively",
      "Delivers strong impact for its space needs"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0251. Caption Fit Auditor

ID: visual-art-caption-fit-auditor
Sub-discipline: Artwork documentation
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste artwork descriptions and intended catalog contexts, and Jev scores each caption for factual alignment, interpretive usefulness, and audience accessibility to prioritize revisions.

Why typed decisions: Typed scores flag specific caption weaknesses without replacing the artist's own voice with generated copy.

TAM: $2B global arts documentation tools
SAM: $180M catalog and caption review tools
SOM: $1M early reachable organizations

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Caption Fit Auditor" 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 artwork descriptions and intended catalog contexts, and Jev scores each caption for factual alignment, interpretive usefulness, and audience accessibility to prioritize revisions.
Discipline: Visual Art (Artwork documentation).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: Typed scores flag specific caption weaknesses without replacing the artist's own voice with generated copy.

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": <Artwork facts, catalog context, and audience profile>, "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)
{
  "factual_alignment": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score how closely this caption aligns with the supplied artwork facts.",
    "criteria": [
      "Contradicts or invents key facts",
      "Contains notable ambiguity",
      "Mostly matches the supplied facts",
      "Accurately reflects the supplied facts"
    ]
  },
  "interpretive_usefulness": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score how much useful context this caption gives the intended reader.",
    "criteria": [
      "Adds no useful context",
      "Adds limited context",
      "Provides helpful context",
      "Deepens understanding without overexplaining"
    ]
  },
  "audience_accessibility": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score how accessible this caption is to the intended audience.",
    "criteria": [
      "Difficult for this audience to follow",
      "Has substantial barriers",
      "Generally accessible",
      "Clear and well suited to this audience"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0252. Commission Scope Guard

ID: visual-art-commission-scope-guard
Sub-discipline: Creative project scoping
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste an art commission brief and proposed deliverables, and Jev scores each deliverable set for brief coverage, scope clarity, and feasibility to rank package options.

Why typed decisions: Dimension-based scoring helps artists compare scope packages against client needs without generating or negotiating contract language.

TAM: $10B global creative services
SAM: $700M commission workflow tools
SOM: $4M early reachable users

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Commission Scope Guard" 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 an art commission brief and proposed deliverables, and Jev scores each deliverable set for brief coverage, scope clarity, and feasibility to rank package options.
Discipline: Visual Art (Creative project scoping).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: Dimension-based scoring helps artists compare scope packages against client needs without generating or negotiating contract language.

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": <Commission brief, package options, and artist capacity>, "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)
{
  "brief_coverage": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score how fully this package addresses the client's stated needs.",
    "criteria": [
      "Misses most stated needs",
      "Covers only a few needs",
      "Covers most important needs",
      "Directly covers all central needs"
    ]
  },
  "scope_clarity": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score how clearly the proposed deliverables define the work.",
    "criteria": [
      "Deliverables are unclear",
      "Several important ambiguities",
      "Mostly clear deliverables",
      "Specific and consistently bounded deliverables"
    ]
  },
  "feasibility": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score how feasible this package is given the stated artist capacity.",
    "criteria": [
      "Not feasible with stated capacity",
      "Feasible only with major changes",
      "Feasible with manageable effort",
      "Well matched to stated capacity"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0253. Colorway Review Bench

ID: visual-art-colorway-review-bench
Sub-discipline: Illustration and product art
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste design descriptions, target contexts, and colorway options, and Jev scores each option for brand fit, contrast, and production robustness to rank variants.

Why typed decisions: Comparable scores separate subjective brand alignment from functional color requirements, with weights set by the team.

TAM: $5B global design software
SAM: $400M colorway workflow tools
SOM: $3M early reachable teams

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Colorway Review Bench" 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 design descriptions, target contexts, and colorway options, and Jev scores each option for brand fit, contrast, and production robustness to rank variants.
Discipline: Visual Art (Illustration and product art).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: Comparable scores separate subjective brand alignment from functional color requirements, with weights set by the team.

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": <Brand direction, usage contexts, and colorway options>, "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)
{
  "brand_fit": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score how well this colorway fits the supplied brand direction.",
    "criteria": [
      "Conflicts with the brand direction",
      "Shares limited brand traits",
      "Fits the brand direction",
      "Strongly expresses the brand direction"
    ]
  },
  "contrast_quality": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score whether the described colors provide suitable contrast for the use case.",
    "criteria": [
      "Contrast undermines the use case",
      "Contrast is inconsistent",
      "Contrast is generally suitable",
      "Contrast is especially effective and clear"
    ]
  },
  "production_robustness": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score how robust this colorway is across the stated production contexts.",
    "criteria": [
      "Likely to fail in key contexts",
      "Works only in limited contexts",
      "Works across most contexts",
      "Consistently suits the stated contexts"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0254. Generative Output Curator

ID: visual-art-generative-output-curator-2
Sub-discipline: Generative art
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste a generative-art prompt, selection goals, and output metadata, and Jev scores each candidate for prompt alignment, novelty, and compositional strength to rank a review set.

Why typed decisions: Independent scores help artists curate batches according to their own balance of fidelity and surprise rather than accept a textual judgment.

TAM: $4B global generative art tools
SAM: $300M generative curation software
SOM: $3M early reachable users

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Generative Output Curator" 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 generative-art prompt, selection goals, and output metadata, and Jev scores each candidate for prompt alignment, novelty, and compositional strength to rank a review set.
Discipline: Visual Art (Generative art).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: Independent scores help artists curate batches according to their own balance of fidelity and surprise rather than accept a textual 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": <Prompt, selection goals, and candidate metadata>, "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)
{
  "prompt_alignment": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score how well this candidate reflects the stated prompt intent.",
    "criteria": [
      "Largely misses the prompt",
      "Reflects only a minor element",
      "Clearly reflects the prompt",
      "Strongly realizes the prompt intent"
    ]
  },
  "novelty": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score how distinctive this candidate feels within the supplied batch.",
    "criteria": [
      "Highly repetitive or generic",
      "Some familiar elements dominate",
      "Contains distinctive choices",
      "Feels especially unexpected and distinctive"
    ]
  },
  "composition_strength": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score the candidate's described compositional effectiveness.",
    "criteria": [
      "Composition feels unresolved",
      "Composition has notable weaknesses",
      "Composition is generally effective",
      "Composition is especially compelling and controlled"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0255. Art Buyer Match Desk

ID: visual-art-art-buyer-match-desk
Sub-discipline: Art sales and collecting
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste buyer preference profiles and artwork listings, and Jev scores each work for taste fit, collection complement, and budget alignment to rank recommendations.

Why typed decisions: Per-work scores make recommendations explainable through adjustable priorities without fabricating personalized sales copy.

TAM: $65B global art market
SAM: $1B art discovery and sales tools
SOM: $5M early reachable users

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Art Buyer Match Desk" 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 buyer preference profiles and artwork listings, and Jev scores each work for taste fit, collection complement, and budget alignment to rank recommendations.
Discipline: Visual Art (Art sales and collecting).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: Per-work scores make recommendations explainable through adjustable priorities without fabricating personalized sales copy.

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": <Buyer preferences, existing collection summary, and listings>, "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)
{
  "taste_fit": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score how well this work matches the buyer's stated preferences.",
    "criteria": [
      "Poor match for stated preferences",
      "Matches only a minor preference",
      "Matches several preferences",
      "Strong match across key preferences"
    ]
  },
  "collection_complement": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score how well this work complements the supplied collection summary.",
    "criteria": [
      "Duplicates or clashes with the collection",
      "Adds little complementarity",
      "Adds a useful connection or contrast",
      "Distinctly strengthens the collection"
    ]
  },
  "budget_alignment": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score how well the listing fits the buyer's stated budget range.",
    "criteria": [
      "Far outside the range",
      "Outside the range with limited flexibility",
      "Within or near the range",
      "Comfortably within the preferred range"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0256. Workshop Example Picker

ID: visual-art-workshop-example-picker
Sub-discipline: Art education
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste a lesson objective, learner profile, and artwork examples, and Jev scores each example for teaching relevance, learner accessibility, and discussion potential to rank class materials.

Why typed decisions: Comparable dimensions help educators choose examples that serve both learning goals and varied learner needs.

TAM: $8B global art education market
SAM: $500M visual teaching resource tools
SOM: $3M early reachable educators

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Workshop Example Picker" 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 lesson objective, learner profile, and artwork examples, and Jev scores each example for teaching relevance, learner accessibility, and discussion potential to rank class materials.
Discipline: Visual Art (Art education).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: Comparable dimensions help educators choose examples that serve both learning goals and varied learner needs.

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": <Lesson objective, learner profile, and example descriptions>, "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)
{
  "teaching_relevance": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score how directly this example supports the lesson objective.",
    "criteria": [
      "Unrelated to the objective",
      "Supports it indirectly",
      "Clearly supports it",
      "Demonstrates the objective exceptionally well"
    ]
  },
  "learner_accessibility": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score how approachable this example is for the stated learners.",
    "criteria": [
      "Likely inaccessible to these learners",
      "Requires substantial prior knowledge",
      "Generally approachable",
      "Especially well suited to their experience level"
    ]
  },
  "discussion_potential": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score how well this example invites useful classroom discussion.",
    "criteria": [
      "Offers little to discuss",
      "Allows limited discussion",
      "Supports meaningful discussion",
      "Invites rich, focused discussion"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0257. Residency Fit Sorter

ID: visual-art-residency-fit-sorter
Sub-discipline: Artist residencies
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste residency descriptions and artist project summaries, and Jev scores each opportunity for practice fit, resource alignment, and development value to rank applications.

Why typed decisions: Weighted, comparable scores help artists assess opportunities against personal priorities instead of relying on generic summaries.

TAM: $4B global artist opportunity ecosystem
SAM: $280M residency discovery tools
SOM: $2M early reachable users

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Residency Fit Sorter" 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 residency descriptions and artist project summaries, and Jev scores each opportunity for practice fit, resource alignment, and development value to rank applications.
Discipline: Visual Art (Artist residencies).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: Weighted, comparable scores help artists assess opportunities against personal priorities instead of relying on generic summaries.

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": <Artist goals, project summary, and residency descriptions>, "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)
{
  "practice_fit": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score how well this residency suits the artist's stated practice.",
    "criteria": [
      "Poor fit for the practice",
      "Offers a limited connection",
      "Fits the practice well",
      "Closely supports the practice's needs"
    ]
  },
  "resource_alignment": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score how well the residency's stated resources match project needs.",
    "criteria": [
      "Lacks essential resources",
      "Provides only a few useful resources",
      "Covers most resource needs",
      "Strongly matches the key resource needs"
    ]
  },
  "development_value": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score the likely value of this opportunity for the artist's stated goals.",
    "criteria": [
      "Little connection to goals",
      "Offers limited development",
      "Supports important goals",
      "Strongly advances stated goals"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0258. Artwork Archive Sorter

ID: visual-art-artwork-archive-sorter
Sub-discipline: Artist archives
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste artwork records and an archive or exhibition collection brief, and Jev scores each work for collection relevance, documentation completeness, and contextual value to rank records for review.

Why typed decisions: Consistent scores prioritize records for human attention without treating missing or ambiguous information as invented facts.

TAM: $6B global collections software
SAM: $450M artist archive tools
SOM: $3M early reachable users

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Artwork Archive Sorter" 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 artwork records and an archive or exhibition collection brief, and Jev scores each work for collection relevance, documentation completeness, and contextual value to rank records for review.
Discipline: Visual Art (Artist archives).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: Consistent scores prioritize records for human attention without treating missing or ambiguous information as invented facts.

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": <Collection brief, archive fields, and artwork records>, "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)
{
  "collection_relevance": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score how relevant this work is to the stated collection brief.",
    "criteria": [
      "Not relevant to the brief",
      "Marginally relevant",
      "Clearly relevant",
      "Central to the collection's purpose"
    ]
  },
  "documentation_completeness": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score how complete the supplied documentation is for this work.",
    "criteria": [
      "Most essential fields are missing",
      "Several important fields are missing",
      "Only minor gaps remain",
      "Documentation is complete for the stated purpose"
    ]
  },
  "contextual_value": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score how much useful context this record adds to the collection.",
    "criteria": [
      "Adds little context",
      "Adds limited context",
      "Adds useful context",
      "Provides especially valuable context"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0259. Visual License Matcher

ID: visual-art-visual-license-matcher
Sub-discipline: Art licensing
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste a licensing brief and artwork descriptions, and Jev scores each work for usage fit, rights-condition compatibility, and visual suitability to rank licensing candidates.

Why typed decisions: Separate scores make it easier to filter creative fit and stated usage constraints without generating legal advice.

TAM: $15B global art licensing market
SAM: $900M licensing workflow tools
SOM: $5M early reachable users

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Visual License Matcher" 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 licensing brief and artwork descriptions, and Jev scores each work for usage fit, rights-condition compatibility, and visual suitability to rank licensing candidates.
Discipline: Visual Art (Art licensing).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: Separate scores make it easier to filter creative fit and stated usage constraints without generating legal advice.

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": <Licensing brief, usage conditions, and artwork descriptions>, "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)
{
  "usage_fit": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score how well this artwork fits the requested usage and audience.",
    "criteria": [
      "Poor fit for the usage",
      "Fits only a peripheral use",
      "Fits the requested use",
      "Strongly suits the use and audience"
    ]
  },
  "rights_compatibility": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score compatibility between supplied rights conditions and the requested use.",
    "criteria": [
      "Clear conflict in supplied conditions",
      "Compatibility is uncertain or limited",
      "Appears compatible on supplied details",
      "Clearly aligns with supplied conditions"
    ]
  },
  "visual_suitability": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score the artwork's suitability for the stated placement and format.",
    "criteria": [
      "Unsuitable for the placement",
      "Requires substantial adaptation",
      "Generally suits the placement",
      "Especially effective in the placement"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0260. Exhibition Theme Mapper

ID: visual-art-exhibition-theme-mapper
Sub-discipline: Curatorial research
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste an exhibition theme and proposed artwork summaries, and Jev scores each work for thematic connection, interpretive range, and contribution to the overall lineup to rank inclusions.

Why typed decisions: Dimension-level scores help curators balance a clear theme with meaningful diversity across the show.

TAM: $8B global exhibition economy
SAM: $550M curatorial planning tools
SOM: $3M early reachable organizations

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Exhibition Theme Mapper" 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 an exhibition theme and proposed artwork summaries, and Jev scores each work for thematic connection, interpretive range, and contribution to the overall lineup to rank inclusions.
Discipline: Visual Art (Curatorial research).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: Dimension-level scores help curators balance a clear theme with meaningful diversity across the show.

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": <Exhibition theme, artwork summaries, and curatorial priorities>, "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)
{
  "thematic_connection": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score the strength of this work's connection to the exhibition theme.",
    "criteria": [
      "Contradicts the theme",
      "Connects only loosely",
      "Clearly connects to the theme",
      "Offers a central expression of the theme"
    ]
  },
  "interpretive_range": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score how much this work broadens the theme's possible interpretations.",
    "criteria": [
      "Adds no useful perspective",
      "Adds a familiar or narrow perspective",
      "Adds a meaningful perspective",
      "Opens a distinctive and valuable interpretation"
    ]
  },
  "lineup_contribution": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score how much this work strengthens the proposed lineup as a whole.",
    "criteria": [
      "Weakens or duplicates the lineup",
      "Adds limited value",
      "Improves balance or progression",
      "Provides an essential anchor or contrast"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0261. Caption Matchboard

ID: visual-art-caption-matchboard
Sub-discipline: Artwork cataloguing
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: A painter pastes an artwork description, and Jev selects which extracted title or caption belongs with the work—or none—so the app copies it into the catalog.

Why typed decisions: Selecting an existing caption preserves the artist’s wording and avoids inventing attribution or artwork details.

TAM: $1B+ art cataloguing and collection software
SAM: $100M–$300M visual-arts cataloguing tools
SOM: $1M–$5M early-stage niche adoption

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Caption Matchboard" 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
A painter pastes an artwork description, and Jev selects which extracted title or caption belongs with the work—or none—so the app copies it into the catalog.
Discipline: Visual Art (Artwork cataloguing).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: Selecting an existing caption preserves the artist’s wording and avoids inventing attribution or artwork details.

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": <Artwork description and extracted caption candidates>, "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)
{
  "caption_match": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which extracted caption best identifies this artwork?",
    "criteria": {
      "candidate_1": "Best match to the artwork described",
      "candidate_2": "Plausible match but less specific",
      "candidate_3": "Weak or mismatched association",
      "none": "No candidate is supported"
    }
  },
  "caption_supported": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the description support the selected caption?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The description clearly supports it",
      "false": "The description does not support it"
    }
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0262. Medium Proofreader

ID: visual-art-medium-proofreader
Sub-discipline: Materials classification
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: An illustrator pastes a portfolio blurb, and Jev chooses the best-matching medium from extracted medium phrases or none for a searchable profile.

Why typed decisions: A typed selection keeps the artist’s actual materials terminology instead of substituting a generated label.

TAM: $500M–$1B art portfolio and discovery platforms
SAM: $50M–$150M artist profile and metadata tools
SOM: $500K–$3M initial addressable niche

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Medium Proofreader" 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
An illustrator pastes a portfolio blurb, and Jev chooses the best-matching medium from extracted medium phrases or none for a searchable profile.
Discipline: Visual Art (Materials classification).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: A typed selection keeps the artist’s actual materials terminology instead of substituting a generated label.

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": <Portfolio blurb and extracted medium phrases>, "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)
{
  "medium_phrase": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which extracted phrase most accurately names the medium used?",
    "criteria": {
      "candidate_1": "Directly names the primary medium",
      "candidate_2": "Names a relevant secondary medium",
      "candidate_3": "Mentions a medium without confirming its use",
      "none": "No phrase identifies a medium"
    }
  },
  "medium_confidence": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How clearly does the source establish the selected medium?",
    "criteria": [
      "Ambiguous mention",
      "Some evidence, with uncertainty",
      "Clear identification",
      "Explicit and unambiguous identification"
    ]
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0263. License Clause Finder

ID: visual-art-license-clause-finder
Sub-discipline: Art licensing
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: An artist pastes a licensing email, and Jev selects the extracted sentence that states the permitted usage—or none—to copy into a deal checklist.

Why typed decisions: Copying the source clause reduces the risk of changing legally meaningful wording through paraphrase.

TAM: $1B+ creative licensing and rights-management software
SAM: $100M–$300M independent-artist licensing tools
SOM: $1M–$5M focused product opportunity

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "License Clause Finder" 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
An artist pastes a licensing email, and Jev selects the extracted sentence that states the permitted usage—or none—to copy into a deal checklist.
Discipline: Visual Art (Art licensing).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: Copying the source clause reduces the risk of changing legally meaningful wording through paraphrase.

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": <Licensing email and extracted usage clauses>, "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)
{
  "usage_clause": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which extracted sentence states the actual permitted usage?",
    "criteria": {
      "candidate_1": "Directly grants or describes usage rights",
      "candidate_2": "Describes a related restriction or condition",
      "candidate_3": "Discusses usage without granting it",
      "none": "No candidate states permitted usage"
    }
  },
  "rights_explicit": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is the selected sentence explicit about the usage permission?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "It explicitly states the permission",
      "false": "It is ambiguous or does not state permission"
    }
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0264. Gallery Date Picker

ID: visual-art-gallery-date-picker
Sub-discipline: Exhibition administration
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: A gallerist pastes an exhibition email, and Jev selects the extracted date that refers to the opening reception—or none—to populate the calendar.

Why typed decisions: Choosing among literal dates avoids hallucinated dates and distinguishes openings from deadlines or install days.

TAM: $500M–$1B gallery and exhibition management software
SAM: $50M–$200M gallery scheduling tools
SOM: $500K–$3M initial niche revenue potential

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Gallery Date Picker" 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
A gallerist pastes an exhibition email, and Jev selects the extracted date that refers to the opening reception—or none—to populate the calendar.
Discipline: Visual Art (Exhibition administration).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: Choosing among literal dates avoids hallucinated dates and distinguishes openings from deadlines or install days.

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": <Exhibition email and extracted date phrases>, "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)
{
  "opening_date": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which extracted date refers to the opening reception?",
    "criteria": {
      "candidate_1": "Date explicitly tied to the opening",
      "candidate_2": "Date tied to a related public event",
      "candidate_3": "Date for installation, delivery, or a deadline",
      "none": "No candidate is the opening date"
    }
  },
  "event_match": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is the selected date explicitly associated with an opening event?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The source connects it to an opening",
      "false": "The source connects it to another event or is unclear"
    }
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0265. Portfolio Credit Audit

ID: visual-art-portfolio-credit-audit
Sub-discipline: Illustration credits
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: An illustrator pastes a project page, and Jev selects the extracted name or credit line that identifies their role—or none—for a portfolio entry.

Why typed decisions: Exact selection preserves credit as published and avoids assigning a role the source never confirms.

TAM: $500M–$1B portfolio and creator-profile software
SAM: $50M–$150M artist credit and portfolio tools
SOM: $500K–$2M early focused adoption

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Portfolio Credit Audit" 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
An illustrator pastes a project page, and Jev selects the extracted name or credit line that identifies their role—or none—for a portfolio entry.
Discipline: Visual Art (Illustration credits).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: Exact selection preserves credit as published and avoids assigning a role the source never confirms.

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": <Project page text and extracted names or credit lines>, "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)
{
  "artist_credit": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which extracted credit identifies the artist’s role on this project?",
    "criteria": {
      "candidate_1": "Explicitly credits the artist and role",
      "candidate_2": "Names the artist but not a clear role",
      "candidate_3": "Names another contributor or organization",
      "none": "No candidate supports an artist credit"
    }
  },
  "role_confirmed": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the selected credit explicitly confirm the artist’s role?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The role is stated in the source",
      "false": "The role is not stated or is unclear"
    }
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0266. Palette Note Selector

ID: visual-art-palette-note-selector
Sub-discipline: Color research
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: A painter pastes studio notes, and Jev picks the extracted color name or palette label that refers to the work—or none—for a searchable color archive.

Why typed decisions: Selecting the artist’s own color terminology keeps archive labels faithful to the notes.

TAM: $300M–$800M creative asset and color tools
SAM: $30M–$100M artist-facing color cataloguing
SOM: $300K–$2M specialist product opportunity

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Palette Note Selector" 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
A painter pastes studio notes, and Jev picks the extracted color name or palette label that refers to the work—or none—for a searchable color archive.
Discipline: Visual Art (Color research).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: Selecting the artist’s own color terminology keeps archive labels faithful to the notes.

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": <Studio notes and extracted color terms>, "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)
{
  "palette_term": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which extracted color term best refers to the work’s palette?",
    "criteria": {
      "candidate_1": "Explicit name for the overall palette",
      "candidate_2": "Prominent color used in the work",
      "candidate_3": "Color mentioned in another context",
      "none": "No candidate refers to the palette"
    }
  },
  "palette_relevance": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How directly does the selected term describe the artwork’s colors?",
    "criteria": [
      "Unrelated mention",
      "Possibly relevant",
      "Clearly relevant",
      "Explicitly describes the overall palette"
    ]
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0267. Print Edition Extractor

ID: visual-art-print-edition-extractor
Sub-discipline: Printmaking operations
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: A printmaker pastes a sales listing, and Jev selects the extracted edition notation that describes the print run—or none—to copy into inventory.

Why typed decisions: Edition notation is precise and should be copied verbatim rather than normalized into potentially incorrect text.

TAM: $300M–$700M art inventory and commerce tools
SAM: $30M–$100M printmaker inventory software
SOM: $300K–$2M early niche opportunity

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Print Edition Extractor" 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
A printmaker pastes a sales listing, and Jev selects the extracted edition notation that describes the print run—or none—to copy into inventory.
Discipline: Visual Art (Printmaking operations).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: Edition notation is precise and should be copied verbatim rather than normalized into potentially incorrect text.

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": <Sales listing and extracted edition notations>, "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)
{
  "edition_notation": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which extracted notation describes the edition size or numbering?",
    "criteria": {
      "candidate_1": "Explicit edition size or numbered fraction",
      "candidate_2": "Potential edition reference with missing context",
      "candidate_3": "A number unrelated to edition size",
      "none": "No candidate states an edition"
    }
  },
  "edition_explicit": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the selected notation explicitly refer to the print edition?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "It is clearly an edition notation",
      "false": "It is not clearly an edition notation"
    }
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0268. Exhibition Theme Matcher

ID: visual-art-exhibition-theme-matcher
Sub-discipline: Curatorial research
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: A curator pastes an exhibition proposal, and Jev selects the extracted phrase that states its central theme—or none—for a planning board.

Why typed decisions: Selecting a phrase already written by the curator keeps the proposal’s framing intact.

TAM: $500M–$1B exhibition planning and curatorial software
SAM: $50M–$150M curator research tools
SOM: $500K–$3M focused market entry

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Exhibition Theme Matcher" 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
A curator pastes an exhibition proposal, and Jev selects the extracted phrase that states its central theme—or none—for a planning board.
Discipline: Visual Art (Curatorial research).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: Selecting a phrase already written by the curator keeps the proposal’s framing intact.

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": <Exhibition proposal and extracted thematic phrases>, "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)
{
  "central_theme": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which extracted phrase most directly states the exhibition’s central theme?",
    "criteria": {
      "candidate_1": "Explicit summary of the exhibition’s central concern",
      "candidate_2": "Relevant recurring topic",
      "candidate_3": "A single artwork subject or side detail",
      "none": "No candidate states a central theme"
    }
  },
  "theme_coverage": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How well does the selected phrase represent the proposal as a whole?",
    "criteria": [
      "Represents a minor detail",
      "Covers one substantial part",
      "Captures most of the proposal",
      "Explicitly summarizes its central concern"
    ]
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0269. Artwork Dimension Sorter

ID: visual-art-artwork-dimension-sorter
Sub-discipline: Collection management
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: A gallery assistant pastes an artwork record, and Jev selects which extracted measurement belongs to the framed work—or none—to copy into the collection database.

Why typed decisions: A typed choice can distinguish artwork, frame, and shipping measurements without altering the source values.

TAM: $500M–$1B collection management software
SAM: $50M–$200M visual-art inventory tools
SOM: $500K–$3M initial product opportunity

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Artwork Dimension Sorter" 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
A gallery assistant pastes an artwork record, and Jev selects which extracted measurement belongs to the framed work—or none—to copy into the collection database.
Discipline: Visual Art (Collection management).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: A typed choice can distinguish artwork, frame, and shipping measurements without altering the source values.

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": <Artwork record and extracted measurements with nearby labels>, "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)
{
  "framed_measurement": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which extracted measurement refers to the framed artwork?",
    "criteria": {
      "candidate_1": "Explicitly labeled framed dimensions",
      "candidate_2": "Dimensions of the artwork without frame",
      "candidate_3": "Packing, wall, or installation measurement",
      "none": "No candidate gives framed dimensions"
    }
  },
  "label_match": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the selected value have a source label supporting that measurement type?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "A nearby label confirms the measurement type",
      "false": "The label is absent or points to another type"
    }
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0270. Process Note Picker

ID: visual-art-process-note-picker
Sub-discipline: Artist documentation
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: A generative artist pastes process notes, and Jev selects the extracted sentence that describes the technique actually used—or none for a project log.

Why typed decisions: Choosing a source sentence documents real process without embellishing or inventing artistic methods.

TAM: $300M–$800M creative workflow and documentation tools
SAM: $30M–$100M generative-art process tools
SOM: $300K–$2M specialist adoption opportunity

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Process Note Picker" 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
A generative artist pastes process notes, and Jev selects the extracted sentence that describes the technique actually used—or none for a project log.
Discipline: Visual Art (Artist documentation).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: Choosing a source sentence documents real process without embellishing or inventing artistic methods.

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": <Process notes and extracted technique sentences>, "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)
{
  "technique_sentence": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which sentence describes a technique used in this project?",
    "criteria": {
      "candidate_1": "Direct description of a technique performed",
      "candidate_2": "Description of a planned technique",
      "candidate_3": "General reflection without a concrete technique",
      "none": "No candidate describes a technique used"
    }
  },
  "performed_technique": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the selected sentence describe completed work rather than an intention?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "It describes a technique already used",
      "false": "It describes a plan, possibility, or unclear action"
    }
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0271. Reference Image Triage

ID: visual-art-reference-image-triage
Sub-discipline: Illustration research
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: An illustrator pastes research notes, and Jev selects the extracted source citation tied to a chosen visual reference—or none—to attach to the project board.

Why typed decisions: Selecting a citation from the source preserves attribution and avoids fabricating references.

TAM: $500M–$1B creative research and asset-management tools
SAM: $50M–$150M illustrator reference-management tools
SOM: $500K–$3M niche market entry

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Reference Image Triage" 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
An illustrator pastes research notes, and Jev selects the extracted source citation tied to a chosen visual reference—or none—to attach to the project board.
Discipline: Visual Art (Illustration research).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: Selecting a citation from the source preserves attribution and avoids fabricating references.

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": <Research notes and extracted citations or URLs>, "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)
{
  "reference_citation": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which extracted citation is tied to the visual reference being discussed?",
    "criteria": {
      "candidate_1": "Direct citation for the relevant reference",
      "candidate_2": "Citation for a related visual source",
      "candidate_3": "Unrelated link or general resource",
      "none": "No candidate cites the reference"
    }
  },
  "citation_supported": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the source connect the selected citation to that reference?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The connection is explicit or clear",
      "false": "The connection is absent or uncertain"
    }
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0272. Artist Bio Lineup

ID: visual-art-artist-bio-lineup
Sub-discipline: Artist communications
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: An artist pastes several draft bio lines, and Jev selects the extracted sentence best suited to a short exhibition profile—or none—to reuse verbatim.

Why typed decisions: Selecting a line avoids generated biography claims and leaves the artist’s approved wording untouched.

TAM: $500M–$1B creator profile and portfolio platforms
SAM: $50M–$150M visual-artist communications tools
SOM: $500K–$2M early niche opportunity

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Artist Bio Lineup" 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
An artist pastes several draft bio lines, and Jev selects the extracted sentence best suited to a short exhibition profile—or none—to reuse verbatim.
Discipline: Visual Art (Artist communications).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: Selecting a line avoids generated biography claims and leaves the artist’s approved wording untouched.

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": <Bio drafts and extracted sentences>, "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)
{
  "bio_sentence": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which sentence best fits a concise professional exhibition profile?",
    "criteria": {
      "candidate_1": "Clear sentence about practice or medium",
      "candidate_2": "Useful sentence about experience or recognition",
      "candidate_3": "Personal detail or vague promotional claim",
      "none": "No candidate fits a professional profile"
    }
  },
  "claim_grounded": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is the selected sentence a factual claim supported by the supplied text?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The supplied text supports the claim",
      "false": "The claim is unsupported or ambiguous"
    }
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0273. Condition Report Matcher

ID: visual-art-condition-report-matcher
Sub-discipline: Art conservation
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: A conservator pastes a condition report, and Jev selects the extracted observation that corresponds to a chosen artwork area—or none—to attach to a checklist.

Why typed decisions: Exact selection keeps condition observations traceable and avoids introducing unsupported conservation findings.

TAM: $500M–$1B conservation and collections software
SAM: $50M–$200M condition-reporting tools
SOM: $500K–$3M specialist adoption opportunity

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Condition Report Matcher" 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
A conservator pastes a condition report, and Jev selects the extracted observation that corresponds to a chosen artwork area—or none—to attach to a checklist.
Discipline: Visual Art (Art conservation).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: Exact selection keeps condition observations traceable and avoids introducing unsupported conservation findings.

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": <Condition report and extracted observations with location terms>, "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)
{
  "area_observation": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which observation applies to the specified artwork area?",
    "criteria": {
      "candidate_1": "Observation explicitly tied to that area",
      "candidate_2": "Observation on a nearby or related area",
      "candidate_3": "General condition statement without area match",
      "none": "No candidate applies to that area"
    }
  },
  "observation_located": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is the selected observation explicitly associated with the specified area?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The location is stated or clearly linked",
      "false": "The location is missing or mismatched"
    }
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0274. Commission Brief Sorter

ID: visual-art-commission-brief-sorter
Sub-discipline: Illustration commissions
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: An illustrator pastes a client brief, and Jev selects the extracted sentence that states the deliverable—or none—to copy into a project checklist.

Why typed decisions: Choosing a literal requirement avoids turning ambiguous client language into invented scope.

TAM: $500M–$1B freelance creative workflow software
SAM: $50M–$150M commission-management tools for illustrators
SOM: $500K–$3M focused product opportunity

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Commission Brief Sorter" 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
An illustrator pastes a client brief, and Jev selects the extracted sentence that states the deliverable—or none—to copy into a project checklist.
Discipline: Visual Art (Illustration commissions).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: Choosing a literal requirement avoids turning ambiguous client language into invented scope.

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": <Client brief and extracted requirement sentences>, "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)
{
  "deliverable_sentence": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which sentence states a requested deliverable?",
    "criteria": {
      "candidate_1": "Explicitly names an item the artist must deliver",
      "candidate_2": "Describes a style preference or creative direction",
      "candidate_3": "Describes timing, feedback, or process",
      "none": "No candidate states a deliverable"
    }
  },
  "requirement_explicit": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the selected sentence clearly require that deliverable?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The requirement is stated clearly",
      "false": "It is optional, implied, or unclear"
    }
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0275. Wall Text Clipbook

ID: visual-art-wall-text-clipbook
Sub-discipline: Gallery interpretation
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: A gallerist pastes an approved wall-text draft, and Jev selects the extracted sentence most relevant to a specific artwork—or none—to reuse in a label.

Why typed decisions: Selecting approved copy preserves institutional review and avoids generating unapproved interpretive claims.

TAM: $300M–$800M museum and gallery interpretation tools
SAM: $30M–$100M wall-text and label workflows
SOM: $300K–$2M initial niche opportunity

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Wall Text Clipbook" 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
A gallerist pastes an approved wall-text draft, and Jev selects the extracted sentence most relevant to a specific artwork—or none—to reuse in a label.
Discipline: Visual Art (Gallery interpretation).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: Selecting approved copy preserves institutional review and avoids generating unapproved interpretive claims.

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": <Approved wall-text draft and extracted sentences>, "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)
{
  "label_sentence": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which sentence most directly relates to the specified artwork?",
    "criteria": {
      "candidate_1": "Names or describes the artwork directly",
      "candidate_2": "Discusses its artist or a closely related theme",
      "candidate_3": "Provides broad exhibition context only",
      "none": "No candidate is relevant to this artwork"
    }
  },
  "artwork_specific": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the selected sentence make a supported claim about the artwork?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The sentence is specifically supported by the draft",
      "false": "It is general, unsupported, or mismatched"
    }
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0276. Image Alttext Selector

ID: visual-art-image-alttext-selector
Sub-discipline: Art accessibility
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: An artist pastes draft accessibility notes, and Jev selects the extracted description that best identifies a particular image—or none—to use as its alt text.

Why typed decisions: Choosing among artist-written descriptions avoids invented visual details and preserves human-approved language.

TAM: $500M–$1B accessibility and digital publishing tools
SAM: $50M–$150M art-focused accessibility workflows
SOM: $500K–$3M early adoption potential

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Image Alttext Selector" 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
An artist pastes draft accessibility notes, and Jev selects the extracted description that best identifies a particular image—or none—to use as its alt text.
Discipline: Visual Art (Art accessibility).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: Choosing among artist-written descriptions avoids invented visual details and preserves human-approved language.

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": <Accessibility notes and extracted image descriptions>, "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)
{
  "image_description": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which description best matches the specified image?",
    "criteria": {
      "candidate_1": "Describes the image’s visible subject and composition",
      "candidate_2": "Describes a relevant detail but not the whole image",
      "candidate_3": "Describes the artist’s intent rather than visible content",
      "none": "No candidate describes this image"
    }
  },
  "visible_content": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the selected description focus on content visible in the image?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "It describes visible content",
      "false": "It relies on unsupported intent or unrelated context"
    }
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0277. Material Safety Finder

ID: visual-art-material-safety-finder
Sub-discipline: Studio safety
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: A painter pastes a supplier safety sheet, and Jev selects the extracted line that names a handling precaution—or none—to copy into a studio checklist.

Why typed decisions: Verbatim selection is safer than generated paraphrase when handling instructions must remain faithful to the source.

TAM: $500M–$1B workplace safety information tools
SAM: $30M–$100M independent studio safety tools
SOM: $300K–$2M specialist market opportunity

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Material Safety Finder" 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
A painter pastes a supplier safety sheet, and Jev selects the extracted line that names a handling precaution—or none—to copy into a studio checklist.
Discipline: Visual Art (Studio safety).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: Verbatim selection is safer than generated paraphrase when handling instructions must remain faithful to the source.

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": <Safety sheet and extracted precaution statements>, "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)
{
  "safety_precaution": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which line states a handling precaution for the named material?",
    "criteria": {
      "candidate_1": "Direct handling or protective-equipment instruction",
      "candidate_2": "Storage or disposal precaution",
      "candidate_3": "General hazard statement without an action",
      "none": "No candidate gives a relevant precaution"
    }
  },
  "precaution_direct": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the selected line directly apply to handling this material?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "It is a direct handling precaution",
      "false": "It is general, unrelated, or unclear"
    }
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0278. Artwork Provenance Clip

ID: visual-art-artwork-provenance-clip
Sub-discipline: Art provenance research
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: A gallerist pastes provenance notes, and Jev selects the extracted ownership event tied to a particular date—or none—to copy into a timeline.

Why typed decisions: Choosing a documented event preserves source language and avoids fabricating ownership history.

TAM: $500M–$1B art-market research and collection tools
SAM: $50M–$150M provenance workflow software
SOM: $500K–$3M focused product opportunity

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Artwork Provenance Clip" 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
A gallerist pastes provenance notes, and Jev selects the extracted ownership event tied to a particular date—or none—to copy into a timeline.
Discipline: Visual Art (Art provenance research).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: Choosing a documented event preserves source language and avoids fabricating ownership history.

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": <Provenance notes and extracted event phrases>, "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)
{
  "ownership_event": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which extracted phrase describes an ownership or transfer event?",
    "criteria": {
      "candidate_1": "Explicit purchase, gift, inheritance, or transfer",
      "candidate_2": "Exhibition or loan event rather than ownership",
      "candidate_3": "Unverified speculation or unrelated mention",
      "none": "No candidate describes an ownership event"
    }
  },
  "event_documented": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is the selected event presented as documented in the source?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The source states it as a recorded event",
      "false": "It is speculative, unclear, or not documented"
    }
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0279. Series Link Curator

ID: visual-art-series-link-curator
Sub-discipline: Art series organization
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: A painter pastes notes about a body of work, and Jev selects the extracted phrase that connects a new piece to an existing series—or none—to reuse as a tag.

Why typed decisions: Selecting the artist’s own series language keeps organization consistent without inventing a conceptual connection.

TAM: $300M–$800M creative asset organization software
SAM: $30M–$100M artist series and project tools
SOM: $300K–$2M early niche opportunity

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Series Link Curator" 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
A painter pastes notes about a body of work, and Jev selects the extracted phrase that connects a new piece to an existing series—or none—to reuse as a tag.
Discipline: Visual Art (Art series organization).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: Selecting the artist’s own series language keeps organization consistent without inventing a conceptual connection.

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": <Series notes and extracted project or series names>, "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)
{
  "series_phrase": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which phrase connects this piece to an existing series?",
    "criteria": {
      "candidate_1": "Explicit name of the relevant series",
      "candidate_2": "Phrase describing a recurring theme across the series",
      "candidate_3": "Name or theme belonging to a different project",
      "none": "No candidate supports a series link"
    }
  },
  "series_connection": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How strongly does the source connect the piece to the selected series?",
    "criteria": [
      "No clear connection",
      "Possible thematic connection",
      "Strong recurring connection",
      "Explicitly identified as part of the series"
    ]
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0280. Juror Criteria Matcher

ID: visual-art-juror-criteria-matcher
Sub-discipline: Art submissions
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: An artist pastes an open-call page and their draft submission, and Jev selects the extracted sentence that addresses a stated eligibility criterion—or none—to flag for review.

Why typed decisions: Matching existing text to explicit criteria highlights evidence without generating claims or rewriting the application.

TAM: $500M–$1B application and creative opportunity platforms
SAM: $50M–$150M visual-artist submission tools
SOM: $500K–$3M focused market entry

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Juror Criteria Matcher" 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
An artist pastes an open-call page and their draft submission, and Jev selects the extracted sentence that addresses a stated eligibility criterion—or none—to flag for review.
Discipline: Visual Art (Art submissions).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: Matching existing text to explicit criteria highlights evidence without generating claims or rewriting the application.

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": <Open-call criteria, draft submission, and extracted sentences>, "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)
{
  "criterion_evidence": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which submission sentence best addresses the selected eligibility criterion?",
    "criteria": {
      "candidate_1": "Direct evidence that meets the criterion",
      "candidate_2": "Related evidence with an incomplete match",
      "candidate_3": "Statement unrelated to eligibility",
      "none": "No sentence addresses the criterion"
    }
  },
  "criterion_met": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the selected sentence establish that the criterion is met?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The sentence provides sufficient direct evidence",
      "false": "The evidence is incomplete or unrelated"
    }
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0281. Provenance Proof Desk

ID: visual-art-provenance-proof-desk
Sub-discipline: Art provenance
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Gallerists paste artwork records and supporting documents, and Jev checks each provenance claim, classifies its evidence, and routes uncertain claims to human review.

Why typed decisions: Typed decisions make claim-by-claim verification and escalation consistent without inventing provenance narratives.

TAM: $1B–$3B global provenance services
SAM: $100M–$300M galleries and dealers
SOM: $1M–$5M initial software market

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Provenance Proof Desk" 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
Gallerists paste artwork records and supporting documents, and Jev checks each provenance claim, classifies its evidence, and routes uncertain claims to human review.
Discipline: Visual Art (Art provenance).
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 decisions make claim-by-claim verification and escalation consistent without inventing provenance narratives.

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": <Artwork record, provenance claims, and document excerpts>, "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)
{
  "claim_supported": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the cited evidence support this provenance claim?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Evidence directly supports the claim.",
      "false": "Evidence is missing, indirect, or contradictory."
    }
  },
  "evidence_kind": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "What best describes the strongest cited evidence?",
    "criteria": {
      "primary": "Contemporaneous record or original document.",
      "institutional": "Record from a recognized institution.",
      "secondary": "Later account or catalog reference.",
      "weak": "Unverified, incomplete, or unclear source."
    }
  },
  "review_priority": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How urgently should a human review this claim?",
    "criteria": [
      "Routine: strong evidence and no conflict.",
      "Elevated: partial evidence or a minor gap.",
      "Urgent: contradiction, high-value claim, or weak evidence."
    ]
  }
}

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

---

## 0282. Rights Boundary Check

ID: visual-art-rights-boundary-check
Sub-discipline: Image licensing
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Artists paste usage requests alongside license terms, and Jev verifies each requested use against the terms and sends uncertain matches to a human queue.

Why typed decisions: A yes/no fit decision per usage field is safer than generated legal-sounding prose.

TAM: $2B–$6B visual licensing services
SAM: $200M–$600M independent art licensing
SOM: $2M–$8M artist licensing tools

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Rights Boundary Check" 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
Artists paste usage requests alongside license terms, and Jev verifies each requested use against the terms and sends uncertain matches to a human queue.
Discipline: Visual Art (Image licensing).
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: A yes/no fit decision per usage field is safer than generated legal-sounding prose.

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": <License terms, requested uses, and artwork metadata>, "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)
{
  "use_permitted": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Do the license terms permit this specific requested use?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The requested use falls within explicit terms.",
      "false": "Terms exclude it, are silent, or conflict."
    }
  },
  "use_category": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which usage category best fits the request?",
    "criteria": {
      "editorial": "Editorial or educational use.",
      "commercial": "Advertising, product, or paid promotion.",
      "display": "Exhibition, portfolio, or public display.",
      "derivative": "Adaptation, modification, or merchandise."
    }
  },
  "term_clarity": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How clear are the applicable license terms?",
    "criteria": [
      "Clear: explicit scope and conditions.",
      "Partial: scope is clear but a condition is ambiguous.",
      "Unclear: key terms are missing or conflicting."
    ]
  }
}

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

---

## 0283. Condition Report Triage

ID: visual-art-condition-report-triage
Sub-discipline: Artwork conservation
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Conservators paste condition notes and image observations, and Jev checks whether each recorded damage claim is supported before uncertain cases enter review.

Why typed decisions: Typed evidence checks expose unsupported condition fields without replacing a conservator’s judgment.

TAM: $1B–$4B conservation services
SAM: $100M–$350M collection condition reporting
SOM: $1M–$6M conservation documentation software

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Condition Report Triage" 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
Conservators paste condition notes and image observations, and Jev checks whether each recorded damage claim is supported before uncertain cases enter review.
Discipline: Visual Art (Artwork conservation).
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 checks expose unsupported condition fields without replacing a conservator’s 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": <Condition notes, image observations, and artwork fields>, "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)
{
  "damage_visible": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the supplied observation support the recorded damage field?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The observation clearly matches the recorded condition.",
      "false": "The field is unsupported, obscured, or contradicted."
    }
  },
  "condition_class": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which condition category best fits the supported observation?",
    "criteria": {
      "surface": "Surface dirt, abrasion, or varnish change.",
      "structural": "Tear, crack, deformation, or instability.",
      "color": "Fading, discoloration, or pigment change.",
      "uncertain": "Evidence does not support a reliable category."
    }
  },
  "intervention_risk": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How much human review does this condition need?",
    "criteria": [
      "Low: minor, clearly documented issue.",
      "Medium: ambiguous or potentially changing condition.",
      "High: structural concern or conflicting observations."
    ]
  }
}

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

---

## 0284. Portfolio Fit Sorter

ID: visual-art-portfolio-fit-sorter
Sub-discipline: Artist representation
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Artists paste portfolio entries and gallery submission criteria, and Jev verifies each fit claim and escalates borderline submissions for human assessment.

Why typed decisions: Structured fit decisions let galleries triage portfolios without treating generated persuasion as evidence.

TAM: $500M–$2B artist representation services
SAM: $50M–$200M gallery submission workflows
SOM: $500K–$3M portfolio triage tools

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Portfolio Fit Sorter" 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
Artists paste portfolio entries and gallery submission criteria, and Jev verifies each fit claim and escalates borderline submissions for human assessment.
Discipline: Visual Art (Artist representation).
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: Structured fit decisions let galleries triage portfolios without treating generated persuasion as evidence.

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": <Portfolio metadata, images descriptions, and gallery criteria>, "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)
{
  "criterion_met": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does this portfolio entry meet the stated gallery criterion?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The supplied portfolio evidence directly meets it.",
      "false": "Evidence is absent, weak, or inconsistent."
    }
  },
  "fit_area": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which criterion area is most relevant to this entry?",
    "criteria": {
      "medium": "Material, medium, or process.",
      "style": "Visual approach or subject matter.",
      "career": "Exhibition history or career stage.",
      "presentation": "Portfolio completeness or image quality."
    }
  },
  "fit_strength": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How strong is the evidenced fit?",
    "criteria": [
      "Strong: multiple clear matches.",
      "Moderate: one clear match or several partial matches.",
      "Weak: little evidence or notable mismatch."
    ]
  }
}

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

---

## 0285. Edition Ledger Sentinel

ID: visual-art-edition-ledger-sentinel
Sub-discipline: Printmaking editions
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Printmakers paste edition records and sale entries, and Jev checks each edition, proof, and availability claim against the ledger, routing inconsistencies to review.

Why typed decisions: Typed consistency checks can flag specific edition conflicts without silently rewriting the record.

TAM: $500M–$2B print edition management
SAM: $50M–$180M print studios and dealers
SOM: $500K–$3M edition tracking software

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Edition Ledger Sentinel" 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
Printmakers paste edition records and sale entries, and Jev checks each edition, proof, and availability claim against the ledger, routing inconsistencies to review.
Discipline: Visual Art (Printmaking editions).
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 consistency checks can flag specific edition conflicts without silently rewriting the record.

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": <Edition ledger, proof labels, and transaction entries>, "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)
{
  "edition_consistent": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does this entry agree with the stated edition and proof rules?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Numbering and category match the recorded rules.",
      "false": "Numbering, category, or status conflicts with the rules."
    }
  },
  "entry_type": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "What kind of print entry is this?",
    "criteria": {
      "numbered": "Numbered edition impression.",
      "artist_proof": "Artist proof or related reserved proof.",
      "trial": "Trial, color, or printer proof.",
      "unique": "Unique work or monotype."
    }
  },
  "ledger_risk": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How seriously should this discrepancy be reviewed?",
    "criteria": [
      "Low: no meaningful discrepancy.",
      "Medium: incomplete or ambiguous entry.",
      "High: duplicate number, conflicting status, or sale risk."
    ]
  }
}

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

---

## 0286. Exhibition Label Audit

ID: visual-art-exhibition-label-audit
Sub-discipline: Gallery interpretation
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Gallerists paste draft labels and verified artwork records, and Jev checks each factual label field against the record and routes uncertain fields for staff review.

Why typed decisions: Field-level typed verification prevents unsupported dates or materials from slipping into public labels.

TAM: $1B–$3B exhibition interpretation services
SAM: $150M–$500M gallery label workflows
SOM: $1M–$5M exhibition content QA tools

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Exhibition Label Audit" 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
Gallerists paste draft labels and verified artwork records, and Jev checks each factual label field against the record and routes uncertain fields for staff review.
Discipline: Visual Art (Gallery interpretation).
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: Field-level typed verification prevents unsupported dates or materials from slipping into public labels.

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": <Draft label fields and approved artwork records>, "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)
{
  "field_verified": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is this label field supported by the approved artwork record?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The record explicitly supports the field.",
      "false": "The field is absent, inconsistent, or ambiguous."
    }
  },
  "field_kind": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which label field is being checked?",
    "criteria": {
      "identity": "Title, artist, or attribution.",
      "date": "Date or period.",
      "material": "Medium, support, or dimensions.",
      "credit": "Collection, lender, or provenance credit."
    }
  },
  "visitor_impact": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How important is human review before publication?",
    "criteria": [
      "Low: minor nonessential detail.",
      "Medium: useful context or incomplete evidence.",
      "High: identity, attribution, or material discrepancy."
    ]
  }
}

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

---

## 0287. Palette Claim Inspector

ID: visual-art-palette-claim-inspector
Sub-discipline: Color analysis
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Artists paste palette descriptions and sampled image colors, and Jev verifies color and material claims against the samples, escalating uncertain matches.

Why typed decisions: Typed match judgments are more useful than fluent but potentially inaccurate descriptions of color evidence.

TAM: $1B–$4B digital color tools
SAM: $100M–$400M artist palette analysis
SOM: $1M–$5M palette verification apps

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Palette Claim Inspector" 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
Artists paste palette descriptions and sampled image colors, and Jev verifies color and material claims against the samples, escalating uncertain matches.
Discipline: Visual Art (Color analysis).
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 match judgments are more useful than fluent but potentially inaccurate descriptions of color evidence.

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": <Palette claims, image samples, and medium 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)
{
  "palette_supported": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Do the supplied samples support this palette claim?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Samples visibly support the stated color relationship.",
      "false": "Samples conflict, are insufficient, or are unreliable."
    }
  },
  "claim_scope": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "What kind of palette claim is being checked?",
    "criteria": {
      "hue": "Named hues or color family.",
      "temperature": "Warm-cool balance.",
      "relationship": "Contrast, harmony, or complementarity.",
      "material": "Pigment or medium color behavior."
    }
  },
  "sample_reliability": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How reliable are the samples for this check?",
    "criteria": [
      "High: calibrated, representative samples.",
      "Medium: usable samples with capture limitations.",
      "Low: poor lighting, compression, or missing context."
    ]
  }
}

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

---

## 0288. Commission Scope Guard

ID: visual-art-commission-scope-guard-1
Sub-discipline: Art commissions
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Artists paste a commission brief and agreed scope, and Jev checks each requested deliverable against the agreement and sends ambiguous changes to human review.

Why typed decisions: Typed scope checks identify actionable mismatches without drafting negotiation messages.

TAM: $1B–$3B commission marketplaces and services
SAM: $100M–$350M independent artist commissions
SOM: $1M–$5M commission workflow tools

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Commission Scope Guard" 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
Artists paste a commission brief and agreed scope, and Jev checks each requested deliverable against the agreement and sends ambiguous changes to human review.
Discipline: Visual Art (Art commissions).
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 scope checks identify actionable mismatches without drafting negotiation messages.

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": <Commission agreement, brief, and change requests>, "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)
{
  "within_scope": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is this requested deliverable covered by the agreed scope?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The agreement explicitly includes it.",
      "false": "It is excluded, unmentioned, or inconsistent."
    }
  },
  "change_kind": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "What kind of scope item is being checked?",
    "criteria": {
      "format": "File format, size, or output count.",
      "revision": "Revision round or alteration.",
      "usage": "Rights, territory, or duration.",
      "schedule": "Milestone, deadline, or delivery timing."
    }
  },
  "change_impact": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How much review does this request need?",
    "criteria": [
      "Low: clearly covered and low impact.",
      "Medium: ambiguous term or modest scope change.",
      "High: major rights, cost, or schedule impact."
    ]
  }
}

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

---

## 0289. Mural Site Readiness

ID: visual-art-mural-site-readiness
Sub-discipline: Public art planning
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Muralists paste site surveys, wall photos, and project requirements, and Jev verifies each site-readiness claim and escalates safety or access uncertainties.

Why typed decisions: Typed checks connect specific site evidence to requirements while leaving consequential judgments to people.

TAM: $1B–$4B public art projects
SAM: $100M–$400M mural planning and administration
SOM: $1M–$6M site readiness tools

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Mural Site Readiness" 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
Muralists paste site surveys, wall photos, and project requirements, and Jev verifies each site-readiness claim and escalates safety or access uncertainties.
Discipline: Visual Art (Public art planning).
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 checks connect specific site evidence to requirements while leaving consequential judgments to people.

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": <Site survey fields, photographs, and project requirements>, "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)
{
  "requirement_met": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the supplied site evidence satisfy this requirement?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Evidence directly supports the requirement.",
      "false": "Evidence is missing, contradictory, or inadequate."
    }
  },
  "site_factor": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which site factor is being assessed?",
    "criteria": {
      "surface": "Wall material and surface condition.",
      "access": "Equipment, height, and access.",
      "exposure": "Weather, sun, or moisture exposure.",
      "permission": "Ownership, approval, or site restrictions."
    }
  },
  "site_risk": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "What is the human review priority for this factor?",
    "criteria": [
      "Low: clear evidence and routine condition.",
      "Medium: incomplete evidence or moderate concern.",
      "High: safety, permission, or major surface uncertainty."
    ]
  }
}

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

---

## 0290. Artwork Match Verifier

ID: visual-art-artwork-match-verifier
Sub-discipline: Collection management
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Registrars paste inventory records and incoming artwork details, and Jev checks whether each candidate match is evidence-supported, escalating ambiguous matches.

Why typed decisions: Typed match classifications reduce mistaken merges while preserving human review for lookalike works.

TAM: $2B–$6B collection management
SAM: $200M–$700M museum and gallery collections
SOM: $2M–$10M collection matching tools

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Artwork Match Verifier" 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
Registrars paste inventory records and incoming artwork details, and Jev checks whether each candidate match is evidence-supported, escalating ambiguous matches.
Discipline: Visual Art (Collection management).
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 match classifications reduce mistaken merges while preserving human review for lookalike works.

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": <Inventory records, incoming details, and image references>, "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)
{
  "same_artwork": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the evidence support that these records describe the same artwork?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Distinctive identifiers and details align.",
      "false": "Details conflict or evidence is insufficient."
    }
  },
  "match_basis": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "What is the strongest basis for the candidate match?",
    "criteria": {
      "identifier": "Accession number or unique identifier.",
      "visual": "Distinctive visual features.",
      "metadata": "Artist, title, date, and medium align.",
      "weak": "Only generic or incomplete details align."
    }
  },
  "merge_confidence": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How cautiously should the candidate be handled?",
    "criteria": [
      "Low concern: multiple distinctive matches.",
      "Medium concern: partial match or missing fields.",
      "High concern: conflicting identifiers or weak evidence."
    ]
  }
}

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

---

## 0291. Reference Image Gate

ID: visual-art-reference-image-gate
Sub-discipline: Illustration research
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Illustrators paste reference images with source and usage notes, and Jev verifies attribution and usage claims from supplied evidence, routing uncertain items to review.

Why typed decisions: Typed checks distinguish supported source facts from assumptions without generating citations.

TAM: $1B–$4B creative research tools
SAM: $100M–$400M illustration reference workflows
SOM: $1M–$5M reference verification apps

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Reference Image 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
Illustrators paste reference images with source and usage notes, and Jev verifies attribution and usage claims from supplied evidence, routing uncertain items to review.
Discipline: Visual Art (Illustration research).
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 checks distinguish supported source facts from assumptions without generating citations.

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": <Reference metadata, URLs, and intended use>, "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)
{
  "source_claim_verified": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the supplied source evidence support the attribution claim?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The source clearly identifies the referenced creator or work.",
      "false": "The source is unclear, missing, or contradictory."
    }
  },
  "reference_role": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "What role does this reference play?",
    "criteria": {
      "anatomy": "Pose, anatomy, or gesture reference.",
      "object": "Object, setting, or material reference.",
      "style": "Visual style or technique study.",
      "direct": "Close depiction or source-derived element."
    }
  },
  "usage_concern": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How much human review does this reference need?",
    "criteria": [
      "Low: source and intended use are clear.",
      "Medium: attribution or use context is incomplete.",
      "High: close copying concern or unclear rights context."
    ]
  }
}

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

---

## 0292. AI Disclosure Checker

ID: visual-art-ai-disclosure-checker
Sub-discipline: Generative art compliance
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Generative artists paste process disclosures and project records, and Jev verifies each declared tool or training-data claim against supplied evidence and escalates gaps.

Why typed decisions: Typed evidence checks make disclosure completeness measurable without generating policy language.

TAM: $1B–$5B AI content governance
SAM: $100M–$500M creative disclosure workflows
SOM: $1M–$8M generative art compliance tools

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "AI Disclosure Checker" 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
Generative artists paste process disclosures and project records, and Jev verifies each declared tool or training-data claim against supplied evidence and escalates gaps.
Discipline: Visual Art (Generative art compliance).
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 checks make disclosure completeness measurable without generating policy language.

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": <Disclosure fields, tool records, and project evidence>, "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)
{
  "disclosure_supported": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the evidence support this disclosure field?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Records support the stated process or tool use.",
      "false": "The claim is unsupported, incomplete, or contradicted."
    }
  },
  "disclosure_area": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which disclosure area is being checked?",
    "criteria": {
      "tool": "Model, application, or version used.",
      "input": "Prompts, references, or source materials.",
      "process": "Human edits, selection, or compositing.",
      "rights": "Training, permission, or usage assertion."
    }
  },
  "disclosure_risk": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How urgently should this disclosure be reviewed?",
    "criteria": [
      "Low: complete and well evidenced.",
      "Medium: a noncritical field is unclear.",
      "High: rights or material process claim is unsupported."
    ]
  }
}

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

---

## 0293. Artwork Shipping Fit

ID: visual-art-artwork-shipping-fit
Sub-discipline: Art logistics
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Artists paste packing plans, artwork dimensions, and carrier limits, and Jev checks each packing and handling claim against the shipment requirements, escalating uncertain fits.

Why typed decisions: Typed requirement checks catch concrete mismatches without pretending to replace a shipper’s assessment.

TAM: $2B–$8B fine art logistics
SAM: $200M–$800M independent art shipping
SOM: $1M–$7M shipping compliance tools

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Artwork Shipping Fit" 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
Artists paste packing plans, artwork dimensions, and carrier limits, and Jev checks each packing and handling claim against the shipment requirements, escalating uncertain fits.
Discipline: Visual Art (Art logistics).
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 requirement checks catch concrete mismatches without pretending to replace a shipper’s assessment.

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": <Artwork dimensions, packing plan, and carrier requirements>, "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)
{
  "requirement_satisfied": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the packing plan meet this stated shipping requirement?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The plan explicitly satisfies the requirement.",
      "false": "The plan conflicts, omits details, or lacks evidence."
    }
  },
  "requirement_type": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which shipping requirement is being checked?",
    "criteria": {
      "size": "Dimensions, weight, or crate clearance.",
      "protection": "Cushioning, glazing, or surface protection.",
      "handling": "Orientation, lifting, or fragile handling.",
      "environment": "Temperature, moisture, or transit duration."
    }
  },
  "shipment_risk": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How important is human review before dispatch?",
    "criteria": [
      "Low: routine requirement clearly met.",
      "Medium: incomplete packing evidence.",
      "High: possible damage, fit, or handling failure."
    ]
  }
}

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

---

## 0294. Gallery Loan Checker

ID: visual-art-gallery-loan-checker
Sub-discipline: Exhibition loans
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Registrars paste loan agreements and exhibition plans, and Jev verifies each planned condition against the agreement and routes uncertain conflicts to review.

Why typed decisions: Typed checks expose agreement mismatches by field without generating legal interpretations.

TAM: $1B–$4B exhibition loan administration
SAM: $150M–$500M gallery and museum loan workflows
SOM: $1M–$6M loan compliance software

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Gallery Loan Checker" 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
Registrars paste loan agreements and exhibition plans, and Jev verifies each planned condition against the agreement and routes uncertain conflicts to review.
Discipline: Visual Art (Exhibition loans).
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 checks expose agreement mismatches by field without generating legal interpretations.

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": <Loan terms, exhibition plan, and object records>, "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)
{
  "loan_condition_met": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the exhibition plan satisfy this loan condition?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The plan matches an explicit loan term.",
      "false": "It conflicts, is undocumented, or remains ambiguous."
    }
  },
  "loan_field": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which loan condition is being checked?",
    "criteria": {
      "display": "Display location or duration.",
      "handling": "Installation, packing, or transport.",
      "environment": "Light, humidity, or temperature.",
      "credit": "Credit line, lender, or reproduction terms."
    }
  },
  "loan_review_level": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How urgently should staff review this condition?",
    "criteria": [
      "Low: clear compliance evidence.",
      "Medium: missing confirmation or minor ambiguity.",
      "High: rights, environment, or handling conflict."
    ]
  }
}

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

---

## 0295. Image Alt QA

ID: visual-art-image-alt-qa
Sub-discipline: Art accessibility
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Galleries paste image descriptions alongside artwork metadata, and Jev checks each factual description claim against the metadata and image notes, escalating uncertain claims.

Why typed decisions: Typed factual verification helps teams catch inaccurate descriptions without automating interpretive writing.

TAM: $1B–$5B accessibility services
SAM: $100M–$400M arts website accessibility
SOM: $1M–$6M image description QA tools

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Image Alt QA" 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
Galleries paste image descriptions alongside artwork metadata, and Jev checks each factual description claim against the metadata and image notes, escalating uncertain claims.
Discipline: Visual Art (Art accessibility).
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 factual verification helps teams catch inaccurate descriptions without automating interpretive writing.

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": <Image descriptions, artwork metadata, and image 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)
{
  "description_fact_supported": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is this factual description claim supported by the supplied evidence?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Metadata or image notes support the claim.",
      "false": "The claim is absent from evidence or contradicts it."
    }
  },
  "description_field": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "What kind of description detail is being checked?",
    "criteria": {
      "subject": "Depicted subject or scene.",
      "medium": "Materials, technique, or format.",
      "composition": "Layout, forms, or visual placement.",
      "access": "Color, contrast, or other access-relevant detail."
    }
  },
  "access_review": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How much human review does this description need?",
    "criteria": [
      "Low: factual details are clear and supported.",
      "Medium: useful detail is ambiguous or incomplete.",
      "High: key visual or access information may mislead."
    ]
  }
}

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

---

## 0296. Print Color Proof

ID: visual-art-print-color-proof
Sub-discipline: Fine art printing
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Artists paste print proofs, target specifications, and color claims, and Jev verifies each proof field against the specifications and escalates questionable deviations.

Why typed decisions: Typed tolerance and evidence decisions are actionable in production, unlike open-ended generated feedback.

TAM: $2B–$6B fine art print production
SAM: $150M–$600M artist and print shop proofing
SOM: $1M–$7M print QA software

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Print Color Proof" 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
Artists paste print proofs, target specifications, and color claims, and Jev verifies each proof field against the specifications and escalates questionable deviations.
Discipline: Visual Art (Fine art printing).
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 tolerance and evidence decisions are actionable in production, unlike open-ended generated feedback.

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": <Proof measurements, target specs, and print metadata>, "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)
{
  "within_spec": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does this proof measurement fall within the stated specification?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The evidence is within the supplied tolerance.",
      "false": "It exceeds, lacks, or conflicts with the tolerance."
    }
  },
  "proof_field": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which proof field is being checked?",
    "criteria": {
      "color": "Color value or profile match.",
      "paper": "Paper, substrate, or surface.",
      "dimension": "Trim size or image placement.",
      "finish": "Coating, texture, or finishing detail."
    }
  },
  "reprint_priority": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How strongly should this proof be escalated?",
    "criteria": [
      "Low: clear pass with minor variation.",
      "Medium: borderline result or missing measurement.",
      "High: clear spec failure or material mismatch."
    ]
  }
}

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

---

## 0297. Artwork Insurance Intake

ID: visual-art-artwork-insurance-intake
Sub-discipline: Fine art insurance
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Artists and galleries paste valuation records and insurance forms, and Jev checks each declared artwork field against supplied evidence, routing unsupported values to human review.

Why typed decisions: Per-field typed verification flags risky form entries while leaving valuation decisions to qualified reviewers.

TAM: $2B–$8B fine art insurance
SAM: $200M–$700M artist and gallery policy administration
SOM: $1M–$8M art insurance intake tools

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Artwork Insurance Intake" 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
Artists and galleries paste valuation records and insurance forms, and Jev checks each declared artwork field against supplied evidence, routing unsupported values to human review.
Discipline: Visual Art (Fine art insurance).
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: Per-field typed verification flags risky form entries while leaving valuation decisions to qualified reviewers.

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": <Insurance fields, valuation documents, and object records>, "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)
{
  "value_field_supported": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the supplied evidence support this insurance field?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "A cited record supports the stated value or detail.",
      "false": "Evidence is missing, outdated, or inconsistent."
    }
  },
  "insurance_field": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which field is being reviewed?",
    "criteria": {
      "valuation": "Value, appraisal date, or currency.",
      "identity": "Title, artist, or attribution.",
      "condition": "Condition or restoration history.",
      "location": "Storage, transit, or exhibition location."
    }
  },
  "underwriting_review": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How urgently should a person review this field?",
    "criteria": [
      "Low: current, consistent documentation.",
      "Medium: incomplete or aging documentation.",
      "High: material value, identity, or condition uncertainty."
    ]
  }
}

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

---

## 0298. Fair Entry Auditor

ID: visual-art-fair-entry-auditor
Sub-discipline: Art fair operations
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Galleries paste booth applications and fair rules, and Jev verifies each eligibility claim against submitted records and sends uncertain applications to human review.

Why typed decisions: Typed eligibility results make rule-based triage auditable while preserving staff judgment on edge cases.

TAM: $1B–$4B art fair services
SAM: $100M–$400M gallery application operations
SOM: $1M–$5M application triage software

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Fair Entry Auditor" 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
Galleries paste booth applications and fair rules, and Jev verifies each eligibility claim against submitted records and sends uncertain applications to human review.
Discipline: Visual Art (Art fair operations).
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 eligibility results make rule-based triage auditable while preserving staff judgment on edge cases.

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": <Application fields, gallery records, and fair rules>, "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)
{
  "eligibility_supported": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the application evidence support this eligibility claim?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Required evidence meets the stated rule.",
      "false": "Evidence is absent, inconsistent, or insufficient."
    }
  },
  "eligibility_area": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which eligibility area is being checked?",
    "criteria": {
      "program": "Artist or gallery program fit.",
      "history": "Exhibition or operating history.",
      "booth": "Booth size, layout, or category.",
      "documents": "Required files, deadlines, or attestations."
    }
  },
  "application_priority": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How much staff review should this application receive?",
    "criteria": [
      "Low: clear evidence satisfies the rule.",
      "Medium: missing detail or borderline fit.",
      "High: conflicting evidence or critical requirement gap."
    ]
  }
}

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

---

## 0299. Mosaic Fit Inspector

ID: visual-art-mosaic-fit-inspector
Sub-discipline: Mosaic art
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Mosaic artists paste tile schedules, surface plans, and material specifications, and Jev checks each compatibility claim against project evidence and escalates uncertain combinations.

Why typed decisions: Typed compatibility judgments help identify material risks before installation without generating speculative craft advice.

TAM: $500M–$2B mosaic and tile project services
SAM: $50M–$200M mosaic studios and contractors
SOM: $500K–$3M material compatibility tools

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Mosaic Fit Inspector" 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
Mosaic artists paste tile schedules, surface plans, and material specifications, and Jev checks each compatibility claim against project evidence and escalates uncertain combinations.
Discipline: Visual Art (Mosaic art).
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 compatibility judgments help identify material risks before installation without generating speculative craft advice.

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": <Tile schedule, substrate details, and material specs>, "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)
{
  "material_compatible": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the evidence support compatibility between these materials?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Supplied specifications support the combination.",
      "false": "Specifications conflict, are absent, or are unclear."
    }
  },
  "compatibility_area": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which compatibility factor is being checked?",
    "criteria": {
      "adhesion": "Adhesive and substrate match.",
      "exposure": "Indoor, outdoor, or moisture suitability.",
      "movement": "Expansion, flexibility, or joint requirements.",
      "finish": "Surface, grout, or cleaning compatibility."
    }
  },
  "installation_risk": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How urgently should this combination be reviewed?",
    "criteria": [
      "Low: specified materials are a documented match.",
      "Medium: one material property is uncertain.",
      "High: likely adhesion, exposure, or movement failure."
    ]
  }
}

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

---

## 0300. Artwork Credit Reconciler

ID: visual-art-artwork-credit-reconciler
Sub-discipline: Exhibition credits
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Galleries paste wall credits, loan records, and sponsor agreements, and Jev checks each credit field against its source record and queues uncertain discrepancies for staff.

Why typed decisions: Typed field-level checks prevent inconsistent acknowledgments without generating promotional copy.

TAM: $1B–$3B exhibition operations
SAM: $100M–$350M gallery and museum credit workflows
SOM: $1M–$5M credit verification tools

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Artwork Credit Reconciler" 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
Galleries paste wall credits, loan records, and sponsor agreements, and Jev checks each credit field against its source record and queues uncertain discrepancies for staff.
Discipline: Visual Art (Exhibition credits).
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 field-level checks prevent inconsistent acknowledgments without generating promotional copy.

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": <Credit lines, loan records, and sponsor terms>, "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)
{
  "credit_verified": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the source record support this displayed credit?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The wording and party match an approved record.",
      "false": "The credit is missing, inconsistent, or unapproved."
    }
  },
  "credit_type": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "What kind of credit is being checked?",
    "criteria": {
      "lender": "Collection or lender acknowledgment.",
      "artist": "Artist, studio, or copyright credit.",
      "supporter": "Sponsor, funder, or grant credit.",
      "image": "Photographer or image rights credit."
    }
  },
  "publication_risk": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How important is review before publication?",
    "criteria": [
      "Low: approved wording matches exactly.",
      "Medium: minor wording or source uncertainty.",
      "High: missing required credit or rights conflict."
    ]
  }
}

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

---

# Discipline: Videography & Film

Audience: videographers, editors, content creators
Market anchor: the video editing software market (~$1.1B) and >50M creators

## 0301. Rough Cut Triage

ID: video-rough-cut-triage
Sub-discipline: Video editing
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: Editors paste clip notes and timecoded rough-cut observations, and Jev routes each item to a fixed editing task while judging urgency and whether it blocks delivery.

Why typed decisions: Typed task categories and consistent urgency levels make a sortable queue more useful than generated editing advice.

TAM: Global video post-production software: multi-billion-dollar market
SAM: Independent and small-studio editing workflow tools: hundreds of millions
SOM: Early niche target: $1M–$5M annual revenue

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Rough Cut Triage" 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
Editors paste clip notes and timecoded rough-cut observations, and Jev routes each item to a fixed editing task while judging urgency and whether it blocks delivery.
Discipline: Videography & Film (Video editing).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: Typed task categories and consistent urgency levels make a sortable queue more useful than generated editing advice.

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": <Project deadline, edit stage, and task labels>, "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)
{
  "task_route": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which editing task should handle this note?",
    "criteria": {
      "trim": "Remove or shorten footage",
      "continuity": "Resolve a visual or narrative mismatch",
      "audio": "Fix dialogue, music, or sound levels",
      "color": "Adjust exposure, white balance, or look"
    }
  },
  "urgency": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "For the selected task, how urgent is this before the next review?",
    "criteria": [
      "Can wait until final polish",
      "Address during the next edit pass",
      "Fix before the next review",
      "Blocks review or delivery"
    ]
  },
  "delivery_blocker": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "For the selected task, would leaving this unresolved prevent delivery?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "It creates a delivery, compliance, or playback blocker",
      "false": "The video can still be delivered"
    }
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0302. Footage Bin Guide

ID: video-footage-bin-guide
Sub-discipline: Media asset management
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: Creators paste clip descriptions or logging notes, and Jev routes each clip to a footage bin while scoring its likely usefulness for the project.

Why typed decisions: A stable bin assignment and reuse score make clips searchable without relying on inconsistent free-form tags.

TAM: Global digital asset management market: multi-billion-dollar market
SAM: Video-first logging and media management: hundreds of millions
SOM: Initial creator-focused niche: $1M–$5M annual revenue

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Footage Bin Guide" 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
Creators paste clip descriptions or logging notes, and Jev routes each clip to a footage bin while scoring its likely usefulness for the project.
Discipline: Videography & Film (Media asset management).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: A stable bin assignment and reuse score make clips searchable without relying on inconsistent free-form tags.

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": <Project brief, bin names, and footage log schema>, "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)
{
  "bin_route": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which project bin should receive this clip?",
    "criteria": {
      "hero": "Primary story or must-have visual",
      "b_roll": "Supporting visuals and cutaways",
      "transition": "Establishers, bridges, and visual transitions",
      "wildcard": "Unplanned material worth reviewing"
    }
  },
  "reuse_value": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "For the selected bin, how useful is this clip likely to be in the final edit?",
    "criteria": [
      "Low value or redundant",
      "Possible supporting use",
      "Strong usable option",
      "Essential or uniquely valuable"
    ]
  },
  "technical_review": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "For this bin, does the clip need a technical review before editing?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Check focus, exposure, stabilization, or recording defects",
      "false": "No technical review is indicated"
    }
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0303. Release Form Sorter

ID: video-release-form-sorter
Sub-discipline: Production paperwork
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: Producers paste release-form summaries, and Jev routes each one to a person, property, performance, or exception review while checking clearance risk.

Why typed decisions: Explicit clearance categories and risk flags support reliable follow-up better than a generated summary.

TAM: Global contract lifecycle and rights-management software: multi-billion-dollar market
SAM: Release and clearance workflow tools for media production: tens of millions
SOM: Initial production-team niche: $500K–$3M annual revenue

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Release Form Sorter" 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
Producers paste release-form summaries, and Jev routes each one to a person, property, performance, or exception review while checking clearance risk.
Discipline: Videography & Film (Production paperwork).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: Explicit clearance categories and risk flags support reliable follow-up better than a generated summary.

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": <Production, release types, and clearance policy>, "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)
{
  "release_route": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which clearance queue should handle this release item?",
    "criteria": {
      "person": "Appearance, interview, or performance release",
      "property": "Location, artwork, or visible property release",
      "music": "Music, sound recording, or composition rights",
      "exception": "Unclear, missing, or nonstandard clearance"
    }
  },
  "clearance_risk": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "For the selected queue, how serious is the clearance risk?",
    "criteria": [
      "Routine; documentation appears sufficient",
      "Minor detail needs confirmation",
      "Material uncertainty needs follow-up",
      "High risk; do not use until resolved"
    ]
  },
  "hold_usage": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "For this selected release item, should footage usage be held pending review?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Do not publish or distribute until reviewed",
      "false": "Usage can proceed under current information"
    }
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0304. Caption Fix Queue

ID: video-caption-fix-queue
Sub-discipline: Accessibility and captions
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: Editors paste caption segments with timing and context, and Jev routes each segment to a caption issue category while grading its correction priority.

Why typed decisions: Fixed issue labels and priority scores produce actionable caption QA tasks instead of another prose rewrite.

TAM: Global subtitling and captioning software: multi-billion-dollar market
SAM: Caption QA tools for video publishers and production teams: hundreds of millions
SOM: Early target among creator teams: $1M–$5M annual revenue

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Caption Fix Queue" 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
Editors paste caption segments with timing and context, and Jev routes each segment to a caption issue category while grading its correction priority.
Discipline: Videography & Film (Accessibility and captions).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: Fixed issue labels and priority scores produce actionable caption QA tasks instead of another prose rewrite.

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": <Caption style guide, language, and delivery requirements>, "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)
{
  "caption_route": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which caption QA category should handle this segment?",
    "criteria": {
      "accuracy": "Words, speaker attribution, or meaning may be wrong",
      "timing": "Caption timing, duration, or synchronization issue",
      "readability": "Length, line breaks, or reading speed issue",
      "accessibility": "Missing sound cues or accessibility convention"
    }
  },
  "correction_priority": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "For the selected category, how important is correction before delivery?",
    "criteria": [
      "Optional polish",
      "Minor improvement",
      "Important for comprehension",
      "Critical accessibility or accuracy failure"
    ]
  },
  "meaning_changed": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "For this issue, does the current caption materially change what a speaker means?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The caption misrepresents or obscures the meaning",
      "false": "Meaning remains substantially intact"
    }
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0305. Sound Note Router

ID: video-sound-note-router
Sub-discipline: Production sound
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: Sound editors paste location notes and audio observations, and Jev routes each issue to a sound-treatment category while assessing whether it is salvageable.

Why typed decisions: Structured repair routing and salvage assessment help editors prioritize listening tests without generated troubleshooting prose.

TAM: Global professional audio and video post-production tools: multi-billion-dollar market
SAM: Audio repair and production workflow software: hundreds of millions
SOM: Sound-editor niche: $1M–$5M annual revenue

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Sound Note Router" 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
Sound editors paste location notes and audio observations, and Jev routes each issue to a sound-treatment category while assessing whether it is salvageable.
Discipline: Videography & Film (Production sound).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: Structured repair routing and salvage assessment help editors prioritize listening tests without generated troubleshooting prose.

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": <Project audio profile, delivery format, and repair options>, "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)
{
  "sound_route": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which audio treatment queue should receive this note?",
    "criteria": {
      "dialogue": "Dialogue clarity, noise, or intelligibility",
      "ambience": "Room tone, environmental sound, or unwanted noise",
      "sync": "Audio-video sync or take alignment",
      "mix": "Levels, balance, music, or final mix"
    }
  },
  "repairability": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "For the selected treatment, how likely is the issue to be repaired in post?",
    "criteria": [
      "Unlikely to be recoverable",
      "Possible with substantial effort",
      "Likely with standard tools",
      "Straightforward fix"
    ]
  },
  "reshoot_needed": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "For this issue, is a pickup or replacement recording likely necessary?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Post repair is unlikely to meet the project need",
      "false": "Existing recordings are likely sufficient"
    }
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0306. Shot Match Inspector

ID: video-shot-match-inspector
Sub-discipline: Color grading
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: Colorists paste paired shot notes and scene context, and Jev routes each mismatch to a grading category while measuring how severe the continuity break is.

Why typed decisions: Repeatable mismatch types and severity levels let colorists build precise review queues instead of parsing subjective descriptions.

TAM: Global color grading and post-production software: multi-billion-dollar market
SAM: Color workflow and shot-matching tools: hundreds of millions
SOM: Independent colorist niche: $500K–$3M annual revenue

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Shot Match Inspector" 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
Colorists paste paired shot notes and scene context, and Jev routes each mismatch to a grading category while measuring how severe the continuity break is.
Discipline: Videography & Film (Color grading).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: Repeatable mismatch types and severity levels let colorists build precise review queues instead of parsing subjective descriptions.

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": <Scene notes, reference shots, and target look>, "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)
{
  "match_route": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which grading issue best describes this shot mismatch?",
    "criteria": {
      "exposure": "Brightness, contrast, or highlight-shadow mismatch",
      "white_balance": "Color temperature or tint mismatch",
      "skin_tone": "Skin hue, saturation, or consistency mismatch",
      "look": "Creative look, saturation, or shot-to-shot style mismatch"
    }
  },
  "match_severity": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "For the selected issue, how visible is the mismatch in the cut?",
    "criteria": [
      "Barely noticeable",
      "Visible on close review",
      "Distracting in normal playback",
      "Breaks scene continuity"
    ]
  },
  "reference_available": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "For this mismatch, is a reliable reference shot available?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "A known target shot or approved still can guide matching",
      "false": "No dependable visual reference is available"
    }
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0307. B-Roll Match Desk

ID: video-b-roll-match-desk
Sub-discipline: Documentary editing
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: Documentary editors paste narration beats and available clip notes, and Jev routes each beat to a b-roll coverage type while judging how well the footage supports it.

Why typed decisions: Typed coverage categories and support scores help editors spot missing visuals faster than generated shot suggestions.

TAM: Global documentary and unscripted post-production tools: multi-billion-dollar market
SAM: Footage logging and editorial research software: hundreds of millions
SOM: Documentary team niche: $1M–$5M annual revenue

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "B-Roll Match Desk" 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
Documentary editors paste narration beats and available clip notes, and Jev routes each beat to a b-roll coverage type while judging how well the footage supports it.
Discipline: Videography & Film (Documentary editing).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: Typed coverage categories and support scores help editors spot missing visuals faster than generated shot suggestions.

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": <Narration outline, footage inventory, and coverage labels>, "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)
{
  "coverage_route": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "What kind of visual coverage should be checked for this beat?",
    "criteria": {
      "literal": "Directly depicts the person, place, or action mentioned",
      "contextual": "Provides relevant setting or background context",
      "emotional": "Supports the beat's mood or human impact",
      "evidence": "Shows an artifact, process, or verifiable detail"
    }
  },
  "coverage_fit": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "For the selected coverage type, how well does available footage support this beat?",
    "criteria": [
      "No usable match identified",
      "Weak or indirect support",
      "Good usable support",
      "Strong, specific match"
    ]
  },
  "claim_support": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "For this beat, could the selected footage mislead viewers about what happened?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The footage risks implying an unsupported event or claim",
      "false": "The footage does not appear to create that risk"
    }
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0308. Social Cut Router

ID: video-social-cut-router
Sub-discipline: Short-form repurposing
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: Creators paste source-video segment descriptions and platform requirements, and Jev routes each segment to a short-form format while scoring its opening strength.

Why typed decisions: A fixed format decision plus an opening score supports batch planning and comparison without generated hooks or scripts.

TAM: Global social video creation and editing software: multi-billion-dollar market
SAM: Creator repurposing and short-form workflow tools: hundreds of millions
SOM: Small creator-tool niche: $1M–$5M annual revenue

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Social Cut Router" 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
Creators paste source-video segment descriptions and platform requirements, and Jev routes each segment to a short-form format while scoring its opening strength.
Discipline: Videography & Film (Short-form repurposing).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: A fixed format decision plus an opening score supports batch planning and comparison without generated hooks or scripts.

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": <Source video outline, platform limits, and format menu>, "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)
{
  "format_route": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which short-form edit format best fits this segment?",
    "criteria": {
      "quick_tip": "A concise instructional or practical takeaway",
      "reaction": "A strong emotional or opinion moment",
      "story_beat": "A self-contained narrative moment",
      "visual_montage": "A sequence led mainly by visuals or music"
    }
  },
  "opening_strength": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "For the selected format, how strong is the segment's opening moment?",
    "criteria": [
      "Slow or unclear opening",
      "Some interest after setup",
      "Strong opening with brief setup",
      "Immediate, clear attention grab"
    ]
  },
  "standalone": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "For this format, can the segment make sense without watching the source video?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "It has enough context to work independently",
      "false": "It depends on context missing from the segment"
    }
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0309. Thumbnail Frame Picker

ID: video-thumbnail-frame-picker
Sub-discipline: Video packaging
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: Creators paste candidate-frame descriptions and video context, and Jev routes each frame to a packaging role while scoring its likely clarity at thumbnail size.

Why typed decisions: Role labels and small-size readability scores make frame selection comparable without generating visual or promotional copy.

TAM: Global digital content packaging and design tools: multi-billion-dollar market
SAM: Thumbnail testing and video packaging tools: tens to hundreds of millions
SOM: Creator packaging niche: $500K–$3M annual revenue

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Thumbnail Frame Picker" 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
Creators paste candidate-frame descriptions and video context, and Jev routes each frame to a packaging role while scoring its likely clarity at thumbnail size.
Discipline: Videography & Film (Video packaging).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: Role labels and small-size readability scores make frame selection comparable without generating visual or promotional copy.

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": <Video topic, audience, brand rules, and candidate frames>, "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)
{
  "frame_route": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "What packaging role best fits this candidate frame?",
    "criteria": {
      "subject": "Clear person or main subject",
      "action": "Distinctive action or visual event",
      "emotion": "Readable facial expression or emotional moment",
      "context": "Setting or object that communicates the topic"
    }
  },
  "thumbnail_clarity": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "For the selected role, how clear would this frame be at small thumbnail size?",
    "criteria": [
      "Unclear without explanation",
      "Main idea partly readable",
      "Subject and idea are clear",
      "Instantly recognizable and distinctive"
    ]
  },
  "misleading": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "For this role, would using the frame materially misrepresent the video?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The frame implies content or events absent from the video",
      "false": "The frame accurately represents the video"
    }
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0310. Take Continuity Check

ID: video-take-continuity-check
Sub-discipline: Scripted production
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: Assistant editors paste adjacent-take notes and continuity observations, and Jev routes each discrepancy to a continuity category while grading its on-screen impact.

Why typed decisions: Consistent discrepancy types and impact scores focus script supervisors on visible problems rather than vague notes.

TAM: Global film and television production workflow software: multi-billion-dollar market
SAM: Continuity and production tracking software: tens of millions
SOM: Initial scripted-production niche: $500K–$3M annual revenue

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Take Continuity Check" 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
Assistant editors paste adjacent-take notes and continuity observations, and Jev routes each discrepancy to a continuity category while grading its on-screen impact.
Discipline: Videography & Film (Scripted production).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: Consistent discrepancy types and impact scores focus script supervisors on visible problems rather than vague notes.

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": <Scene breakdown, continuity log, and edit stage>, "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)
{
  "continuity_route": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which continuity category should handle this discrepancy?",
    "criteria": {
      "wardrobe": "Clothing, accessories, hair, or makeup changes",
      "prop": "Object position, state, or handling changes",
      "performance": "Gesture, blocking, eyeline, or delivery changes",
      "environment": "Lighting, background, weather, or set changes"
    }
  },
  "screen_impact": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "For the selected category, how noticeable is this discrepancy in the cut?",
    "criteria": [
      "Unlikely to be noticed",
      "Noticeable only on close review",
      "Visible to most viewers",
      "Strong distraction or scene-breaking"
    ]
  },
  "coverage_option": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "For this discrepancy, is there an alternate take likely to conceal it?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Another take or angle offers a usable continuity fix",
      "false": "No suitable alternate coverage is known"
    }
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0311. Location Scout Sorter

ID: video-location-scout-sorter
Sub-discipline: Location scouting
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: Producers paste location descriptions and scene needs, and Jev routes each candidate to a production-use category while scoring its fit and flagging access concerns.

Why typed decisions: Standardized location roles and decision scores make scouting candidates easier to compare across a production team.

TAM: Global production management and location services market: multi-billion-dollar market
SAM: Location scouting and production planning software: tens of millions
SOM: Regional production niche: $500K–$3M annual revenue

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Location Scout Sorter" 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
Producers paste location descriptions and scene needs, and Jev routes each candidate to a production-use category while scoring its fit and flagging access concerns.
Discipline: Videography & Film (Location scouting).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: Standardized location roles and decision scores make scouting candidates easier to compare across a production team.

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": <Scene requirements, budget range, and location constraints>, "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)
{
  "location_route": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which production use best fits this location candidate?",
    "criteria": {
      "primary": "Main dramatic or interview location",
      "establishing": "Exterior, cityscape, or geographic opener",
      "support": "Secondary scene, insert, or pickup location",
      "contingency": "Backup option for another selected location"
    }
  },
  "location_fit": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "For the selected use, how well does the candidate fit the scene requirements?",
    "criteria": [
      "Poor fit",
      "Some useful qualities but notable gaps",
      "Good fit with manageable constraints",
      "Strong fit with few compromises"
    ]
  },
  "access_risk": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "For this use, is there a significant access or permission risk?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Permission, access, or restrictions need resolution before booking",
      "false": "No significant access concern is currently indicated"
    }
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0312. Music Cue Triage

ID: video-music-cue-triage
Sub-discipline: Music supervision
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: Editors paste scene notes and candidate-track descriptions, and Jev routes each cue to a musical function while scoring its fit and checking clearance status.

Why typed decisions: Typed cue purposes and fit ratings support quick music reviews while keeping rights checks explicit and auditable.

TAM: Global music licensing and media-production software: multi-billion-dollar market
SAM: Music supervision and cue-management tools: hundreds of millions
SOM: Editor and production-team niche: $1M–$5M annual revenue

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Music Cue Triage" 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
Editors paste scene notes and candidate-track descriptions, and Jev routes each cue to a musical function while scoring its fit and checking clearance status.
Discipline: Videography & Film (Music supervision).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: Typed cue purposes and fit ratings support quick music reviews while keeping rights checks explicit and auditable.

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": <Scene tone, cue library metadata, and music rights status>, "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)
{
  "cue_route": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which role should this cue fill in the scene?",
    "criteria": {
      "underscore": "Support dialogue or ongoing scene emotion",
      "transition": "Bridge scenes, time, or location changes",
      "montage": "Drive rhythm across a visual sequence",
      "spot": "Emphasize a specific reveal, action, or beat"
    }
  },
  "cue_fit": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "For the selected role, how well does the track fit the scene?",
    "criteria": [
      "Poor emotional or rhythmic fit",
      "Potential fit with notable mismatch",
      "Good fit with minor adjustment",
      "Strong fit for the scene"
    ]
  },
  "rights_cleared": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "For this cue, is the required music usage cleared for the intended release?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Required rights appear cleared for this use",
      "false": "Rights are missing, uncertain, or insufficient"
    }
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0313. VFX Note Router

ID: video-vfx-note-router
Sub-discipline: Visual effects production
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: Editors paste shot notes and supervisor observations, and Jev routes each shot to a VFX department while scoring complexity and identifying likely replacement needs.

Why typed decisions: A fixed department assignment and complexity grade create trackable work orders without attempting to invent technical instructions.

TAM: Global VFX and post-production software: multi-billion-dollar market
SAM: VFX shot-tracking and review workflow tools: hundreds of millions
SOM: Small and mid-sized post-house niche: $1M–$5M annual revenue

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "VFX Note Router" 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
Editors paste shot notes and supervisor observations, and Jev routes each shot to a VFX department while scoring complexity and identifying likely replacement needs.
Discipline: Videography & Film (Visual effects production).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: A fixed department assignment and complexity grade create trackable work orders without attempting to invent technical instructions.

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": <Shot list, VFX departments, and delivery specifications>, "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)
{
  "vfx_route": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which VFX work queue should receive this shot?",
    "criteria": {
      "cleanup": "Remove wires, rigs, blemishes, or unwanted objects",
      "compositing": "Combine plates, mattes, or layered elements",
      "tracking": "Matchmove, stabilization, or camera tracking",
      "graphics": "Screen inserts, titles, or in-scene graphics"
    }
  },
  "vfx_complexity": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "For the selected department, how complex does the shot appear?",
    "criteria": [
      "Simple, isolated change",
      "Moderate work with clear elements",
      "Complex shot or multiple dependencies",
      "High uncertainty or substantial bespoke work"
    ]
  },
  "plate_needed": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "For this shot, does the team likely need a new plate or pickup?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Existing material may not support the required effect",
      "false": "Current footage likely provides sufficient source material"
    }
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0314. Privacy Frame Review

ID: video-privacy-frame-review
Sub-discipline: Privacy and compliance
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: Creators paste scene descriptions and review notes, and Jev routes potential privacy issues to a remediation category while grading publication risk.

Why typed decisions: Explicit risk classes and fix categories support consistent review and escalation better than a generated legal-sounding explanation.

TAM: Global privacy and compliance software: multi-billion-dollar market
SAM: Privacy review workflows for media publishers and creators: tens of millions
SOM: Creator and publisher niche: $500K–$3M annual revenue

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Privacy Frame Review" 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
Creators paste scene descriptions and review notes, and Jev routes potential privacy issues to a remediation category while grading publication risk.
Discipline: Videography & Film (Privacy and compliance).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: Explicit risk classes and fix categories support consistent review and escalation better than a generated legal-sounding explanation.

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": <Release region, privacy policy, and review standards>, "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)
{
  "privacy_route": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which privacy remediation queue best fits this issue?",
    "criteria": {
      "blur": "Blur or obscure an identifiable person or detail",
      "remove": "Cut or replace sensitive footage",
      "consent": "Verify permission, consent, or release",
      "escalate": "Refer an uncertain or high-risk case for review"
    }
  },
  "publication_risk": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "For the selected queue, how serious is the risk if published unchanged?",
    "criteria": [
      "Low apparent risk",
      "Minor concern to verify",
      "Material concern requiring action",
      "High risk; hold from publication"
    ]
  },
  "identifiable": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "For this issue, is a person or sensitive detail identifiable in the footage?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "A viewer could reasonably identify the person or detail",
      "false": "The subject or detail is not reasonably identifiable"
    }
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0315. Delivery Spec Checker

ID: video-delivery-spec-checker
Sub-discipline: Media operations
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: Post teams paste export notes and delivery specs, and Jev routes each item to a technical check while scoring the risk of rejection or playback failure.

Why typed decisions: Machine-actionable check categories and risk levels make delivery triage predictable without generating ambiguous instructions.

TAM: Global media workflow and delivery software: multi-billion-dollar market
SAM: Video QC and delivery-compliance tools: hundreds of millions
SOM: Independent post-production niche: $1M–$5M annual revenue

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Delivery Spec Checker" 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
Post teams paste export notes and delivery specs, and Jev routes each item to a technical check while scoring the risk of rejection or playback failure.
Discipline: Videography & Film (Media operations).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: Machine-actionable check categories and risk levels make delivery triage predictable without generating ambiguous instructions.

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": <Platform specs, client requirements, and export profile>, "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)
{
  "delivery_route": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which delivery check should handle this item?",
    "criteria": {
      "picture": "Resolution, aspect ratio, frame rate, or color space",
      "audio": "Channels, loudness, sample rate, or peak levels",
      "container": "Codec, wrapper, bitrate, or file integrity",
      "metadata": "Naming, captions, slate, or required embedded data"
    }
  },
  "rejection_risk": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "For the selected check, how likely is noncompliance to cause rejection or failure?",
    "criteria": [
      "Cosmetic or low-impact discrepancy",
      "Minor compliance risk",
      "Likely to require correction",
      "Likely rejection or playback failure"
    ]
  },
  "spec_confirmed": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "For this check, are the applicable delivery requirements confirmed?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "A current client or platform specification is available",
      "false": "The requirement is missing, stale, or uncertain"
    }
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0316. Set Safety Signal

ID: video-set-safety-signal
Sub-discipline: Production safety
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: Production managers paste call-sheet notes and incident observations, and Jev routes each item to a safety response category while grading its immediate severity.

Why typed decisions: Clear escalation categories and severity levels help teams act consistently instead of interpreting generated safety prose.

TAM: Global workplace health and safety software: multi-billion-dollar market
SAM: Safety workflow tools for film and video productions: tens of millions
SOM: Production-specific niche: $500K–$3M annual revenue

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Set Safety Signal" 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
Production managers paste call-sheet notes and incident observations, and Jev routes each item to a safety response category while grading its immediate severity.
Discipline: Videography & Film (Production safety).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: Clear escalation categories and severity levels help teams act consistently instead of interpreting generated safety prose.

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": <Production safety policy, location, and escalation contacts>, "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)
{
  "safety_route": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which safety response queue should handle this item?",
    "criteria": {
      "stop_work": "Immediate hazard requiring work to pause",
      "equipment": "Camera, rigging, power, or gear hazard",
      "environment": "Weather, location, traffic, or terrain hazard",
      "report": "Incident, near miss, or follow-up documentation"
    }
  },
  "safety_severity": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "For the selected queue, how severe is the potential harm?",
    "criteria": [
      "Low concern; routine precaution",
      "Minor injury or disruption possible",
      "Serious harm is plausible",
      "Immediate danger or potential for severe harm"
    ]
  },
  "immediate_action": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "For this item, is immediate action needed before work continues?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Pause or address the hazard before proceeding",
      "false": "No immediate stop-work response is indicated"
    }
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0317. Interview Quote Index

ID: video-interview-quote-index
Sub-discipline: Interview editing
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: Editors paste interview transcripts with topic context, and Jev routes each quote to an editorial theme while scoring its usefulness as a standalone sound bite.

Why typed decisions: Consistent theme routing and standalone-fit grades make transcript review searchable without generating or altering quotes.

TAM: Global video transcription and editing workflow software: multi-billion-dollar market
SAM: Interview logging and transcript-based editing tools: hundreds of millions
SOM: Documentary and interview editor niche: $1M–$5M annual revenue

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Interview Quote Index" 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
Editors paste interview transcripts with topic context, and Jev routes each quote to an editorial theme while scoring its usefulness as a standalone sound bite.
Discipline: Videography & Film (Interview editing).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: Consistent theme routing and standalone-fit grades make transcript review searchable without generating or altering quotes.

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": <Interview transcripts, story outline, and theme labels>, "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)
{
  "quote_route": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which editorial theme should index this quote?",
    "criteria": {
      "character": "Personality, motivation, or personal experience",
      "evidence": "Factual detail, example, or corroborating account",
      "conflict": "Disagreement, tension, or obstacle",
      "resolution": "Outcome, learning, or forward-looking conclusion"
    }
  },
  "soundbite_fit": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "For the selected theme, how usable is this quote as a standalone edit?",
    "criteria": [
      "Needs extensive context",
      "Usable with substantial setup",
      "Mostly self-contained",
      "Clear, concise, and self-contained"
    ]
  },
  "quote_complete": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "For this quote, can the essential meaning be preserved without changing the speaker's intent?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "A concise edit can retain the original meaning",
      "false": "Removing context would likely distort the meaning"
    }
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0318. Ad Read Monitor

ID: video-ad-read-monitor
Sub-discipline: Branded video production
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: Creators paste sponsor briefs and draft segment notes, and Jev routes each requirement to a compliance category while judging whether the cut appears to satisfy it.

Why typed decisions: Typed obligation checks and pass-risk decisions create auditable review queues without composing promotional copy.

TAM: Global influencer marketing and creator monetization software: multi-billion-dollar market
SAM: Sponsor workflow and branded-content compliance tools: hundreds of millions
SOM: Creator and agency niche: $1M–$5M annual revenue

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Ad Read Monitor" 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
Creators paste sponsor briefs and draft segment notes, and Jev routes each requirement to a compliance category while judging whether the cut appears to satisfy it.
Discipline: Videography & Film (Branded video production).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: Typed obligation checks and pass-risk decisions create auditable review queues without composing promotional copy.

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": <Sponsor brief, platform rules, and approved claims>, "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)
{
  "sponsor_route": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which sponsor requirement category should review this item?",
    "criteria": {
      "disclosure": "Paid partnership disclosure or placement identification",
      "claim": "Product claim, offer, or approved wording",
      "placement": "Logo, product visibility, or segment position",
      "restriction": "Category, competitor, or platform restriction"
    }
  },
  "compliance_status": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "For the selected category, how closely does the current cut appear to meet the brief?",
    "criteria": [
      "Requirement appears unmet",
      "Significant detail is missing",
      "Mostly compliant; confirm a detail",
      "Clearly meets the stated requirement"
    ]
  },
  "approval_needed": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "For this item, is sponsor approval required before publication?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The brief or agreement requires approval",
      "false": "No approval requirement is indicated"
    }
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0319. Archive Keep Score

ID: video-archive-keep-score
Sub-discipline: Video archiving
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: Media managers paste asset summaries and project closeout notes, and Jev routes each item to an archive tier while scoring its future reuse value.

Why typed decisions: A fixed retention destination and reuse score make archive decisions consistent and easier to audit than prose recommendations.

TAM: Global digital preservation and storage software: multi-billion-dollar market
SAM: Media asset archiving and lifecycle tools: hundreds of millions
SOM: Small production archive niche: $1M–$5M annual revenue

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Archive Keep Score" 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
Media managers paste asset summaries and project closeout notes, and Jev routes each item to an archive tier while scoring its future reuse value.
Discipline: Videography & Film (Video archiving).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: A fixed retention destination and reuse score make archive decisions consistent and easier to audit than prose recommendations.

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": <Archive policy, project lifecycle, and asset catalog>, "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)
{
  "archive_route": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which archive destination best fits this asset?",
    "criteria": {
      "active": "Keep readily accessible for ongoing work",
      "preserve": "Retain a high-value master or source asset",
      "proxy": "Keep a lightweight review or reference copy",
      "discard_review": "Flag for retention-policy or ownership review"
    }
  },
  "reuse_value": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "For the selected destination, how valuable is this asset for future projects?",
    "criteria": [
      "Little likely future use",
      "Possible reference or occasional reuse",
      "Useful reusable production material",
      "High-value master or uniquely reusable asset"
    ]
  },
  "rights_known": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "For this asset, are ownership and retention rights sufficiently documented?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Ownership and permitted retention are documented",
      "false": "Rights or retention permission need verification"
    }
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0320. Festival Cut Selector

ID: video-festival-cut-selector
Sub-discipline: Film distribution
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: Filmmakers paste screener notes and festival requirements, and Jev routes each cut to a submission strategy while scoring its fit for the target program.

Why typed decisions: Fixed submission categories and fit grades help compare cuts to program needs without generating positioning copy.

TAM: Global film distribution and festival submission services: hundreds of millions
SAM: Festival planning and submission workflow tools: tens of millions
SOM: Independent filmmaker niche: $500K–$3M annual revenue

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Festival Cut Selector" 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
Filmmakers paste screener notes and festival requirements, and Jev routes each cut to a submission strategy while scoring its fit for the target program.
Discipline: Videography & Film (Film distribution).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: Fixed submission categories and fit grades help compare cuts to program needs without generating positioning copy.

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": <Film synopsis, runtime, premiere status, and festival criteria>, "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)
{
  "submission_route": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which submission path best fits this cut and target program?",
    "criteria": {
      "premiere": "Prioritize premiere-sensitive programs",
      "genre": "Target a genre-focused program",
      "regional": "Target a geographically or culturally focused program",
      "general": "Consider broad-interest or mixed programs"
    }
  },
  "program_fit": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "For the selected path, how well does the cut fit the target program?",
    "criteria": [
      "Weak match",
      "Some relevant qualities",
      "Good program fit",
      "Strong, distinctive fit"
    ]
  },
  "eligibility_concern": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "For this path, is there a known eligibility issue to resolve before submission?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Premiere, runtime, completion date, or other rule may disqualify it",
      "false": "No eligibility issue is currently known"
    }
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0321. Rough Cut Rescue

ID: video-rough-cut-rescue
Sub-discipline: Edit review
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste a rough-cut note and scene list, and Jev checks for pacing, continuity, and coverage risks that the app combines into a review-priority queue.

Why typed decisions: Independent yes/no risk flags are easier to audit and act on than a paragraph of generated feedback.

TAM: TAM $8B global post-production software
SAM: SAM $1.4B independent editing teams
SOM: SOM $8M early adopter subscriptions

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Rough Cut Rescue" 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 rough-cut note and scene list, and Jev checks for pacing, continuity, and coverage risks that the app combines into a review-priority queue.
Discipline: Videography & Film (Edit review).
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: Independent yes/no risk flags are easier to audit and act on than a paragraph of generated feedback.

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": <Rough-cut notes and ordered scene list>, "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)
{
  "pacing_drag": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the described sequence risk feeling slow for its stated purpose?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The notes indicate repetition, unnecessary pauses, or prolonged setup.",
      "false": "The sequence appears brisk or its duration is justified."
    }
  },
  "continuity_break": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is a continuity break indicated in the notes?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "An action, prop, wardrobe, or screen-direction mismatch is described.",
      "false": "No continuity mismatch is described."
    }
  },
  "coverage_gap": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is essential coverage apparently missing?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "A required story beat lacks a usable shot or transition.",
      "false": "The described coverage appears sufficient for the beat."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0322. Scene Match Scout

ID: video-scene-match-scout
Sub-discipline: Continuity management
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste scene notes and shot descriptions, and Jev checks for mismatched time, wardrobe, and props before the app flags scenes for review.

Why typed decisions: Separate binary mismatch checks make continuity triage consistent without inventing explanations.

TAM: TAM $3.2B production workflow tools
SAM: SAM $620M film continuity workflows
SOM: SOM $5M small production teams

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Scene Match Scout" 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 scene notes and shot descriptions, and Jev checks for mismatched time, wardrobe, and props before the app flags scenes for review.
Discipline: Videography & Film (Continuity management).
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: Separate binary mismatch checks make continuity triage consistent without inventing explanations.

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": <Scene notes and shot-description records>, "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)
{
  "time_mismatch": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Do the notes imply conflicting times of day for this scene?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Lighting or explicit scene details conflict with the stated time.",
      "false": "The described time-of-day details are consistent."
    }
  },
  "wardrobe_mismatch": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is a wardrobe continuity mismatch described?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "A character's clothing changes unexpectedly across adjacent shots.",
      "false": "Clothing remains consistent or changes are explained."
    }
  },
  "prop_mismatch": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is a prop position or state inconsistent across shots?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "A prop appears, disappears, or changes state without an indicated action.",
      "false": "Prop continuity is consistent or the change is explained."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0323. Audio Take Gate

ID: video-audio-take-gate
Sub-discipline: Production sound
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste take logs and sound notes, and Jev checks for clipping, noise, and dialogue intelligibility so the app can flag takes for listening.

Why typed decisions: Explicit audio-quality flags map directly to review actions and avoid unreliable free-form judgments.

TAM: TAM $5B audio and video production tools
SAM: SAM $900M location sound workflows
SOM: SOM $6M indie production subscriptions

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Audio Take 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 take logs and sound notes, and Jev checks for clipping, noise, and dialogue intelligibility so the app can flag takes for listening.
Discipline: Videography & Film (Production sound).
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 audio-quality flags map directly to review actions and avoid unreliable free-form judgments.

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": <Audio take log and sound 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)
{
  "clipping_present": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Do the notes indicate audible clipping or distortion?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Clipping, overload, or distortion is reported.",
      "false": "No clipping or distortion is indicated."
    }
  },
  "noise_intrusion": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is disruptive background noise indicated?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Noise is described as masking or distracting from the take.",
      "false": "Noise is absent or not disruptive."
    }
  },
  "dialogue_unclear": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is important dialogue difficult to understand?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Key words are reported as masked, muffled, or unintelligible.",
      "false": "Important dialogue is described as clear."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0324. B-Roll Coverage Check

ID: video-b-roll-coverage-check
Sub-discipline: Documentary editing
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste a script outline and available B-roll list, and Jev checks for unsupported claims, missing visual coverage, and redundant shots before the app highlights gaps.

Why typed decisions: Independent coverage checks turn semantic review into clear, testable flags rather than speculative suggestions.

TAM: TAM $6B video production and asset tools
SAM: SAM $1.1B documentary editorial workflows
SOM: SOM $7M documentary teams

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "B-Roll Coverage Check" 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 script outline and available B-roll list, and Jev checks for unsupported claims, missing visual coverage, and redundant shots before the app highlights gaps.
Discipline: Videography & Film (Documentary editing).
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: Independent coverage checks turn semantic review into clear, testable flags rather than speculative suggestions.

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": <Script beats and available B-roll descriptions>, "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)
{
  "claim_unsupported": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does a script beat make a factual claim without matching visual evidence in the listed B-roll?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "A factual claim has no described supporting footage.",
      "false": "Relevant supporting footage is listed or the beat makes no factual claim."
    }
  },
  "visual_gap": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is a key beat missing any usable visual coverage?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "A required beat has no suitable described shot.",
      "false": "Each key beat has at least one suitable described shot."
    }
  },
  "shot_redundancy": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the listed coverage repeat substantially the same visual information?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Multiple shots appear to serve the same visual purpose without variation.",
      "false": "The listed shots provide distinct or necessary coverage."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0325. Subtitle Sync Sentinel

ID: video-subtitle-sync-sentinel
Sub-discipline: Caption editing
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste caption blocks with their timecodes and scene notes, and Jev checks for timing conflicts, readability risks, and speaker mismatches for a focused correction list.

Why typed decisions: Binary checks identify specific caption defects more reliably than generated rewrite advice.

TAM: TAM $2.8B captioning and accessibility tools
SAM: SAM $540M creator subtitle workflows
SOM: SOM $4M editor subscriptions

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Subtitle Sync Sentinel" 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 caption blocks with their timecodes and scene notes, and Jev checks for timing conflicts, readability risks, and speaker mismatches for a focused correction list.
Discipline: Videography & Film (Caption editing).
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: Binary checks identify specific caption defects more reliably than generated rewrite advice.

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": <Caption text, timecodes, and speaker 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)
{
  "timing_conflict": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Do the caption timecodes create an overlap or implausible gap?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Adjacent blocks overlap improperly or leave a gap inconsistent with the dialogue notes.",
      "false": "Timing appears sequential and plausible."
    }
  },
  "readability_risk": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is a caption block likely difficult to read at normal playback?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "A block is unusually long or dense for its displayed duration.",
      "false": "Block length appears readable for its duration."
    }
  },
  "speaker_mismatch": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does a caption appear assigned to the wrong speaker?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Speaker labels conflict with the scene or dialogue notes.",
      "false": "Speaker labels match the available notes or are not needed."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0326. Color Continuity Radar

ID: video-color-continuity-radar
Sub-discipline: Color grading
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste shot metadata and grading notes, and Jev checks for exposure, white-balance, and look discontinuities that the app groups into correction flags.

Why typed decisions: Separate consistency tests help graders catch semantic mismatches without outsourcing subjective creative choices.

TAM: TAM $4B color and post-production software
SAM: SAM $700M grading workflows
SOM: SOM $5M independent colorists

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Color Continuity Radar" 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 shot metadata and grading notes, and Jev checks for exposure, white-balance, and look discontinuities that the app groups into correction flags.
Discipline: Videography & Film (Color grading).
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: Separate consistency tests help graders catch semantic mismatches without outsourcing subjective creative choices.

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": <Shot metadata and grading 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)
{
  "exposure_jump": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is an unintended exposure jump indicated between adjacent shots?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Notes describe a brightness mismatch not motivated by the scene.",
      "false": "Exposure is consistent or the change is intentional."
    }
  },
  "white_balance_shift": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is an unintended color-temperature shift indicated?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Adjacent shots have conflicting color casts without a lighting rationale.",
      "false": "Color temperature is consistent or the shift is motivated."
    }
  },
  "look_break": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does a shot break the established visual look without an apparent reason?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "A shot's described contrast, saturation, or palette departs unexpectedly.",
      "false": "The look is coherent or the departure is intentional."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0327. Export Failure Watch

ID: video-export-failure-watch
Sub-discipline: Media delivery
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste delivery specs and export logs, and Jev checks for codec, frame-rate, and audio-layout mismatches before the app marks risky deliverables.

Why typed decisions: Typed failure flags make compliance checks actionable and consistent across delivery requirements.

TAM: TAM $3.5B media delivery software
SAM: SAM $650M creator and studio delivery
SOM: SOM $4M post houses

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Export Failure Watch" 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 delivery specs and export logs, and Jev checks for codec, frame-rate, and audio-layout mismatches before the app marks risky deliverables.
Discipline: Videography & Film (Media delivery).
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: Typed failure flags make compliance checks actionable and consistent across delivery requirements.

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": <Delivery specifications and export log>, "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)
{
  "codec_mismatch": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the export codec conflict with the delivery specification?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The recorded codec differs from the required codec.",
      "false": "The codec matches or no requirement is specified."
    }
  },
  "frame_rate_mismatch": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the export frame rate conflict with the delivery specification?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The recorded frame rate differs from the required rate.",
      "false": "The frame rate matches or no requirement is specified."
    }
  },
  "audio_layout_mismatch": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the audio-channel layout conflict with the delivery specification?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The export channel layout differs from the required layout.",
      "false": "The layout matches or no requirement is specified."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0328. Interview Cut Finder

ID: video-interview-cut-finder
Sub-discipline: Interview editing
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste interview transcripts with clip notes, and Jev checks for usable answers, repeated takes, and missing context so the app can prioritize selects.

Why typed decisions: Independent editorial checks help sift large transcripts while leaving final selection to the editor.

TAM: TAM $2.6B video editing and review tools
SAM: SAM $480M interview-based productions
SOM: SOM $3M documentary editors

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Interview Cut Finder" 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 interview transcripts with clip notes, and Jev checks for usable answers, repeated takes, and missing context so the app can prioritize selects.
Discipline: Videography & Film (Interview editing).
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: Independent editorial checks help sift large transcripts while leaving final selection to the editor.

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": <Interview transcript and clip 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)
{
  "complete_answer": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does this excerpt contain a complete answer usable without missing context?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The response is understandable and self-contained in the supplied notes.",
      "false": "The response relies on omitted context or is incomplete."
    }
  },
  "duplicate_take": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does this excerpt substantially repeat another listed take?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Another take expresses the same point with little meaningful difference.",
      "false": "No substantially duplicate take is listed."
    }
  },
  "context_gap": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is essential context missing for interpreting this answer?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "A question, reference, or antecedent needed to understand it is absent.",
      "false": "The excerpt is understandable from its available context."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0329. Music Cue Clearance

ID: video-music-cue-clearance
Sub-discipline: Music supervision
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste a cue sheet and scene descriptions, and Jev checks for placement conflicts, tonal mismatch, and missing clearance details before the app routes cues for review.

Why typed decisions: Separate risk checks provide transparent screening without making legal claims or generating music suggestions.

TAM: TAM $1.8B music licensing and production tools
SAM: SAM $320M video music supervision
SOM: SOM $2M production teams

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Music Cue Clearance" 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 cue sheet and scene descriptions, and Jev checks for placement conflicts, tonal mismatch, and missing clearance details before the app routes cues for review.
Discipline: Videography & Film (Music supervision).
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: Separate risk checks provide transparent screening without making legal claims or generating music suggestions.

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": <Cue sheet and scene descriptions>, "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)
{
  "placement_conflict": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the cue placement conflict with dialogue or a described sound event?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The cue is noted as obscuring essential dialogue or competing with a key sound.",
      "false": "No such conflict is described."
    }
  },
  "tone_mismatch": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the cue's described mood conflict with the scene's stated intent?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The cue is described as emotionally at odds with the scene without apparent intent.",
      "false": "The cue supports the scene or contrast is intentional."
    }
  },
  "clearance_missing": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Are required ownership or license details missing from the cue record?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "A rights holder, license, or usage detail required by the project is absent.",
      "false": "Required clearance details are present or not applicable."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0330. Shot List Reality Check

ID: video-shot-list-reality-check
Sub-discipline: Production planning
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste a shot list and location constraints, and Jev checks for infeasible setups, missing story coverage, and schedule conflicts for a planning dashboard.

Why typed decisions: Independent feasibility flags help crews focus on concrete production risks instead of generic planning prose.

TAM: TAM $5B production planning software
SAM: SAM $850M small film and video crews
SOM: SOM $5M production coordinators

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Shot List Reality Check" 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 shot list and location constraints, and Jev checks for infeasible setups, missing story coverage, and schedule conflicts for a planning dashboard.
Discipline: Videography & Film (Production planning).
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: Independent feasibility flags help crews focus on concrete production risks instead of generic planning prose.

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": <Shot list and location constraints>, "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)
{
  "setup_infeasible": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does a listed setup conflict with stated equipment or location limits?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The required camera, rig, access, or space is unavailable per the notes.",
      "false": "The setup appears feasible under the stated limits."
    }
  },
  "story_coverage_missing": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is a required story beat absent from the shot list?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "A stated beat has no shot intended to capture it.",
      "false": "The stated beats are represented in the list."
    }
  },
  "schedule_conflict": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the plan require incompatible locations or setups within the stated schedule?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Travel, setup, or timing constraints make the sequence implausible.",
      "false": "The stated schedule appears compatible."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0331. Reel Hook Audit

ID: video-reel-hook-audit
Sub-discipline: Short-form editing
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste a short-video outline and opening-shot descriptions, and Jev checks for delayed premise, unclear stakes, and weak visual establishment before the app flags openings to revisit.

Why typed decisions: Specific opening-condition checks are more useful to editors than a generated list of subjective hook ideas.

TAM: TAM $7B creator video tools
SAM: SAM $1.2B short-form editing workflows
SOM: SOM $8M creator subscriptions

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Reel Hook Audit" 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 short-video outline and opening-shot descriptions, and Jev checks for delayed premise, unclear stakes, and weak visual establishment before the app flags openings to revisit.
Discipline: Videography & Film (Short-form editing).
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: Specific opening-condition checks are more useful to editors than a generated list of subjective hook ideas.

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": <Short-form outline and opening-shot descriptions>, "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)
{
  "premise_delayed": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is the video's central premise withheld too long for the stated format?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The opening delays essential topic context beyond the initial section.",
      "false": "The premise is clear early or the delay is intentional."
    }
  },
  "stakes_unclear": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Are the reason to keep watching or the stakes unclear in the opening?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The opening gives no discernible question, outcome, or viewer relevance.",
      "false": "A clear reason to continue is established."
    }
  },
  "visual_context_missing": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the opening lack visual context needed to understand its premise?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The described opening visuals do not establish the subject or situation.",
      "false": "The visuals establish the relevant subject or context."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0332. Green Screen Edge Check

ID: video-green-screen-edge-check
Sub-discipline: Compositing
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste compositing notes and shot metadata, and Jev checks for spill, edge artifacts, and lighting inconsistency so the app queues problematic shots.

Why typed decisions: Discrete defect checks support repeatable quality review while avoiding unsolicited creative direction.

TAM: TAM $3B compositing and VFX tools
SAM: SAM $520M small-studio compositing
SOM: SOM $3M independent VFX artists

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Green Screen Edge Check" 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 compositing notes and shot metadata, and Jev checks for spill, edge artifacts, and lighting inconsistency so the app queues problematic shots.
Discipline: Videography & Film (Compositing).
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: Discrete defect checks support repeatable quality review while avoiding unsolicited creative direction.

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": <Compositing notes and shot metadata>, "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)
{
  "spill_present": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Do the notes indicate visible background-color spill on the subject?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Green or blue spill is reported on skin, hair, or wardrobe.",
      "false": "No visible spill is indicated."
    }
  },
  "edge_artifact": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Are matte-edge artifacts reported?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The subject edge is described as jagged, clipped, or unnaturally soft.",
      "false": "No edge artifact is described."
    }
  },
  "lighting_mismatch": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the foreground lighting conflict with the described background?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Light direction, color, or intensity appears inconsistent.",
      "false": "Foreground and background lighting appear compatible."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0333. Proxy Pair Inspector

ID: video-proxy-pair-inspector
Sub-discipline: Media management
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste proxy and source-file manifests, and Jev checks for mismatched duration, frame rate, and naming so the app flags unsafe offline-edit pairs.

Why typed decisions: Independent metadata checks detect pairing risks with explicit outcomes instead of ambiguous explanations.

TAM: TAM $2.2B media asset management
SAM: SAM $430M post-production media workflows
SOM: SOM $3M editing teams

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Proxy Pair Inspector" 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 proxy and source-file manifests, and Jev checks for mismatched duration, frame rate, and naming so the app flags unsafe offline-edit pairs.
Discipline: Videography & Film (Media management).
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: Independent metadata checks detect pairing risks with explicit outcomes instead of ambiguous explanations.

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": <Proxy and source-file manifest rows>, "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)
{
  "duration_mismatch": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does a proxy duration conflict with its source duration?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The recorded durations differ beyond the stated tolerance.",
      "false": "Durations match or no discrepancy is indicated."
    }
  },
  "rate_mismatch": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does a proxy frame rate conflict with its source frame rate?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The listed rates differ in a way that risks sync or playback issues.",
      "false": "The listed rates match or are compatible."
    }
  },
  "name_pair_uncertain": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is the proxy-to-source pairing ambiguous from the manifest?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Names or identifiers could refer to multiple source files.",
      "false": "The pairing is uniquely indicated."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0334. Trailer Beat Balance

ID: video-trailer-beat-balance
Sub-discipline: Trailer editing
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste a trailer beat sheet and shot descriptions, and Jev checks for spoiler exposure, tonal whiplash, and missing setup before the app marks beats for editorial review.

Why typed decisions: Independent semantic flags surface trailer risks without attempting to write or rearrange the cut.

TAM: TAM $2.4B trailer and promotional video tools
SAM: SAM $390M entertainment marketing editors
SOM: SOM $2M trailer houses

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Trailer Beat Balance" 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 trailer beat sheet and shot descriptions, and Jev checks for spoiler exposure, tonal whiplash, and missing setup before the app marks beats for editorial review.
Discipline: Videography & Film (Trailer editing).
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: Independent semantic flags surface trailer risks without attempting to write or rearrange the cut.

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": <Trailer beat sheet and shot descriptions>, "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)
{
  "spoiler_exposure": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does a described beat reveal an outcome marked confidential or to be withheld?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The beat exposes a protected reveal, ending, or plot turn.",
      "false": "No protected reveal is indicated."
    }
  },
  "tonal_whiplash": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the sequence make an abrupt tonal shift without a transition?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Adjacent beats conflict in mood without a described bridge or intent.",
      "false": "The tone is coherent or the shift is intentional."
    }
  },
  "setup_missing": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does a payoff appear without enough setup in the listed beats?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "A reveal or emotional payoff lacks preceding context.",
      "false": "The payoff has adequate setup or none is present."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0335. Vertical Frame Guard

ID: video-vertical-frame-guard
Sub-discipline: Aspect-ratio adaptation
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste landscape shot descriptions and target-platform notes, and Jev checks for crop loss, subject cutoffs, and caption collisions before the app flags reframing work.

Why typed decisions: Separate composition risks are faster to resolve than broad generated cropping advice.

TAM: TAM $4.5B video editing and publishing tools
SAM: SAM $780M vertical video repurposing
SOM: SOM $5M creator editing teams

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Vertical Frame Guard" 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 landscape shot descriptions and target-platform notes, and Jev checks for crop loss, subject cutoffs, and caption collisions before the app flags reframing work.
Discipline: Videography & Film (Aspect-ratio adaptation).
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: Separate composition risks are faster to resolve than broad generated cropping advice.

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": <Shot descriptions and vertical delivery 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)
{
  "crop_context_lost": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Would a vertical crop remove context essential to the shot?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Important subjects, action, or visual information sit outside the vertical safe area.",
      "false": "Essential context remains within the likely crop."
    }
  },
  "subject_cutoff": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is a key subject likely to be cut off by the vertical framing?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The subject's position or movement conflicts with the target frame.",
      "false": "Key subjects appear retainable within the frame."
    }
  },
  "caption_collision": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Would captions overlap a key subject or essential visual detail?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Caption-safe placement conflicts with important image content.",
      "false": "A clear caption-safe area is indicated."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0336. Location Sound Match

ID: video-location-sound-match
Sub-discipline: Post sound editing
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste scene audio notes and location records, and Jev checks for ambience mismatch, room-tone gaps, and perspective jumps before the app creates a sound-review queue.

Why typed decisions: Typed consistency checks make audio continuity review measurable without generating subjective mix notes.

TAM: TAM $3.8B audio post-production tools
SAM: SAM $660M film sound editing
SOM: SOM $4M post-production sound teams

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Location Sound Match" 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 scene audio notes and location records, and Jev checks for ambience mismatch, room-tone gaps, and perspective jumps before the app creates a sound-review queue.
Discipline: Videography & Film (Post sound editing).
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: Typed consistency checks make audio continuity review measurable without generating subjective mix notes.

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": <Scene audio notes and location records>, "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)
{
  "ambience_mismatch": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the ambience change unexpectedly between adjacent shots in one location?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Room tone or environmental sound differs without a scene change.",
      "false": "Ambience remains consistent or changes are motivated."
    }
  },
  "room_tone_gap": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is room tone missing where an edit is likely to need it?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Notes indicate dialogue edits but no usable room tone is available.",
      "false": "Room tone is available or not needed."
    }
  },
  "perspective_jump": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does sound perspective jump unnaturally across the cut?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Distance, reverberation, or apparent mic position changes without cause.",
      "false": "Perspective is consistent or intentionally changed."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0337. Take Select Signal

ID: video-take-select-signal
Sub-discipline: On-set video assist
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste camera take notes and performance observations, and Jev checks for technical defects, unusable performance, and slate ambiguity so the app surfaces takes needing review.

Why typed decisions: Multiple yes/no checks create a dependable shortlist while preserving the director's creative judgment.

TAM: TAM $2B production capture and review tools
SAM: SAM $360M video-assist workflows
SOM: SOM $2M small production crews

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Take Select Signal" 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 camera take notes and performance observations, and Jev checks for technical defects, unusable performance, and slate ambiguity so the app surfaces takes needing review.
Discipline: Videography & Film (On-set video assist).
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: Multiple yes/no checks create a dependable shortlist while preserving the director's creative 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": <Camera take log and performance observations>, "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)
{
  "technical_defect": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is a technical defect reported that could make the take unusable?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Focus, exposure, recording, or camera movement failure is noted.",
      "false": "No potentially disqualifying technical defect is noted."
    }
  },
  "performance_issue": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is a performance issue reported that undermines the intended beat?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The notes identify a missed line, action, or essential emotional beat.",
      "false": "The performance appears to meet the stated beat."
    }
  },
  "slate_ambiguity": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is the take identity unclear from its slate or log entry?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Scene, take, camera, or file identifiers are missing or conflicting.",
      "false": "The take is unambiguously identified."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0338. Ad Claim Frame Check

ID: video-ad-claim-frame-check
Sub-discipline: Branded video compliance
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste a branded-video script and shot plan, and Jev checks whether depicted claims, disclosures, and product details are supported before the app flags compliance review items.

Why typed decisions: Explicit checks help teams route concrete risks to reviewers without pretending to provide legal approval.

TAM: TAM $6B branded video production tools
SAM: SAM $1B agency video compliance workflows
SOM: SOM $4M creative agencies

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Ad Claim Frame Check" 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 branded-video script and shot plan, and Jev checks whether depicted claims, disclosures, and product details are supported before the app flags compliance review items.
Discipline: Videography & Film (Branded video compliance).
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 checks help teams route concrete risks to reviewers without pretending to provide legal approval.

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": <Branded-video script and shot plan>, "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)
{
  "claim_visual_support": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is a product claim depicted without supporting evidence in the shot plan?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The script makes a claim but no supporting visual or substantiation is listed.",
      "false": "Support is listed or the script makes no such claim."
    }
  },
  "disclosure_visibility": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is a required disclosure likely to be absent or unreadable?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The notes indicate missing, obscured, or inadequately timed disclosure.",
      "false": "Disclosure is accounted for or not indicated as required."
    }
  },
  "product_detail_mismatch": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the depicted product detail conflict with the supplied approved details?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "A feature, label, or use shown conflicts with the provided product record.",
      "false": "The depiction matches or no conflict is described."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0339. Focus Pull Risk Desk

ID: video-focus-pull-risk-desk
Sub-discipline: Camera department
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste shot descriptions and focus notes, and Jev checks for focus-critical action, depth-of-field risk, and missing marks before the app flags shots for camera review.

Why typed decisions: Distinct risk flags translate semantic shot requirements into direct crew checks, unlike free-form advice.

TAM: TAM $2.7B camera and production tools
SAM: SAM $440M professional video crews
SOM: SOM $2M camera departments

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Focus Pull Risk Desk" 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 shot descriptions and focus notes, and Jev checks for focus-critical action, depth-of-field risk, and missing marks before the app flags shots for camera review.
Discipline: Videography & Film (Camera department).
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: Distinct risk flags translate semantic shot requirements into direct crew checks, unlike free-form advice.

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": <Shot descriptions and focus-pull 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)
{
  "focus_critical_action": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the shot require focus to follow a critical moving subject or action?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The described action depends on a subject moving through focus planes.",
      "false": "The shot is static or focus-following is not essential."
    }
  },
  "depth_risk": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Do the notes indicate insufficient depth of field for the described action?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Multiple important planes or movements exceed the stated focus range.",
      "false": "The described focus range appears adequate."
    }
  },
  "mark_missing": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Are focus marks or focus cues missing for a planned repeatable move?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "A repeatable focus pull is planned without usable marks or cues.",
      "false": "Marks are present or no repeatable pull is required."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0340. Film Grain Consistency

ID: video-film-grain-consistency
Sub-discipline: Finishing
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste finishing notes and shot metadata, and Jev checks for inconsistent grain, sharpening artifacts, and mismatched texture so the app directs final-pass reviews.

Why typed decisions: Independent texture checks catch technical discontinuities while avoiding prescriptive aesthetic text.

TAM: TAM $3.1B finishing and post-production tools
SAM: SAM $520M final-grade workflows
SOM: SOM $3M finishing artists

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Film Grain Consistency" 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 finishing notes and shot metadata, and Jev checks for inconsistent grain, sharpening artifacts, and mismatched texture so the app directs final-pass reviews.
Discipline: Videography & Film (Finishing).
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: Independent texture checks catch technical discontinuities while avoiding prescriptive aesthetic text.

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": <Finishing notes and shot metadata>, "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)
{
  "grain_inconsistent": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does grain or texture vary unexpectedly across adjacent shots?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Adjacent shots have visibly different grain treatment without intent.",
      "false": "Texture is consistent or variation is intentional."
    }
  },
  "sharpening_artifact": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Are sharpening artifacts reported in the finished image?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Halos, ringing, or unnatural edge enhancement is noted.",
      "false": "No sharpening artifact is indicated."
    }
  },
  "texture_mismatch": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does processed footage conflict in texture with the surrounding material?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Noise reduction, detail, or image texture breaks continuity unexpectedly.",
      "false": "Texture matches or a difference is motivated."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0341. B-Roll Matchboard

ID: video-b-roll-matchboard
Sub-discipline: Documentary editing
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste a scene brief and candidate B-roll notes, and Jev scores each clip for narrative fit, visual relevance, and coverage value so you can rank them with adjustable weights.

Why typed decisions: Comparable scores make it easy to rank footage against the same editorial criteria without relying on generated descriptions.

TAM: Global video editing software: $1B+
SAM: Documentary and factual editors: $100M–$500M
SOM: Early niche capture: $1M–$5M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "B-Roll Matchboard" 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 scene brief and candidate B-roll notes, and Jev scores each clip for narrative fit, visual relevance, and coverage value so you can rank them with adjustable weights.
Discipline: Videography & Film (Documentary editing).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: Comparable scores make it easy to rank footage against the same editorial criteria without relying on generated descriptions.

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": <Scene brief and candidate clip 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)
{
  "narrative_fit": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How well does this clip support the scene’s narrative purpose?",
    "criteria": [
      "0 — Conflicts with the purpose",
      "1 — Weak or indirect support",
      "2 — Clear support",
      "3 — Strongly advances the purpose"
    ]
  },
  "visual_relevance": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How closely does the clip depict the scene’s subject or setting?",
    "criteria": [
      "0 — Unrelated",
      "1 — Loosely related",
      "2 — Clearly related",
      "3 — Directly depicts the subject or setting"
    ]
  },
  "coverage_value": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How much useful visual coverage does this clip add?",
    "criteria": [
      "0 — Adds no usable coverage",
      "1 — Adds little variety",
      "2 — Adds a useful angle or detail",
      "3 — Fills a major coverage need"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0342. Takekeeper Selects

ID: video-takekeeper-selects
Sub-discipline: Production dailies
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste a scene objective and notes for alternate takes, and Jev scores each take for performance, continuity, and technical usability to rank selects.

Why typed decisions: A shared scorecard gives editors consistent, adjustable comparisons across takes without turning selection into a prose summary.

TAM: Film and TV production tools: $1B+
SAM: Dailies and post-production teams: $100M–$500M
SOM: Independent productions: $1M–$5M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Takekeeper Selects" 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 scene objective and notes for alternate takes, and Jev scores each take for performance, continuity, and technical usability to rank selects.
Discipline: Videography & Film (Production dailies).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: A shared scorecard gives editors consistent, adjustable comparisons across takes without turning selection into a prose summary.

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": <Scene objective and per-take 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)
{
  "performance": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How effectively does the take deliver the intended performance?",
    "criteria": [
      "0 — Misses the intended performance",
      "1 — Partially lands it",
      "2 — Lands it clearly",
      "3 — Exceptional and compelling"
    ]
  },
  "continuity": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How well does the take fit continuity requirements?",
    "criteria": [
      "0 — Major continuity conflict",
      "1 — Noticeable conflict",
      "2 — Minor or manageable conflict",
      "3 — Clean continuity match"
    ]
  },
  "technical_usability": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How usable is the take technically for the edit?",
    "criteria": [
      "0 — Unusable",
      "1 — Usable only with substantial work",
      "2 — Usable with minor fixes",
      "3 — Ready for the edit"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0343. Cutaway Coverage Map

ID: video-cutaway-coverage-map
Sub-discipline: News editing
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste a story rundown and candidate cutaway descriptions, and Jev scores each cutaway for topic relevance, visual clarity, and edit coverage to rank options.

Why typed decisions: Comparable dimension scores help editors quickly find the most useful cutaway for a specific beat.

TAM: Newsroom production software: $500M–$2B
SAM: Video news editing teams: $100M–$500M
SOM: Small newsroom segment: $1M–$5M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Cutaway Coverage Map" 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 story rundown and candidate cutaway descriptions, and Jev scores each cutaway for topic relevance, visual clarity, and edit coverage to rank options.
Discipline: Videography & Film (News editing).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: Comparable dimension scores help editors quickly find the most useful cutaway for a specific beat.

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": <Story rundown and cutaway descriptions>, "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)
{
  "topic_relevance": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How directly does this cutaway relate to the story beat?",
    "criteria": [
      "0 — Unrelated",
      "1 — Indirect connection",
      "2 — Clear connection",
      "3 — Directly illustrates the beat"
    ]
  },
  "visual_clarity": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How clearly would the described image communicate on screen?",
    "criteria": [
      "0 — Difficult to understand",
      "1 — Requires context",
      "2 — Understandable at a glance",
      "3 — Instantly legible and specific"
    ]
  },
  "edit_coverage": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How well does this cutaway cover an edit or transition need?",
    "criteria": [
      "0 — No coverage value",
      "1 — Limited value",
      "2 — Useful for a likely edit",
      "3 — Fills a clear coverage gap"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0344. Color Reference Sorter

ID: video-color-reference-sorter
Sub-discipline: Color grading
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste a project look brief and candidate reference-image descriptions, and Jev scores each reference for palette, contrast, and mood alignment to rank grading targets.

Why typed decisions: A weighted scorecard makes subjective references comparable while leaving the final look choice to the colorist.

TAM: Color and finishing tools: $500M–$2B
SAM: Colorists and post houses: $100M–$500M
SOM: Independent colorists: $1M–$5M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Color Reference Sorter" 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 project look brief and candidate reference-image descriptions, and Jev scores each reference for palette, contrast, and mood alignment to rank grading targets.
Discipline: Videography & Film (Color grading).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: A weighted scorecard makes subjective references comparable while leaving the final look choice to the colorist.

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": <Look brief and reference descriptions>, "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)
{
  "palette_match": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How closely does the reference palette fit the intended look?",
    "criteria": [
      "0 — Opposes the intended palette",
      "1 — Shares a minor color cue",
      "2 — Mostly fits the palette",
      "3 — Strong palette match"
    ]
  },
  "contrast_match": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How well does the reference contrast suit the project?",
    "criteria": [
      "0 — Opposite contrast character",
      "1 — Weak match",
      "2 — Good match with adjustments",
      "3 — Strong match"
    ]
  },
  "mood_match": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How closely does the reference convey the intended mood?",
    "criteria": [
      "0 — Contradictory mood",
      "1 — Slight mood overlap",
      "2 — Clear mood match",
      "3 — Exact mood direction"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0345. Music Cue Matcher

ID: video-music-cue-matcher
Sub-discipline: Music supervision
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste a scene description and licensed-track metadata, and Jev scores each track for emotional fit, pacing, and tonal compatibility to rank cue candidates.

Why typed decisions: Consistent scores let creators compare tracks against the scene rather than sift through generated music recommendations.

TAM: Music licensing and discovery: $1B+
SAM: Video creator music selection: $100M–$500M
SOM: Independent creators: $1M–$5M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Music Cue Matcher" 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 scene description and licensed-track metadata, and Jev scores each track for emotional fit, pacing, and tonal compatibility to rank cue candidates.
Discipline: Videography & Film (Music supervision).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: Consistent scores let creators compare tracks against the scene rather than sift through generated music recommendations.

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": <Scene description and track metadata>, "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)
{
  "emotional_fit": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How well does this track support the scene’s emotional intent?",
    "criteria": [
      "0 — Undermines the emotion",
      "1 — Weak emotional fit",
      "2 — Supports the intended emotion",
      "3 — Intensifies it precisely"
    ]
  },
  "pacing_fit": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How well does the track’s described pace fit the scene?",
    "criteria": [
      "0 — Strongly mismatched",
      "1 — Somewhat mismatched",
      "2 — Generally suitable",
      "3 — Excellent pacing match"
    ]
  },
  "tonal_compatibility": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How well does the track fit the scene’s tonal style?",
    "criteria": [
      "0 — Tonally incompatible",
      "1 — Noticeably awkward fit",
      "2 — Compatible with minor caveats",
      "3 — Seamless tonal fit"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0346. Shotlist Feasibility Ranker

ID: video-shotlist-feasibility-ranker
Sub-discipline: Production planning
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste a shoot brief and proposed shots, and Jev scores each shot for story value, location feasibility, and setup efficiency so a weighted ranking guides the schedule.

Why typed decisions: Comparable scores help crews prioritize shots under real constraints without replacing the director’s judgment.

TAM: Production planning software: $500M–$2B
SAM: Small and mid-size production teams: $100M–$500M
SOM: Independent production crews: $1M–$5M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Shotlist Feasibility Ranker" 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 shoot brief and proposed shots, and Jev scores each shot for story value, location feasibility, and setup efficiency so a weighted ranking guides the schedule.
Discipline: Videography & Film (Production planning).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: Comparable scores help crews prioritize shots under real constraints without replacing the director’s 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": <Shoot brief, shot descriptions, and constraints>, "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)
{
  "story_value": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How important is this shot to communicating the story?",
    "criteria": [
      "0 — No meaningful story value",
      "1 — Nice-to-have detail",
      "2 — Supports an important beat",
      "3 — Essential story beat"
    ]
  },
  "location_feasibility": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How feasible is this shot under the stated location constraints?",
    "criteria": [
      "0 — Not feasible",
      "1 — Major obstacles",
      "2 — Feasible with adjustments",
      "3 — Straightforward to shoot"
    ]
  },
  "setup_efficiency": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How efficiently can this shot be captured relative to its value?",
    "criteria": [
      "0 — Very costly for little value",
      "1 — Inefficient setup",
      "2 — Reasonable effort",
      "3 — High value for minimal setup"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0347. Thumbnail Frame Finder

ID: video-thumbnail-frame-finder
Sub-discipline: Creator publishing
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste a video premise and candidate frame descriptions, and Jev scores each frame for subject clarity, emotional impact, and premise relevance to rank thumbnail options.

Why typed decisions: A consistent visual scorecard helps creators choose among real frames without generating replacement artwork or copy.

TAM: Creator publishing tools: $1B+
SAM: Video thumbnail workflow tools: $100M–$500M
SOM: Creator teams: $1M–$5M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Thumbnail Frame Finder" 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 video premise and candidate frame descriptions, and Jev scores each frame for subject clarity, emotional impact, and premise relevance to rank thumbnail options.
Discipline: Videography & Film (Creator publishing).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: A consistent visual scorecard helps creators choose among real frames without generating replacement artwork or copy.

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": <Video premise and frame descriptions>, "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)
{
  "subject_clarity": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How clearly does the frame show its main subject?",
    "criteria": [
      "0 — Subject unclear",
      "1 — Subject partly obscured",
      "2 — Subject clear",
      "3 — Subject immediately unmistakable"
    ]
  },
  "emotional_impact": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How strongly does the frame convey an expressive moment?",
    "criteria": [
      "0 — No expressive impact",
      "1 — Subtle impact",
      "2 — Noticeable impact",
      "3 — Highly expressive and engaging"
    ]
  },
  "premise_relevance": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How well does the frame represent the video premise?",
    "criteria": [
      "0 — Misrepresents the video",
      "1 — Weak connection",
      "2 — Represents a key element",
      "3 — Instantly communicates the premise"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0348. Transition Point Scout

ID: video-transition-point-scout
Sub-discipline: Short-form editing
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste a sequence outline and candidate transition-point notes, and Jev scores each point for visual match, rhythmic fit, and narrative smoothness to rank edit options.

Why typed decisions: Scores let editors compare likely transition points on repeatable criteria instead of accepting a generated cut suggestion.

TAM: Editing and post-production software: $1B+
SAM: Short-form editing workflows: $100M–$500M
SOM: Social video editors: $1M–$5M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Transition Point Scout" 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 sequence outline and candidate transition-point notes, and Jev scores each point for visual match, rhythmic fit, and narrative smoothness to rank edit options.
Discipline: Videography & Film (Short-form editing).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: Scores let editors compare likely transition points on repeatable criteria instead of accepting a generated cut suggestion.

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": <Sequence outline and transition-point 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)
{
  "visual_match": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How well do the adjoining visuals match at this point?",
    "criteria": [
      "0 — Abrupt visual clash",
      "1 — Noticeable mismatch",
      "2 — Mostly compatible",
      "3 — Natural visual match"
    ]
  },
  "rhythmic_fit": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How well does this point fit the sequence rhythm?",
    "criteria": [
      "0 — Breaks the rhythm",
      "1 — Weak timing fit",
      "2 — Fits the rhythm",
      "3 — Strengthens the rhythm"
    ]
  },
  "narrative_smoothness": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How smoothly does the transition preserve the sequence logic?",
    "criteria": [
      "0 — Confusing jump",
      "1 — Requires explanation",
      "2 — Understandable transition",
      "3 — Seamless progression"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0349. Location Scout Sorter

ID: video-location-scout-sorter-1
Sub-discipline: Location scouting
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste a production brief and candidate location notes, and Jev scores locations for visual fit, practical access, and shooting flexibility to rank scout options.

Why typed decisions: A transparent weighted ranking compares locations against the actual brief while keeping final selection with the production team.

TAM: Location and production services: $500M–$2B
SAM: Film and commercial location teams: $100M–$500M
SOM: Regional scout services: $1M–$5M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Location Scout Sorter" 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 production brief and candidate location notes, and Jev scores locations for visual fit, practical access, and shooting flexibility to rank scout options.
Discipline: Videography & Film (Location scouting).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: A transparent weighted ranking compares locations against the actual brief while keeping final selection with the production team.

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": <Production brief and location 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)
{
  "visual_fit": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How closely does the location’s visual character fit the brief?",
    "criteria": [
      "0 — Clearly wrong look",
      "1 — Limited visual overlap",
      "2 — Good visual fit",
      "3 — Exact visual direction"
    ]
  },
  "practical_access": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How practical is access under the stated production needs?",
    "criteria": [
      "0 — Access not workable",
      "1 — Major access barriers",
      "2 — Manageable access",
      "3 — Straightforward access"
    ]
  },
  "shooting_flexibility": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How well can the location support varied shots or setups?",
    "criteria": [
      "0 — Very restrictive",
      "1 — Few usable options",
      "2 — Several useful options",
      "3 — Broad, flexible coverage"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0350. Reel Sequence Curator

ID: video-reel-sequence-curator
Sub-discipline: Portfolio editing
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste a reel brief and candidate project clips, and Jev scores each clip for relevance, visual distinction, and sequence contribution to rank what belongs in the cut.

Why typed decisions: Comparable scores help editors make a deliberate portfolio selection without having a model write a reel narrative.

TAM: Portfolio and creator tools: $500M–$2B
SAM: Videographer reel editing: $100M–$500M
SOM: Freelance portfolio creators: $1M–$5M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Reel Sequence Curator" 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 reel brief and candidate project clips, and Jev scores each clip for relevance, visual distinction, and sequence contribution to rank what belongs in the cut.
Discipline: Videography & Film (Portfolio editing).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: Comparable scores help editors make a deliberate portfolio selection without having a model write a reel narrative.

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": <Reel brief and candidate clip descriptions>, "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)
{
  "relevance": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How relevant is this clip to the target reel brief?",
    "criteria": [
      "0 — Off-brief",
      "1 — Loosely relevant",
      "2 — Clearly relevant",
      "3 — Directly demonstrates the target work"
    ]
  },
  "visual_distinction": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How visually distinctive is this clip relative to other candidates?",
    "criteria": [
      "0 — Repetitive or generic",
      "1 — Slightly distinctive",
      "2 — Clearly distinctive",
      "3 — Memorable signature image"
    ]
  },
  "sequence_contribution": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How much does this clip improve the reel’s overall variety?",
    "criteria": [
      "0 — Adds no variety",
      "1 — Minor variation",
      "2 — Adds a useful contrast",
      "3 — Fills a major range or style gap"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0351. Interview Bite Ranker

ID: video-interview-bite-ranker
Sub-discipline: Interview editing
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste an interview topic and candidate bite notes, and Jev scores each bite for clarity, emotional resonance, and editorial relevance to rank selects.

Why typed decisions: A bite-by-bite scorecard makes editorial comparisons clear and adjustable without paraphrasing interview material.

TAM: Interview and documentary editing: $500M–$2B
SAM: Documentary and branded-content editors: $100M–$500M
SOM: Small post-production teams: $1M–$5M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Interview Bite Ranker" 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 an interview topic and candidate bite notes, and Jev scores each bite for clarity, emotional resonance, and editorial relevance to rank selects.
Discipline: Videography & Film (Interview editing).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: A bite-by-bite scorecard makes editorial comparisons clear and adjustable without paraphrasing interview material.

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": <Interview topic and candidate bite 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)
{
  "bite_clarity": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How clearly does this bite communicate its point on its own?",
    "criteria": [
      "0 — Incomprehensible",
      "1 — Needs substantial context",
      "2 — Mostly clear",
      "3 — Clear and self-contained"
    ]
  },
  "emotional_resonance": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How strongly does the bite convey a human feeling or stake?",
    "criteria": [
      "0 — No emotional connection",
      "1 — Slight connection",
      "2 — Clear emotional resonance",
      "3 — Powerful and memorable"
    ]
  },
  "editorial_relevance": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How directly does the bite serve the story’s editorial purpose?",
    "criteria": [
      "0 — Irrelevant",
      "1 — Tangential",
      "2 — Supports a key point",
      "3 — Essential to the story"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0352. Soundscape Layer Picker

ID: video-soundscape-layer-picker
Sub-discipline: Sound design
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste a scene sound brief and candidate ambience or effect notes, and Jev scores each layer for scene fit, realism, and mix usefulness to rank options.

Why typed decisions: Typed scores compare sound layers against concrete scene needs while avoiding generated audio or descriptive copy.

TAM: Audio post-production tools: $500M–$2B
SAM: Video sound-design workflows: $100M–$500M
SOM: Independent sound editors: $1M–$5M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Soundscape Layer Picker" 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 scene sound brief and candidate ambience or effect notes, and Jev scores each layer for scene fit, realism, and mix usefulness to rank options.
Discipline: Videography & Film (Sound design).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: Typed scores compare sound layers against concrete scene needs while avoiding generated audio or descriptive copy.

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": <Scene sound brief and candidate layer 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)
{
  "scene_fit": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How well does this layer fit the scene’s place and action?",
    "criteria": [
      "0 — Contradicts the scene",
      "1 — Weak fit",
      "2 — Clear fit",
      "3 — Strongly anchors the scene"
    ]
  },
  "perceived_realism": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How plausible would this layer feel in the scene?",
    "criteria": [
      "0 — Clearly implausible",
      "1 — Noticeably artificial",
      "2 — Mostly believable",
      "3 — Highly convincing"
    ]
  },
  "mix_usefulness": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How useful is this layer to the intended sound mix?",
    "criteria": [
      "0 — Adds no useful function",
      "1 — Limited contribution",
      "2 — Provides a useful layer",
      "3 — Fills a clear sonic need"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0353. Caption Safe-Frame Checker

ID: video-caption-safe-frame-checker
Sub-discipline: Social video finishing
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste platform safe-area rules and candidate frame notes, and Jev scores each frame for caption clearance, subject visibility, and composition balance to rank placements.

Why typed decisions: Comparable scores highlight frame risks early without generating captions or changing the creator’s edit.

TAM: Social video production tools: $1B+
SAM: Short-form finishing and compliance: $100M–$500M
SOM: Creator publishing teams: $1M–$5M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Caption Safe-Frame Checker" 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 platform safe-area rules and candidate frame notes, and Jev scores each frame for caption clearance, subject visibility, and composition balance to rank placements.
Discipline: Videography & Film (Social video finishing).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: Comparable scores highlight frame risks early without generating captions or changing the creator’s edit.

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": <Platform rules and candidate frame 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)
{
  "caption_clearance": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How well does the frame leave room for the planned captions?",
    "criteria": [
      "0 — Captions obscure essential content",
      "1 — Significant overlap risk",
      "2 — Minor adjustment needed",
      "3 — Clear caption-safe area"
    ]
  },
  "subject_visibility": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How visible is the main subject within the intended frame?",
    "criteria": [
      "0 — Subject cut off or obscured",
      "1 — Poorly framed",
      "2 — Clearly visible",
      "3 — Prominent and well framed"
    ]
  },
  "composition_balance": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How well does the composition balance subject, captions, and interface overlays?",
    "criteria": [
      "0 — Major collision or imbalance",
      "1 — Noticeable crowding",
      "2 — Mostly balanced",
      "3 — Clear, balanced layout"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0354. Archive Footage Matcher

ID: video-archive-footage-matcher
Sub-discipline: Footage archives
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste a project brief and archived clip metadata, and Jev scores clips for subject match, period fit, and usable visual quality to rank archival options.

Why typed decisions: A score ranker lets researchers compare archive candidates using consistent editorial criteria rather than keyword matches alone.

TAM: Media asset management: $1B+
SAM: Archive research and footage licensing: $100M–$500M
SOM: Independent producers: $1M–$5M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Archive Footage Matcher" 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 project brief and archived clip metadata, and Jev scores clips for subject match, period fit, and usable visual quality to rank archival options.
Discipline: Videography & Film (Footage archives).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: A score ranker lets researchers compare archive candidates using consistent editorial criteria rather than keyword matches alone.

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": <Project brief and archive clip metadata>, "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)
{
  "subject_match": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How closely does this clip match the brief’s requested subject?",
    "criteria": [
      "0 — No subject match",
      "1 — Indirectly related",
      "2 — Clear subject match",
      "3 — Direct and specific match"
    ]
  },
  "period_fit": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How well does the clip fit the requested time period or context?",
    "criteria": [
      "0 — Conflicts with the period",
      "1 — Unclear or weak fit",
      "2 — Plausible fit",
      "3 — Strongly verified fit from the notes"
    ]
  },
  "visual_usability": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How usable is the described image for the intended edit?",
    "criteria": [
      "0 — Not usable",
      "1 — Usable only as a brief insert",
      "2 — Usable with some limitations",
      "3 — Strong, clean editorial material"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0355. Drone Shot Planner

ID: video-drone-shot-planner
Sub-discipline: Aerial cinematography
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste an aerial sequence brief and proposed drone shots, and Jev scores each for story impact, safety feasibility, and visual continuity to rank the shot plan.

Why typed decisions: A weighted assessment compares proposed aerial shots while keeping safety constraints explicit and human-reviewed.

TAM: Aerial production tools: $500M–$2B
SAM: Commercial and film drone crews: $100M–$500M
SOM: Small aerial teams: $1M–$5M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Drone Shot Planner" 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 an aerial sequence brief and proposed drone shots, and Jev scores each for story impact, safety feasibility, and visual continuity to rank the shot plan.
Discipline: Videography & Film (Aerial cinematography).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: A weighted assessment compares proposed aerial shots while keeping safety constraints explicit and human-reviewed.

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": <Aerial brief, shot notes, and safety constraints>, "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)
{
  "story_impact": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How much does this aerial shot contribute to the sequence?",
    "criteria": [
      "0 — No meaningful contribution",
      "1 — Decorative only",
      "2 — Supports the sequence",
      "3 — Essential establishing or story image"
    ]
  },
  "safety_feasibility": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How feasible is the shot under the supplied safety constraints?",
    "criteria": [
      "0 — Conflicts with a stated constraint",
      "1 — Significant unresolved risks",
      "2 — Feasible with precautions",
      "3 — Feasible within stated constraints"
    ]
  },
  "visual_continuity": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How well does the shot fit the sequence’s visual continuity?",
    "criteria": [
      "0 — Strong mismatch",
      "1 — Noticeable mismatch",
      "2 — Compatible with minor adjustment",
      "3 — Seamless visual fit"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0356. Green Screen Plate Ranker

ID: video-green-screen-plate-ranker
Sub-discipline: Visual effects
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste a composite brief and candidate background plates, and Jev scores each for perspective match, lighting compatibility, and compositing practicality to rank plates.

Why typed decisions: Comparable ratings identify promising plates before expensive compositing work begins, without attempting to create imagery.

TAM: Visual effects software and services: $1B+
SAM: Small and mid-size compositing teams: $100M–$500M
SOM: Freelance VFX artists: $1M–$5M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Green Screen Plate Ranker" 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 composite brief and candidate background plates, and Jev scores each for perspective match, lighting compatibility, and compositing practicality to rank plates.
Discipline: Videography & Film (Visual effects).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: Comparable ratings identify promising plates before expensive compositing work begins, without attempting to create imagery.

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": <Composite brief and plate descriptions>, "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)
{
  "perspective_match": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How well does the plate perspective match the foreground action?",
    "criteria": [
      "0 — Perspective incompatible",
      "1 — Major mismatch",
      "2 — Mostly compatible",
      "3 — Strong perspective match"
    ]
  },
  "lighting_compatibility": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How well can the plate lighting match the foreground?",
    "criteria": [
      "0 — Incompatible lighting",
      "1 — Major relighting needed",
      "2 — Matchable with adjustments",
      "3 — Naturally compatible"
    ]
  },
  "compositing_practicality": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How practical is the plate for the planned composite?",
    "criteria": [
      "0 — Not practical",
      "1 — Major extraction or cleanup burden",
      "2 — Manageable work",
      "3 — Straightforward composite"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0357. Continuity Prop Tracker

ID: video-continuity-prop-tracker
Sub-discipline: Script supervision
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste scene continuity notes and candidate prop or wardrobe states, and Jev scores each state for script consistency, shot visibility, and matching practicality to rank fixes.

Why typed decisions: A consistent ranking helps teams resolve mismatches quickly without asking a model to invent continuity notes.

TAM: Film production management: $500M–$2B
SAM: Script supervision and continuity teams: $100M–$500M
SOM: Independent production crews: $1M–$5M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Continuity Prop Tracker" 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 scene continuity notes and candidate prop or wardrobe states, and Jev scores each state for script consistency, shot visibility, and matching practicality to rank fixes.
Discipline: Videography & Film (Script supervision).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: A consistent ranking helps teams resolve mismatches quickly without asking a model to invent continuity notes.

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": <Continuity notes and candidate prop or wardrobe states>, "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)
{
  "script_consistency": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How well does this state agree with the supplied continuity notes?",
    "criteria": [
      "0 — Direct contradiction",
      "1 — Significant discrepancy",
      "2 — Minor discrepancy",
      "3 — Fully consistent"
    ]
  },
  "shot_visibility": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How visible is the item in the relevant shot?",
    "criteria": [
      "0 — Not visible",
      "1 — Barely visible",
      "2 — Clearly visible",
      "3 — Prominent in the frame"
    ]
  },
  "matching_practicality": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How practical is it to match this state in other shots?",
    "criteria": [
      "0 — Cannot be matched",
      "1 — Difficult to reproduce",
      "2 — Reproducible with care",
      "3 — Easy to match consistently"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0358. Lens Package Comparator

ID: video-lens-package-comparator
Sub-discipline: Camera department
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste a visual brief and candidate lens-package notes, and Jev scores each package for look fit, shooting flexibility, and production practicality to rank options.

Why typed decisions: A weighted comparison turns subjective lens preferences into explicit trade-offs the cinematographer can inspect.

TAM: Cinema camera and production tools: $1B+
SAM: Camera departments and rental planning: $100M–$500M
SOM: Independent cinematographers: $1M–$5M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Lens Package Comparator" 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 visual brief and candidate lens-package notes, and Jev scores each package for look fit, shooting flexibility, and production practicality to rank options.
Discipline: Videography & Film (Camera department).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: A weighted comparison turns subjective lens preferences into explicit trade-offs the cinematographer can inspect.

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": <Visual brief, lens notes, and production constraints>, "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)
{
  "look_fit": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How well does the described lens character fit the intended look?",
    "criteria": [
      "0 — Opposes the intended look",
      "1 — Weak resemblance",
      "2 — Good fit with caveats",
      "3 — Strong look match"
    ]
  },
  "shooting_flexibility": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How well does the package support the planned range of shots?",
    "criteria": [
      "0 — Cannot support the plan",
      "1 — Major coverage gaps",
      "2 — Covers most planned shots",
      "3 — Supports the full range flexibly"
    ]
  },
  "production_practicality": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How practical is the package for the stated production conditions?",
    "criteria": [
      "0 — Impractical",
      "1 — Significant limitations",
      "2 — Manageable trade-offs",
      "3 — Well suited to the conditions"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0359. Vertical Crop Candidate

ID: video-vertical-crop-candidate
Sub-discipline: Video repurposing
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste a source-shot description and candidate vertical crops, and Jev scores each crop for subject retention, action readability, and composition quality to rank reframing options.

Why typed decisions: Comparable crop scores help editors adapt footage for vertical formats while preserving the original image and editorial control.

TAM: Video editing and repurposing software: $1B+
SAM: Vertical video adaptation workflows: $100M–$500M
SOM: Social-first editors: $1M–$5M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Vertical Crop Candidate" 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 source-shot description and candidate vertical crops, and Jev scores each crop for subject retention, action readability, and composition quality to rank reframing options.
Discipline: Videography & Film (Video repurposing).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: Comparable crop scores help editors adapt footage for vertical formats while preserving the original image and editorial control.

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": <Source-shot description and crop options>, "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)
{
  "subject_retention": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How well does the crop keep essential subjects in frame?",
    "criteria": [
      "0 — Essential subject lost",
      "1 — Subject poorly retained",
      "2 — Subject retained with compromise",
      "3 — All essential subjects retained"
    ]
  },
  "action_readability": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How clearly does the crop communicate the key action?",
    "criteria": [
      "0 — Action unclear",
      "1 — Action partly obscured",
      "2 — Action readable",
      "3 — Action immediately clear"
    ]
  },
  "composition_quality": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How strong is the composition within the vertical frame?",
    "criteria": [
      "0 — Unbalanced or unusable",
      "1 — Awkward composition",
      "2 — Acceptable composition",
      "3 — Strong, intentional framing"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0360. Opening Hook Comparator

ID: video-opening-hook-comparator
Sub-discipline: Creator editing
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste a video premise and candidate opening-shot notes, and Jev scores each opening for immediate clarity, curiosity, and premise alignment to rank hook options.

Why typed decisions: A repeatable scorecard compares real opening shots on audience-facing qualities without generating hook scripts.

TAM: Creator video tools: $1B+
SAM: Video retention and editing workflows: $100M–$500M
SOM: Independent creator businesses: $1M–$5M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Opening Hook Comparator" 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 video premise and candidate opening-shot notes, and Jev scores each opening for immediate clarity, curiosity, and premise alignment to rank hook options.
Discipline: Videography & Film (Creator editing).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: A repeatable scorecard compares real opening shots on audience-facing qualities without generating hook scripts.

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": <Video premise and opening-shot 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)
{
  "immediate_clarity": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How quickly would a viewer understand what is happening?",
    "criteria": [
      "0 — Confusing",
      "1 — Requires extended context",
      "2 — Clear after a brief moment",
      "3 — Instantly clear"
    ]
  },
  "curiosity": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How strongly does the opening invite the viewer to keep watching?",
    "criteria": [
      "0 — No reason to continue",
      "1 — Mild interest",
      "2 — Clear unanswered question or intrigue",
      "3 — Strong immediate pull"
    ]
  },
  "premise_alignment": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How well does the opening represent the video’s actual premise?",
    "criteria": [
      "0 — Misleading",
      "1 — Weak connection",
      "2 — Mostly representative",
      "3 — Directly establishes the premise"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0361. Timecode Match Desk

ID: video-timecode-match-desk
Sub-discipline: Footage logging
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: Paste a transcript beside code-extracted timecodes and Jev selects the span that best matches each requested topic, or none, so you can copy the original timecode.

Why typed decisions: A typed selection preserves exact source timecodes and avoids invented edit points.

TAM: Global video production software: multi-billion-dollar market
SAM: Footage logging and post-production tools: hundreds of millions
SOM: Early niche creator tool: low single-digit millions

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Timecode Match Desk" 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 transcript beside code-extracted timecodes and Jev selects the span that best matches each requested topic, or none, so you can copy the original timecode.
Discipline: Videography & Film (Footage logging).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: A typed selection preserves exact source timecodes and avoids invented edit points.

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": <Topic labels, timecodes, and nearby transcript spans>, "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)
{
  "topic_match": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which candidate span best matches the requested topic?",
    "criteria": {
      "span_a": "Candidate transcript span A",
      "span_b": "Candidate transcript span B",
      "span_c": "Candidate transcript span C",
      "none": "No candidate is a good match"
    }
  },
  "context_complete": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How much context does the selected span include?",
    "criteria": [
      "Fragmentary: missing essential context",
      "Partial: useful but incomplete",
      "Strong: understandable with minor context",
      "Complete: clear and self-contained"
    ]
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0362. Take Select Compass

ID: video-take-select-compass
Sub-discipline: Production editing
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: Paste a scene’s take notes and Jev chooses the best matching take number from code-extracted candidates, or none, for your editor’s selects list.

Why typed decisions: A typed choice points to a real take instead of fabricating a recommendation or take identifier.

TAM: Global film and video production market: tens of billions
SAM: Editing and production workflow software: billions
SOM: Independent-editor take selection niche: low single-digit millions

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Take Select Compass" 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 scene’s take notes and Jev chooses the best matching take number from code-extracted candidates, or none, for your editor’s selects list.
Discipline: Videography & Film (Production editing).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: A typed choice points to a real take instead of fabricating a recommendation or take identifier.

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": <Scene ID, take numbers, and production 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)
{
  "best_take": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which recorded take best fits the stated scene requirement?",
    "criteria": {
      "take_1": "Candidate take 1",
      "take_2": "Candidate take 2",
      "take_3": "Candidate take 3",
      "none": "No take clearly fits"
    }
  },
  "note_confidence": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How clearly do the notes distinguish the candidates?",
    "criteria": [
      "Unclear: little usable evidence",
      "Limited: some distinction",
      "Clear: useful distinguishing details",
      "Very clear: explicit comparative evidence"
    ]
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0363. Caption Phrase Finder

ID: video-caption-phrase-finder
Sub-discipline: Social video editing
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: Paste a draft caption and a transcript, then Jev selects a matching phrase from extracted transcript spans, or none, for you to copy into the caption.

Why typed decisions: Selection keeps quoted captions faithful to what was actually said rather than generating a paraphrase.

TAM: Global creator economy software: multi-billion-dollar market
SAM: Captioning and social video tools: hundreds of millions
SOM: Quote-selection feature niche: low single-digit millions

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Caption Phrase Finder" 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 draft caption and a transcript, then Jev selects a matching phrase from extracted transcript spans, or none, for you to copy into the caption.
Discipline: Videography & Film (Social video editing).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: Selection keeps quoted captions faithful to what was actually said rather than generating a paraphrase.

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": <Draft caption and extracted transcript phrases>, "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)
{
  "caption_phrase": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which source phrase best supports the caption?",
    "criteria": {
      "phrase_a": "Extracted transcript phrase A",
      "phrase_b": "Extracted transcript phrase B",
      "phrase_c": "Extracted transcript phrase C",
      "none": "No phrase supports the caption"
    }
  },
  "quote_suitability": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How suitable is the selected phrase as a direct quote?",
    "criteria": [
      "Poor: misleading or incomplete",
      "Fair: usable with surrounding context",
      "Good: clear and faithful",
      "Excellent: concise and self-contained"
    ]
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0364. Continuity Detail Keeper

ID: video-continuity-detail-keeper
Sub-discipline: Script supervision
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: Paste continuity notes and scene descriptions, then Jev selects the matching extracted prop, wardrobe, or action detail, or none, for a continuity report.

Why typed decisions: A typed match lets crews reuse documented details without introducing invented continuity facts.

TAM: Global film production services and software: tens of billions
SAM: Script supervision and production workflow tools: hundreds of millions
SOM: Continuity-assistance niche: low single-digit millions

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Continuity Detail Keeper" 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 continuity notes and scene descriptions, then Jev selects the matching extracted prop, wardrobe, or action detail, or none, for a continuity report.
Discipline: Videography & Film (Script supervision).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: A typed match lets crews reuse documented details without introducing invented continuity facts.

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": <Scene identifiers, continuity notes, and extracted details>, "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)
{
  "continuity_match": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which extracted detail matches the scene note?",
    "criteria": {
      "detail_a": "Candidate continuity detail A",
      "detail_b": "Candidate continuity detail B",
      "detail_c": "Candidate continuity detail C",
      "none": "No detail matches"
    }
  },
  "continuity_risk": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How likely is this mismatch to affect continuity?",
    "criteria": [
      "Low: cosmetic difference",
      "Moderate: noticeable on review",
      "High: obvious between shots",
      "Critical: breaks scene continuity"
    ]
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0365. Grade Reference Picker

ID: video-grade-reference-picker
Sub-discipline: Color grading
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: Paste colorist notes and a reference-shot list, then Jev selects the best-matching existing shot ID from extracted candidates, or none, for your grade session.

Why typed decisions: A typed ID reliably locates an actual reference frame instead of describing or inventing one.

TAM: Global post-production software market: billions
SAM: Color grading and media asset tools: hundreds of millions
SOM: Reference-matching tool niche: low single-digit millions

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Grade Reference Picker" 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 colorist notes and a reference-shot list, then Jev selects the best-matching existing shot ID from extracted candidates, or none, for your grade session.
Discipline: Videography & Film (Color grading).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: A typed ID reliably locates an actual reference frame instead of describing or inventing one.

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": <Color notes, shot IDs, and extracted shot metadata>, "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)
{
  "reference_shot": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which candidate shot best matches the requested visual reference?",
    "criteria": {
      "shot_a": "Candidate shot A",
      "shot_b": "Candidate shot B",
      "shot_c": "Candidate shot C",
      "none": "No shot is a strong match"
    }
  },
  "match_strength": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How closely does the selected shot match the reference criteria?",
    "criteria": [
      "Weak: major visual differences",
      "Moderate: some shared qualities",
      "Strong: close match on key qualities",
      "Very strong: near-exact match"
    ]
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0366. Interview Quote Ledger

ID: video-interview-quote-ledger
Sub-discipline: Documentary editing
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: Paste an interview transcript and an edit brief, then Jev selects the most relevant verbatim transcript span, or none, for your paper edit.

Why typed decisions: A typed span selection protects quote accuracy and makes every chosen line traceable to source text.

TAM: Global documentary production market: billions
SAM: Documentary editing and transcript tools: hundreds of millions
SOM: Paper-edit workflow niche: low single-digit millions

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Interview Quote Ledger" 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 an interview transcript and an edit brief, then Jev selects the most relevant verbatim transcript span, or none, for your paper edit.
Discipline: Videography & Film (Documentary editing).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: A typed span selection protects quote accuracy and makes every chosen line traceable to source text.

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": <Edit brief and extracted interview transcript spans>, "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)
{
  "quote_span": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which transcript span best addresses the brief?",
    "criteria": {
      "span_a": "Candidate verbatim span A",
      "span_b": "Candidate verbatim span B",
      "span_c": "Candidate verbatim span C",
      "none": "No span addresses the brief"
    }
  },
  "standalone_clarity": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How well does the span work without surrounding transcript?",
    "criteria": [
      "Poor: unclear without substantial context",
      "Fair: needs a brief lead-in",
      "Good: mostly understandable alone",
      "Excellent: clear and complete alone"
    ]
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0367. B-Roll Matchboard

ID: video-b-roll-matchboard-1
Sub-discipline: Video editing
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: Paste a sequence brief and a list of logged clips, then Jev selects the best-matching clip ID from extracted candidates, or none, for your b-roll board.

Why typed decisions: A typed selection links an edit brief to real, searchable footage rather than generating imaginary shot suggestions.

TAM: Global video editing and media asset market: billions
SAM: Footage search and media management tools: hundreds of millions
SOM: B-roll matching niche: low single-digit millions

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "B-Roll Matchboard" 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 sequence brief and a list of logged clips, then Jev selects the best-matching clip ID from extracted candidates, or none, for your b-roll board.
Discipline: Videography & Film (Video editing).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: A typed selection links an edit brief to real, searchable footage rather than generating imaginary shot suggestions.

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": <Sequence brief, clip IDs, and logged descriptions>, "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)
{
  "clip_match": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which logged clip best illustrates the sequence brief?",
    "criteria": {
      "clip_a": "Candidate clip A",
      "clip_b": "Candidate clip B",
      "clip_c": "Candidate clip C",
      "none": "No clip fits the brief"
    }
  },
  "coverage_level": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How well does the chosen clip cover the requested visual need?",
    "criteria": [
      "Poor: unrelated or unusable",
      "Partial: related but incomplete",
      "Good: covers the main need",
      "Excellent: directly and fully covers it"
    ]
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0368. Screening Note Locator

ID: video-screening-note-locator
Sub-discipline: Film review workflows
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: Paste screening notes and an edit-decision list, then Jev selects the exact existing note span tied to a requested change, or none, for your review log.

Why typed decisions: A typed span keeps feedback traceable to reviewer wording and prevents invented revision requests.

TAM: Global film and video post-production market: billions
SAM: Review and collaboration software: hundreds of millions
SOM: Screening-note organization niche: low single-digit millions

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Screening Note Locator" 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 screening notes and an edit-decision list, then Jev selects the exact existing note span tied to a requested change, or none, for your review log.
Discipline: Videography & Film (Film review workflows).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: A typed span keeps feedback traceable to reviewer wording and prevents invented revision requests.

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": <Reviewer notes and extracted edit-decision spans>, "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)
{
  "note_match": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which note span refers to the requested edit?",
    "criteria": {
      "note_a": "Candidate note span A",
      "note_b": "Candidate note span B",
      "note_c": "Candidate note span C",
      "none": "No note refers to this edit"
    }
  },
  "actionability": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How actionable is the selected note?",
    "criteria": [
      "Vague: no clear change indicated",
      "Limited: direction is implied",
      "Actionable: change is identifiable",
      "Specific: change and location are clear"
    ]
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0369. Subtitle Source Checker

ID: video-subtitle-source-checker
Sub-discipline: Subtitle editing
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: Paste subtitle lines and a transcript, then Jev selects the closest matching extracted source span, or none, so editors can verify subtitles against original text.

Why typed decisions: A typed match surfaces real source wording for correction without silently rewriting subtitles.

TAM: Global subtitling and localization market: billions
SAM: Subtitle editing and quality-control tools: hundreds of millions
SOM: Transcript-to-subtitle checking niche: low single-digit millions

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Subtitle Source Checker" 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 subtitle lines and a transcript, then Jev selects the closest matching extracted source span, or none, so editors can verify subtitles against original text.
Discipline: Videography & Film (Subtitle editing).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: A typed match surfaces real source wording for correction without silently rewriting subtitles.

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": <Subtitle lines and extracted transcript spans>, "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)
{
  "source_match": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which source span best corresponds to this subtitle line?",
    "criteria": {
      "source_a": "Candidate source span A",
      "source_b": "Candidate source span B",
      "source_c": "Candidate source span C",
      "none": "No source span corresponds"
    }
  },
  "fidelity": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How faithfully does the subtitle reflect the selected source?",
    "criteria": [
      "Low: meaning differs substantially",
      "Partial: meaning is mostly preserved",
      "High: wording and meaning align",
      "Exact: direct wording match"
    ]
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0370. Shot List Crosscheck

ID: video-shot-list-crosscheck
Sub-discipline: Pre-production planning
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: Paste a shot list and location notes, then Jev selects the matching extracted location or setup detail, or none, to flag entries needing a production check.

Why typed decisions: A typed match connects planning items to documented facts without generating new production details.

TAM: Global film and video production market: tens of billions
SAM: Pre-production planning software: hundreds of millions
SOM: Shot-list verification niche: low single-digit millions

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Shot List Crosscheck" 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 shot list and location notes, then Jev selects the matching extracted location or setup detail, or none, to flag entries needing a production check.
Discipline: Videography & Film (Pre-production planning).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: A typed match connects planning items to documented facts without generating new production details.

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": <Shot list entries, location notes, and setup values>, "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)
{
  "location_match": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which documented detail best matches this shot-list entry?",
    "criteria": {
      "value_a": "Candidate detail A",
      "value_b": "Candidate detail B",
      "value_c": "Candidate detail C",
      "none": "No documented detail matches"
    }
  },
  "planning_confidence": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How complete is the supporting location information?",
    "criteria": [
      "Sparse: key details absent",
      "Partial: some useful details",
      "Strong: most details present",
      "Complete: all relevant details documented"
    ]
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0371. Lens Metadata Sorter

ID: video-lens-metadata-sorter
Sub-discipline: Camera data management
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: Paste camera reports and a footage inventory, then Jev selects the matching extracted lens or camera value, or none, to help reconcile clip metadata.

Why typed decisions: A typed choice favors exact recorded values over plausible but potentially false metadata.

TAM: Global camera production and media management market: billions
SAM: Production data and asset-management tools: hundreds of millions
SOM: Camera-report reconciliation niche: low single-digit millions

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Lens Metadata Sorter" 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 camera reports and a footage inventory, then Jev selects the matching extracted lens or camera value, or none, to help reconcile clip metadata.
Discipline: Videography & Film (Camera data management).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: A typed choice favors exact recorded values over plausible but potentially false metadata.

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": <Camera report rows and extracted metadata values>, "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)
{
  "metadata_match": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which recorded value matches the clip entry?",
    "criteria": {
      "value_a": "Candidate recorded value A",
      "value_b": "Candidate recorded value B",
      "value_c": "Candidate recorded value C",
      "none": "No recorded value matches"
    }
  },
  "record_quality": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How reliable is the supporting camera report data?",
    "criteria": [
      "Low: incomplete or inconsistent",
      "Fair: partly corroborated",
      "Good: mostly consistent",
      "High: explicit and corroborated"
    ]
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0372. Thumbnail Frame Scout

ID: video-thumbnail-frame-scout
Sub-discipline: Creator publishing
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: Paste a video outline and frame descriptions, then Jev selects the best existing frame ID from extracted candidates, or none, for a thumbnail shortlist.

Why typed decisions: A typed frame selection points editors to captured footage instead of inventing a visual concept.

TAM: Global creator and digital publishing tools: multi-billion-dollar market
SAM: Video packaging and publishing tools: hundreds of millions
SOM: Frame-selection utility niche: low single-digit millions

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Thumbnail Frame Scout" 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 video outline and frame descriptions, then Jev selects the best existing frame ID from extracted candidates, or none, for a thumbnail shortlist.
Discipline: Videography & Film (Creator publishing).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: A typed frame selection points editors to captured footage instead of inventing a visual concept.

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": <Video outline, frame IDs, and extracted frame descriptions>, "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)
{
  "frame_choice": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which captured frame best represents the video topic?",
    "criteria": {
      "frame_a": "Candidate frame A",
      "frame_b": "Candidate frame B",
      "frame_c": "Candidate frame C",
      "none": "No frame represents the topic"
    }
  },
  "thumbnail_clarity": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How clearly would the selected frame communicate the topic?",
    "criteria": [
      "Low: subject or topic is unclear",
      "Fair: recognizable with context",
      "Good: clear at a glance",
      "Excellent: immediate and distinctive"
    ]
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0373. Cue Sheet Matchbox

ID: video-cue-sheet-matchbox
Sub-discipline: Post-production audio logging
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: Paste a cue sheet and edit notes, then Jev selects the matching existing cue title or time range from extracted entries, or none, for a corrected cue log.

Why typed decisions: A typed selection preserves the cue sheet’s actual titles and timings instead of making up music credits.

TAM: Global media production and rights-management market: billions
SAM: Cue logging and post-production administration: hundreds of millions
SOM: Cue-sheet matching niche: low single-digit millions

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Cue Sheet Matchbox" 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 cue sheet and edit notes, then Jev selects the matching existing cue title or time range from extracted entries, or none, for a corrected cue log.
Discipline: Videography & Film (Post-production audio logging).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: A typed selection preserves the cue sheet’s actual titles and timings instead of making up music credits.

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": <Cue sheet entries, edit notes, and time ranges>, "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)
{
  "cue_match": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which cue-sheet entry matches the edit note?",
    "criteria": {
      "cue_a": "Candidate cue entry A",
      "cue_b": "Candidate cue entry B",
      "cue_c": "Candidate cue entry C",
      "none": "No cue entry matches"
    }
  },
  "credit_completeness": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How complete is the selected entry for a cue log?",
    "criteria": [
      "Incomplete: key fields missing",
      "Partial: some fields missing",
      "Good: only minor gaps",
      "Complete: required fields present"
    ]
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0374. Archive Rights Finder

ID: video-archive-rights-finder
Sub-discipline: Archival footage research
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: Paste a rights brief and archive catalog records, then Jev selects the matching existing rights statement, or none, for a footage clearance checklist.

Why typed decisions: A typed selection keeps clearance work anchored to real catalog language rather than generated legal-sounding claims.

TAM: Global footage licensing and rights market: billions
SAM: Archive research and rights-management tools: hundreds of millions
SOM: Clearance-checking workflow niche: low single-digit millions

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Archive Rights Finder" 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 rights brief and archive catalog records, then Jev selects the matching existing rights statement, or none, for a footage clearance checklist.
Discipline: Videography & Film (Archival footage research).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: A typed selection keeps clearance work anchored to real catalog language rather than generated legal-sounding claims.

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": <Rights brief and extracted catalog rights statements>, "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)
{
  "rights_statement": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which catalog statement best addresses the requested use?",
    "criteria": {
      "statement_a": "Candidate rights statement A",
      "statement_b": "Candidate rights statement B",
      "statement_c": "Candidate rights statement C",
      "none": "No statement addresses the use"
    }
  },
  "clearance_risk": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How much uncertainty remains in the selected rights information?",
    "criteria": [
      "Low: key terms are unclear",
      "Moderate: some terms need checking",
      "High: substantial gaps remain",
      "Critical: statement conflicts with the brief"
    ]
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0375. Revision Point Finder

ID: video-revision-point-finder
Sub-discipline: Client review
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: Paste client feedback and a timecoded review export, then Jev selects the matching extracted timecode comment, or none, for your revision tracker.

Why typed decisions: A typed selection preserves the client’s exact comment and its real timecode for accurate follow-up.

TAM: Global video collaboration and review market: billions
SAM: Client review and revision tracking tools: hundreds of millions
SOM: Comment-to-revision matching niche: low single-digit millions

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Revision Point Finder" 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 client feedback and a timecoded review export, then Jev selects the matching extracted timecode comment, or none, for your revision tracker.
Discipline: Videography & Film (Client review).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: A typed selection preserves the client’s exact comment and its real timecode for accurate follow-up.

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": <Client feedback, comment spans, and timecodes>, "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)
{
  "comment_match": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which timecoded comment best matches the requested revision?",
    "criteria": {
      "comment_a": "Candidate comment A",
      "comment_b": "Candidate comment B",
      "comment_c": "Candidate comment C",
      "none": "No comment matches"
    }
  },
  "revision_specificity": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How clearly does the selected comment identify the change?",
    "criteria": [
      "Vague: change cannot be identified",
      "Partial: general direction only",
      "Clear: specific change indicated",
      "Precise: change and location are explicit"
    ]
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0376. Scene Breakdown Picker

ID: video-scene-breakdown-picker
Sub-discipline: Film production planning
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: Paste a scene breakdown and script excerpts, then Jev selects the source span that supports a requested cast, prop, or location item, or none, for verification.

Why typed decisions: A typed source span makes each breakdown entry auditable against the real script.

TAM: Global film production planning market: billions
SAM: Script breakdown and production tools: hundreds of millions
SOM: Breakdown verification niche: low single-digit millions

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Scene Breakdown Picker" 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 scene breakdown and script excerpts, then Jev selects the source span that supports a requested cast, prop, or location item, or none, for verification.
Discipline: Videography & Film (Film production planning).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: A typed source span makes each breakdown entry auditable against the real script.

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": <Breakdown items and extracted script spans>, "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)
{
  "script_support": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which script span supports this breakdown item?",
    "criteria": {
      "span_a": "Candidate script span A",
      "span_b": "Candidate script span B",
      "span_c": "Candidate script span C",
      "none": "No span supports the item"
    }
  },
  "support_strength": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How directly does the selected span support the item?",
    "criteria": [
      "Weak: only indirectly related",
      "Moderate: implied by context",
      "Strong: directly indicated",
      "Explicit: stated unambiguously"
    ]
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0377. Clip Label Librarian

ID: video-clip-label-librarian
Sub-discipline: Media asset management
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: Paste a clip description and an existing tag list, then Jev selects the best matching tag from extracted labels, or none, to keep your footage library consistently indexed.

Why typed decisions: A typed choice reuses approved labels instead of creating near-duplicate tags.

TAM: Global digital asset management market: billions
SAM: Video asset tagging and search tools: hundreds of millions
SOM: Approved-tag matching niche: low single-digit millions

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Clip Label Librarian" 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 clip description and an existing tag list, then Jev selects the best matching tag from extracted labels, or none, to keep your footage library consistently indexed.
Discipline: Videography & Film (Media asset management).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: A typed choice reuses approved labels instead of creating near-duplicate tags.

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": <Clip description and approved extracted tag values>, "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)
{
  "tag_choice": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which approved tag best describes this clip?",
    "criteria": {
      "tag_a": "Candidate approved tag A",
      "tag_b": "Candidate approved tag B",
      "tag_c": "Candidate approved tag C",
      "none": "No approved tag fits"
    }
  },
  "tag_precision": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How precisely does the selected tag describe the clip?",
    "criteria": [
      "Low: broad or misleading",
      "Fair: related but imprecise",
      "Good: accurate and useful",
      "High: specific and exact"
    ]
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0378. Festival Entry Extractor

ID: video-festival-entry-extractor
Sub-discipline: Film distribution
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: Paste a festival application brief and your existing project materials, then Jev selects the best matching source sentence, or none, for a field such as runtime or premiere status.

Why typed decisions: A typed selection ensures application fields reuse verified project information rather than generated claims.

TAM: Global film distribution and festival market: billions
SAM: Submission and distribution workflow tools: hundreds of millions
SOM: Application-field verification niche: low single-digit millions

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Festival Entry Extractor" 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 festival application brief and your existing project materials, then Jev selects the best matching source sentence, or none, for a field such as runtime or premiere status.
Discipline: Videography & Film (Film distribution).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: A typed selection ensures application fields reuse verified project information rather than generated claims.

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": <Application field, project documents, and extracted candidate values>, "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)
{
  "field_source": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which source value belongs in this application field?",
    "criteria": {
      "value_a": "Candidate source value A",
      "value_b": "Candidate source value B",
      "value_c": "Candidate source value C",
      "none": "No source value is suitable"
    }
  },
  "verification_level": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How well is the selected value verified by the materials?",
    "criteria": [
      "Unverified: no clear source",
      "Weak: indirect mention only",
      "Good: supported by a source",
      "Strong: explicitly confirmed in authoritative material"
    ]
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0379. Release Metadata Match

ID: video-release-metadata-match
Sub-discipline: Video publishing operations
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: Paste a publishing checklist and platform metadata exports, then Jev selects the matching existing title, category, or duration value, or none, for a release audit.

Why typed decisions: A typed match catches inconsistencies while keeping published metadata grounded in actual source values.

TAM: Global digital video publishing market: multi-billion-dollar market
SAM: Publishing operations and metadata tools: hundreds of millions
SOM: Metadata audit utility niche: low single-digit millions

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Release Metadata Match" 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 publishing checklist and platform metadata exports, then Jev selects the matching existing title, category, or duration value, or none, for a release audit.
Discipline: Videography & Film (Video publishing operations).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: A typed match catches inconsistencies while keeping published metadata grounded in actual source values.

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": <Checklist fields and extracted platform metadata>, "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)
{
  "metadata_value": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which exported value matches the checklist field?",
    "criteria": {
      "export_a": "Candidate exported value A",
      "export_b": "Candidate exported value B",
      "export_c": "Candidate exported value C",
      "none": "No exported value matches"
    }
  },
  "release_consistency": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How consistent is this field across the supplied records?",
    "criteria": [
      "Inconsistent: conflicting values",
      "Weak: major records missing",
      "Mostly consistent: minor gaps",
      "Consistent: records agree"
    ]
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0380. Gear Checkout Reconciler

ID: video-gear-checkout-reconciler
Sub-discipline: Production logistics
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: Paste a gear checkout sheet and a crew report, then Jev selects the matching extracted item or serial number, or none, to flag unresolved equipment returns.

Why typed decisions: A typed selection uses real inventory identifiers and avoids confusing similarly named equipment.

TAM: Global production equipment rental and logistics market: billions
SAM: Production inventory and checkout tools: hundreds of millions
SOM: Gear reconciliation niche: low single-digit millions

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Gear Checkout Reconciler" 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 gear checkout sheet and a crew report, then Jev selects the matching extracted item or serial number, or none, to flag unresolved equipment returns.
Discipline: Videography & Film (Production logistics).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: A typed selection uses real inventory identifiers and avoids confusing similarly named equipment.

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": <Checkout rows, crew report, and extracted gear identifiers>, "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)
{
  "gear_match": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which inventory item matches the report entry?",
    "criteria": {
      "item_a": "Candidate gear item A",
      "item_b": "Candidate gear item B",
      "item_c": "Candidate gear item C",
      "none": "No inventory item matches"
    }
  },
  "return_status": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the supplied report explicitly confirm this item was returned?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Yes: return is explicitly confirmed",
      "false": "No: return is not explicitly confirmed"
    }
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0381. Shot Rights Ledger

ID: video-shot-rights-ledger
Sub-discipline: Footage licensing
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Paste a clip manifest with license records and planned uses, and Jev checks each usage claim against its evidence, routing uncertain matches to human review.

Why typed decisions: Typed use decisions and evidence checks expose licensing mismatches more reliably than generated explanations.

TAM: $1B+ global licensing workflows
SAM: $150M US small-production teams
SOM: $5M initial creator segment

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Shot Rights Ledger" 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 clip manifest with license records and planned uses, and Jev checks each usage claim against its evidence, routing uncertain matches to human review.
Discipline: Videography & Film (Footage licensing).
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 use decisions and evidence checks expose licensing mismatches more reliably than generated explanations.

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": <Clip IDs, license terms, planned platforms, and evidence links>, "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)
{
  "use_allowed": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the license evidence support this planned use?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The license explicitly covers the planned use and platform.",
      "false": "Coverage is absent, conflicting, or unclear."
    }
  },
  "rights_status": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "How does the evidence classify the rights status?",
    "criteria": {
      "cleared": "Valid documentation supports all listed rights.",
      "restricted": "Documentation permits only specified uses.",
      "unverified": "Evidence is missing or inconclusive.",
      "conflicted": "Records disagree about ownership or terms."
    }
  },
  "evidence_strength": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How complete and directly relevant is the rights evidence?",
    "criteria": [
      "No usable evidence",
      "Partial or indirect evidence",
      "Mostly complete direct evidence",
      "Complete, explicit evidence"
    ]
  }
}

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

---

## 0382. Release Form Sentinel

ID: video-release-form-sentinel
Sub-discipline: Talent releases
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Paste a shoot roster, release forms, and intended distribution details, and Jev verifies each appearance claim and escalates uncertain releases for review.

Why typed decisions: A yes-or-no release check tied to specific evidence is actionable, while generated prose could obscure missing permissions.

TAM: $500M+ production compliance
SAM: $80M US indie and creator shoots
SOM: $3M regional production teams

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Release Form Sentinel" 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 shoot roster, release forms, and intended distribution details, and Jev verifies each appearance claim and escalates uncertain releases for review.
Discipline: Videography & Film (Talent releases).
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: A yes-or-no release check tied to specific evidence is actionable, while generated prose could obscure missing permissions.

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": <Talent roster, signed forms, and distribution plan>, "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)
{
  "release_covers_use": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the signed release cover this person's depicted use?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The signed form clearly covers the depicted use and intended distribution.",
      "false": "The form is absent, unsigned, limited, or unclear."
    }
  },
  "release_issue": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "What issue, if any, is indicated by the records?",
    "criteria": {
      "none": "No issue is evident in the supplied records.",
      "missing_signature": "A required signature is absent.",
      "scope_mismatch": "The planned use exceeds documented permissions.",
      "identity_mismatch": "The form cannot be reliably matched to the person."
    }
  },
  "match_confidence": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How confidently do identity and release records match?",
    "criteria": [
      "No reliable match",
      "Weak or partial match",
      "Strong match with minor gaps",
      "Direct, unambiguous match"
    ]
  }
}

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

---

## 0383. Music Cue Clearance

ID: video-music-cue-clearance-1
Sub-discipline: Music supervision
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Paste a cue sheet, track licenses, and edit timestamps, and Jev checks whether each cue is supported for its exact use, sending uncertain cases to a reviewer.

Why typed decisions: Typed coverage checks can compare track, territory, term, and placement without inventing legal guidance.

TAM: $300M+ music clearance tools
SAM: $45M US video post-production teams
SOM: $2M independent editors

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Music Cue Clearance" 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 cue sheet, track licenses, and edit timestamps, and Jev checks whether each cue is supported for its exact use, sending uncertain cases to a reviewer.
Discipline: Videography & Film (Music supervision).
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 coverage checks can compare track, territory, term, and placement without inventing legal guidance.

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": <Cue timestamps, track IDs, license documents, and release territories>, "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)
{
  "cue_cleared": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the supplied license evidence cover this cue's use?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The evidence covers the track, placement, territory, and distribution.",
      "false": "One or more required permissions are missing or unclear."
    }
  },
  "license_gap": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which clearance gap best fits the evidence?",
    "criteria": {
      "no_gap": "Evidence supports all specified dimensions.",
      "sync_rights": "Synchronization permission is not established.",
      "master_rights": "Master-use permission is not established.",
      "territory_or_term": "Territory or duration does not match the plan."
    }
  },
  "evidence_fit": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How directly does the documentation match the edited cue?",
    "criteria": [
      "No matching documentation",
      "Indirect or incomplete match",
      "Mostly direct match with a gap",
      "Exact track and use match"
    ]
  }
}

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

---

## 0384. Archive Claim Checker

ID: video-archive-claim-checker
Sub-discipline: Documentary archives
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Paste an archival clip list, catalog records, and proposed factual captions, and Jev checks each claim against the records and queues uncertain items for human verification.

Why typed decisions: A typed supported-or-unsupported decision keeps editorial claims auditable instead of relying on fluent but unverifiable text.

TAM: $250M+ archival media workflows
SAM: $35M US documentary production teams
SOM: $1.5M documentary researchers

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Archive Claim Checker" 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 an archival clip list, catalog records, and proposed factual captions, and Jev checks each claim against the records and queues uncertain items for human verification.
Discipline: Videography & Film (Documentary archives).
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: A typed supported-or-unsupported decision keeps editorial claims auditable instead of relying on fluent but unverifiable text.

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": <Clip metadata, catalog records, and caption claims>, "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)
{
  "claim_supported": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Do the supplied records support this claim about the clip?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "A directly relevant record supports the stated date, place, or event.",
      "false": "The record is absent, contradictory, or too weak to support it."
    }
  },
  "claim_dimension": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which claim dimension is being checked?",
    "criteria": {
      "date": "The claim concerns when the footage was made.",
      "location": "The claim concerns where it was made.",
      "event": "The claim identifies an event or activity.",
      "identity": "The claim identifies a person or group."
    }
  },
  "record_relevance": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How strong is the link between the record and the specific claim?",
    "criteria": [
      "No relevant record",
      "Indirect or ambiguous record",
      "Relevant record with a minor gap",
      "Direct record clearly supports claim"
    ]
  }
}

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

---

## 0385. Subtitle Fact Audit

ID: video-subtitle-fact-audit
Sub-discipline: Caption quality control
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Paste subtitle files, source dialogue notes, and approved names or terms, and Jev verifies flagged subtitle fields against evidence, escalating uncertain corrections.

Why typed decisions: Typed mismatch decisions identify review-worthy caption errors without rewriting dialogue or silently changing meaning.

TAM: $400M+ captioning and QC tools
SAM: $60M US post-production caption workflows
SOM: $2M editor-led caption teams

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Subtitle Fact Audit" 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 subtitle files, source dialogue notes, and approved names or terms, and Jev verifies flagged subtitle fields against evidence, escalating uncertain corrections.
Discipline: Videography & Film (Caption quality control).
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 mismatch decisions identify review-worthy caption errors without rewriting dialogue or silently changing meaning.

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": <Subtitle cues, source notes, and approved terminology>, "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)
{
  "field_verified": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the evidence verify this subtitle field as supplied?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The field matches the source notes or approved reference.",
      "false": "It conflicts with, or is not supported by, the supplied evidence."
    }
  },
  "mismatch_type": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "What kind of field mismatch is present?",
    "criteria": {
      "none": "No mismatch is supported by the evidence.",
      "proper_name": "A person, place, or organization name differs.",
      "number_or_date": "A number, date, or measured value differs.",
      "meaning": "The wording changes a documented factual meaning."
    }
  },
  "source_match": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How directly can this field be compared to its source?",
    "criteria": [
      "No usable source",
      "Partial or ambiguous source",
      "Clear source with minor ambiguity",
      "Exact corresponding source available"
    ]
  }
}

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

---

## 0386. Continuity Frame Watch

ID: video-continuity-frame-watch
Sub-discipline: Continuity editing
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Paste shot logs, continuity photos, and selected edit timestamps, and Jev checks specific continuity claims against the evidence, routing borderline differences to an editor.

Why typed decisions: Typed continuity flags make discrete visual mismatches reviewable without pretending to decide subjective editorial choices.

TAM: $200M+ editing and continuity software
SAM: $30M US scripted video productions
SOM: $1M small post-production houses

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Continuity Frame Watch" 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 shot logs, continuity photos, and selected edit timestamps, and Jev checks specific continuity claims against the evidence, routing borderline differences to an editor.
Discipline: Videography & Film (Continuity editing).
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 continuity flags make discrete visual mismatches reviewable without pretending to decide subjective editorial choices.

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": <Shot IDs, frame references, continuity notes, and edit sequence>, "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)
{
  "continuity_match": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the evidence support continuity for the specified detail?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The detail is consistent across the compared shots.",
      "false": "A visible or documented inconsistency exists, or evidence is insufficient."
    }
  },
  "detail_category": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which continuity detail is being checked?",
    "criteria": {
      "wardrobe": "Clothing, accessories, or costume state.",
      "prop": "Position or state of a handled object.",
      "screen_direction": "Movement or spatial direction across shots.",
      "set_state": "Background, lighting, or set arrangement."
    }
  },
  "comparison_clarity": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How reliable is the evidence for comparing this detail?",
    "criteria": [
      "Comparison evidence unavailable",
      "Partial view or weak shot match",
      "Good comparison with minor ambiguity",
      "Matched views clearly show the detail"
    ]
  }
}

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

---

## 0387. Brand Frame Guard

ID: video-brand-frame-guard
Sub-discipline: Branded content review
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Paste a rough cut's frame notes, brand rules, and approved asset list, and Jev checks each compliance claim against the references, escalating uncertain frames for review.

Why typed decisions: Typed rule-by-rule decisions provide traceable compliance checks where generated summaries may miss a single prohibited detail.

TAM: $500M+ brand compliance workflows
SAM: $70M US branded video production
SOM: $2.5M boutique agencies

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Brand Frame Guard" 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 rough cut's frame notes, brand rules, and approved asset list, and Jev checks each compliance claim against the references, escalating uncertain frames for review.
Discipline: Videography & Film (Branded content review).
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 rule-by-rule decisions provide traceable compliance checks where generated summaries may miss a single prohibited detail.

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": <Frame timestamps, brand rules, and approved asset references>, "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)
{
  "rule_satisfied": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the evidence show this frame satisfies the cited brand rule?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The frame and references support compliance with the cited rule.",
      "false": "The frame appears to conflict with the rule or evidence is inconclusive."
    }
  },
  "rule_area": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which brand-rule area is being checked?",
    "criteria": {
      "logo": "Logo form, placement, or clear space.",
      "color": "Approved colors or contrast requirements.",
      "product": "Product depiction or required labeling.",
      "disclosure": "Required sponsorship or legal disclosure."
    }
  },
  "review_priority": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How significant is the supported compliance concern?",
    "criteria": [
      "No supported concern",
      "Minor or uncertain deviation",
      "Clear deviation with limited impact",
      "Clear high-impact policy deviation"
    ]
  }
}

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

---

## 0388. Location Permit Match

ID: video-location-permit-match
Sub-discipline: Production permitting
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Paste a location schedule, permit documents, and planned shot activities, and Jev verifies each activity against permit conditions and queues unclear permissions for review.

Why typed decisions: Typed scope checks can flag a specific activity-permit mismatch without generating unreliable legal interpretations.

TAM: $250M+ location management tools
SAM: $40M US location-based productions
SOM: $1.2M independent production coordinators

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Location Permit Match" 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 location schedule, permit documents, and planned shot activities, and Jev verifies each activity against permit conditions and queues unclear permissions for review.
Discipline: Videography & Film (Production permitting).
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 scope checks can flag a specific activity-permit mismatch without generating unreliable legal interpretations.

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": <Location schedule, permit conditions, and planned activities>, "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)
{
  "activity_permitted": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the permit evidence cover this planned activity at this location?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The supplied permit explicitly covers the location, date, and activity.",
      "false": "A required scope element is missing, inconsistent, or unclear."
    }
  },
  "scope_gap": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "What permit dimension needs checking?",
    "criteria": {
      "date": "The planned date may not match the authorized dates.",
      "activity": "The planned filming activity may exceed the permit scope.",
      "location": "The site or area may not match the authorization.",
      "crew_or_gear": "Crew size or equipment may exceed stated limits."
    }
  },
  "permit_match": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How closely do the permit details match the production plan?",
    "criteria": [
      "No permit evidence",
      "Several details are uncertain",
      "Mostly matched with one minor gap",
      "All specified details directly match"
    ]
  }
}

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

---

## 0389. Drone Shot Gate

ID: video-drone-shot-gate
Sub-discipline: Aerial cinematography
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Paste a drone shot plan, flight approvals, and site restrictions, and Jev checks each planned-flight claim against the documents, escalating uncertain flights before scheduling.

Why typed decisions: A typed go-or-review decision tied to explicit constraints is safer than generated advice for operational flight planning.

TAM: $300M+ drone production operations
SAM: $45M US commercial video crews
SOM: $1.5M aerial production firms

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Drone Shot 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 drone shot plan, flight approvals, and site restrictions, and Jev checks each planned-flight claim against the documents, escalating uncertain flights before scheduling.
Discipline: Videography & Film (Aerial cinematography).
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: A typed go-or-review decision tied to explicit constraints is safer than generated advice for operational flight planning.

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": <Flight dates, site coordinates, approvals, and shot parameters>, "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)
{
  "flight_covered": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Do the supplied records support this planned flight under the stated constraints?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Relevant approvals and site records cover the planned flight details.",
      "false": "Approval is absent, conflicting, expired, or inconclusive."
    }
  },
  "constraint_type": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which flight constraint is being verified?",
    "criteria": {
      "airspace": "Airspace authorization or restriction.",
      "site_permission": "Property or site permission.",
      "time_window": "Approved time or date range.",
      "operation_limit": "Altitude, crew, or equipment limitation."
    }
  },
  "evidence_completeness": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How complete is the evidence for this planned flight?",
    "criteria": [
      "Critical records missing",
      "Some records present but gaps remain",
      "Most records match with a minor gap",
      "All relevant records directly match"
    ]
  }
}

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

---

## 0390. Export Spec Inspector

ID: video-export-spec-inspector
Sub-discipline: Video delivery
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Paste export settings, delivery specifications, and media probe results, and Jev verifies each technical field against the requested delivery profile, sending ambiguous fields to an editor.

Why typed decisions: Typed field-level pass or review decisions prevent one unsupported assumption from corrupting a delivery package.

TAM: $350M+ media delivery tooling
SAM: $55M US post-production delivery teams
SOM: $2M freelance editors

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Export Spec Inspector" 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 export settings, delivery specifications, and media probe results, and Jev verifies each technical field against the requested delivery profile, sending ambiguous fields to an editor.
Discipline: Videography & Film (Video delivery).
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 field-level pass or review decisions prevent one unsupported assumption from corrupting a delivery package.

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": <Export metadata, delivery spec, and media probe report>, "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)
{
  "field_compliant": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the evidence show this export field meets the delivery specification?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The measured field falls within the stated specification.",
      "false": "It falls outside the specification or cannot be verified."
    }
  },
  "field_type": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which export field is under review?",
    "criteria": {
      "frame_rate": "Frames per second or cadence.",
      "resolution": "Image dimensions or pixel format.",
      "audio": "Sample rate, channel layout, or loudness.",
      "container_codec": "File container or encoded codec."
    }
  },
  "deviation_severity": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How severe is the supported deviation from spec?",
    "criteria": [
      "No deviation supported",
      "Minor deviation or uncertain reading",
      "Clear deviation with workaround",
      "Major deviation likely to block delivery"
    ]
  }
}

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

---

## 0391. Color Reference Check

ID: video-color-reference-check
Sub-discipline: Color grading
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Paste grading reference frames, approved look notes, and output measurements, and Jev verifies measurable look claims against the references while escalating subjective or uncertain mismatches.

Why typed decisions: Typed evidence-fit judgments can separate measurable technical checks from subjective grading calls that need a human.

TAM: $200M+ color finishing tools
SAM: $30M US grading and finishing shops
SOM: $1M independent colorists

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Color Reference Check" 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 grading reference frames, approved look notes, and output measurements, and Jev verifies measurable look claims against the references while escalating subjective or uncertain mismatches.
Discipline: Videography & Film (Color grading).
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-fit judgments can separate measurable technical checks from subjective grading calls that need a human.

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": <Reference frames, look constraints, and output measurements>, "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)
{
  "constraint_met": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the supplied evidence support that this specified look constraint is met?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The measurable constraint matches the reference or approved tolerance.",
      "false": "It conflicts with the reference or cannot be established."
    }
  },
  "constraint_area": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which look constraint is being checked?",
    "criteria": {
      "exposure": "Exposure or brightness range.",
      "white_balance": "White balance or neutral reference.",
      "saturation": "Saturation limit or color intensity.",
      "skin_tone": "Documented skin-tone target or tolerance."
    }
  },
  "measurement_quality": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How dependable is the comparison evidence?",
    "criteria": [
      "No comparable evidence",
      "Weak or mismatched reference",
      "Comparable evidence with some uncertainty",
      "Matched reference and reliable measurement"
    ]
  }
}

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

---

## 0392. Take Select Validator

ID: video-take-select-validator
Sub-discipline: Dailies management
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Paste a camera log, take-selection notes, and media checksums, and Jev verifies each selected-take identity and evidence claim, routing uncertain matches to the editor.

Why typed decisions: Typed identity and integrity checks are easier to audit than generated summaries of high-volume dailies.

TAM: $250M+ dailies and media management
SAM: $35M US production post workflows
SOM: $1.2M indie editorial teams

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Take Select Validator" 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 camera log, take-selection notes, and media checksums, and Jev verifies each selected-take identity and evidence claim, routing uncertain matches to the editor.
Discipline: Videography & Film (Dailies management).
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 identity and integrity checks are easier to audit than generated summaries of high-volume dailies.

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": <Clip IDs, camera logs, selection notes, and checksum results>, "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)
{
  "take_identity_verified": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the evidence verify this selected clip as the intended take?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Clip identifiers and camera records directly match the selection note.",
      "false": "Identifiers conflict, are incomplete, or do not establish the match."
    }
  },
  "selection_basis": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "What evidence basis is supplied for this selection?",
    "criteria": {
      "director_note": "A director or script supervisor selection note.",
      "camera_metadata": "Camera metadata identifies the take.",
      "continuity_log": "A continuity or slate record identifies the take.",
      "checksum": "Media integrity evidence links the file to the logged asset."
    }
  },
  "asset_match_quality": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How strong is the selected clip's identity evidence?",
    "criteria": [
      "No identifiable evidence",
      "Partial or conflicting identifiers",
      "Mostly matching identifiers",
      "Direct match across authoritative records"
    ]
  }
}

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

---

## 0393. Proxy Pair Auditor

ID: video-proxy-pair-auditor
Sub-discipline: Media asset management
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Paste original and proxy metadata with relink records, and Jev checks whether each proxy claim matches its source, escalating uncertain pairings before editing continues.

Why typed decisions: Typed pairing decisions catch wrong-source proxies more directly than generated descriptions of file relationships.

TAM: $300M+ media asset management
SAM: $50M US editing teams with proxy workflows
SOM: $1.8M independent post facilities

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Proxy Pair Auditor" 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 original and proxy metadata with relink records, and Jev checks whether each proxy claim matches its source, escalating uncertain pairings before editing continues.
Discipline: Videography & Film (Media asset management).
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 pairing decisions catch wrong-source proxies more directly than generated descriptions of file relationships.

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": <Original and proxy IDs, metadata, and relink records>, "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)
{
  "proxy_matches_source": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the evidence verify this proxy belongs to the stated original?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Stable identifiers or reliable metadata establish the pairing.",
      "false": "The pairing conflicts or lacks adequate evidence."
    }
  },
  "pairing_evidence": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "What evidence links this proxy to its source?",
    "criteria": {
      "stable_id": "A shared authoritative asset identifier.",
      "timecode": "Matching timecode and duration records.",
      "metadata": "Matching source metadata beyond filename.",
      "manual_relink": "A recorded human relink decision."
    }
  },
  "pairing_confidence": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How strong is the evidence for this source-proxy pairing?",
    "criteria": [
      "No meaningful link evidence",
      "Filename or partial fields only",
      "Multiple matching fields with a gap",
      "Stable identifier and corroborating fields match"
    ]
  }
}

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

---

## 0394. Story Beat Evidence

ID: video-story-beat-evidence
Sub-discipline: Documentary editing
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Paste a paper edit, interview transcripts, and selected clip references, and Jev checks whether each proposed story beat is supported by its cited footage, escalating weak links to an editor.

Why typed decisions: Typed support judgments keep narrative decisions connected to source evidence rather than plausible generated interpretation.

TAM: $250M+ documentary post workflows
SAM: $40M US documentary editorial teams
SOM: $1.5M independent documentary editors

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Story Beat Evidence" 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 paper edit, interview transcripts, and selected clip references, and Jev checks whether each proposed story beat is supported by its cited footage, escalating weak links to an editor.
Discipline: Videography & Film (Documentary editing).
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 support judgments keep narrative decisions connected to source evidence rather than plausible generated interpretation.

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": <Paper-edit beats, transcript excerpts, and clip references>, "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)
{
  "beat_supported": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the cited source evidence support this proposed story beat?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The cited footage or transcript directly supports the beat's factual claim.",
      "false": "Support is missing, contradictory, or too indirect."
    }
  },
  "support_kind": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "What kind of source is cited for this beat?",
    "criteria": {
      "interview": "A recorded interview or transcript.",
      "observational": "Observed action or location footage.",
      "archive": "Third-party archival material.",
      "editorial_note": "A production or editorial note."
    }
  },
  "support_strength": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How directly does the source support the proposed beat?",
    "criteria": [
      "No cited support",
      "Suggestive but indirect support",
      "Mostly direct support with a gap",
      "Direct, specific source support"
    ]
  }
}

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

---

## 0395. Product Frame Proof

ID: video-product-frame-proof
Sub-discipline: Product videography
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Paste a product shot list, approved product references, and frame annotations, and Jev verifies each visible product claim against the references and sends uncertain details for review.

Why typed decisions: Typed attribute checks catch incorrect model, packaging, or feature depictions without generating promotional copy.

TAM: $300M+ product content operations
SAM: $45M US commercial product video
SOM: $1.5M small product studios

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Product Frame Proof" 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 product shot list, approved product references, and frame annotations, and Jev verifies each visible product claim against the references and sends uncertain details for review.
Discipline: Videography & Film (Product videography).
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 attribute checks catch incorrect model, packaging, or feature depictions without generating promotional copy.

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": <Shot annotations, product references, and approved claims>, "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)
{
  "product_claim_verified": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the frame evidence support this stated product detail?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The visible product and approved reference agree on the stated detail.",
      "false": "They conflict or the detail is not verifiable from evidence."
    }
  },
  "product_attribute": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which product detail is being checked?",
    "criteria": {
      "model": "Product model or variant.",
      "packaging": "Package design, label, or included items.",
      "feature": "Visible feature or operation.",
      "brand_mark": "Logo, brand mark, or product name."
    }
  },
  "visual_evidence": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How clearly does the supplied frame show the claimed detail?",
    "criteria": [
      "Detail not visible",
      "Partially visible or ambiguous",
      "Mostly clear with minor obstruction",
      "Clearly visible and reference-matched"
    ]
  }
}

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

---

## 0396. Set Safety Frame

ID: video-set-safety-frame
Sub-discipline: Production safety review
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Paste a shot plan, site safety rules, and annotated set frames, and Jev checks each specified safety claim against the evidence and routes uncertain hazards to the safety lead.

Why typed decisions: Typed hazard and evidence decisions create a review trail without substituting generated advice for a qualified safety professional.

TAM: $400M+ production safety software
SAM: $60M US film and video sets
SOM: $2M regional production companies

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Set Safety Frame" 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 shot plan, site safety rules, and annotated set frames, and Jev checks each specified safety claim against the evidence and routes uncertain hazards to the safety lead.
Discipline: Videography & Film (Production safety review).
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 hazard and evidence decisions create a review trail without substituting generated advice for a qualified safety professional.

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": <Shot plans, site rules, and annotated frame evidence>, "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)
{
  "rule_observed": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the evidence support that this specified safety rule is satisfied?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The relevant frame or record shows the stated rule is satisfied.",
      "false": "A violation is visible or evidence is insufficient."
    }
  },
  "hazard_area": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which safety area does this check concern?",
    "criteria": {
      "cable": "Cable routing or trip exposure.",
      "rigging": "Rigging, overhead equipment, or supports.",
      "access": "Walkway, exit, or restricted-area access.",
      "protective_gear": "Required protective equipment."
    }
  },
  "evidence_visibility": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How clearly can this issue be assessed from the supplied evidence?",
    "criteria": [
      "Not assessable from evidence",
      "Partly visible or context missing",
      "Mostly assessable with minor uncertainty",
      "Clearly documented from relevant angles or records"
    ]
  }
}

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

---

## 0397. Product Placement Audit

ID: video-product-placement-audit
Sub-discipline: Placement compliance
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Paste a cut list, placement agreements, and disclosure rules, and Jev verifies each placement and disclosure claim against the records, escalating uncertain compliance items.

Why typed decisions: Typed checks link each on-screen placement to explicit contract evidence and avoid unreliable prose interpretations.

TAM: $250M+ branded content compliance
SAM: $35M US sponsored video production
SOM: $1M creator agencies

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Product Placement Audit" 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 cut list, placement agreements, and disclosure rules, and Jev verifies each placement and disclosure claim against the records, escalating uncertain compliance items.
Discipline: Videography & Film (Placement compliance).
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 checks link each on-screen placement to explicit contract evidence and avoid unreliable prose interpretations.

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": <Cut timestamps, placement terms, and disclosure requirements>, "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)
{
  "placement_compliant": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the evidence show this placement meets its documented terms?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The appearance and disclosure match the supplied agreement and rules.",
      "false": "A term is unmet, disclosure is missing, or evidence is inconclusive."
    }
  },
  "placement_issue": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which placement detail is being verified?",
    "criteria": {
      "appearance": "Product presence, duration, or prominence.",
      "disclosure": "Required on-screen or accompanying disclosure.",
      "territory": "Where the placement may be distributed.",
      "term": "When the placement agreement is valid."
    }
  },
  "agreement_match": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How directly do the cut and records align?",
    "criteria": [
      "No usable agreement evidence",
      "Partial or ambiguous alignment",
      "Mostly aligned with a minor gap",
      "Cut and agreement directly align"
    ]
  }
}

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

---

## 0398. Thumbnail Claim Check

ID: video-thumbnail-claim-check
Sub-discipline: Creator publishing
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Paste a video transcript, thumbnail draft notes, and title claims, and Jev checks each factual thumbnail or title claim against the source and escalates unsupported claims for creator review.

Why typed decisions: Typed claim verification helps creators avoid misleading packaging without asking a model to generate titles or thumbnails.

TAM: $500M+ creator publishing tools
SAM: $80M US video creator workflows
SOM: $3M professional creator studios

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Thumbnail Claim Check" 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 video transcript, thumbnail draft notes, and title claims, and Jev checks each factual thumbnail or title claim against the source and escalates unsupported claims for creator review.
Discipline: Videography & Film (Creator publishing).
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 claim verification helps creators avoid misleading packaging without asking a model to generate titles or thumbnails.

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": <Transcript excerpts, thumbnail annotations, and title claims>, "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)
{
  "packaging_claim_supported": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the supplied video evidence support this title or thumbnail claim?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The video directly supports the factual claim as presented.",
      "false": "The claim is unsupported, materially exaggerated, or unclear."
    }
  },
  "claim_subject": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "What does the packaging claim concern?",
    "criteria": {
      "person": "A person or participant.",
      "event": "An event or action shown in the video.",
      "result": "An outcome, reveal, or demonstrated result.",
      "quote": "A quoted statement or attributed claim."
    }
  },
  "source_alignment": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How closely does the video evidence match the packaging claim?",
    "criteria": [
      "No matching evidence",
      "Loose or ambiguous connection",
      "Mostly supported with some exaggeration",
      "Directly and fully supported"
    ]
  }
}

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

---

## 0399. UGC Clip Consent

ID: video-ugc-clip-consent
Sub-discipline: Creator rights management
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Paste user-submitted clip records, contributor permissions, and proposed edits, and Jev checks each permission claim against the evidence, sending unclear consent to a human reviewer.

Why typed decisions: Typed consent checks make permission scope visible and auditable instead of burying uncertainty in generated text.

TAM: $300M+ creator rights management
SAM: $45M US UGC production workflows
SOM: $1.5M creator-led agencies

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "UGC Clip Consent" 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 user-submitted clip records, contributor permissions, and proposed edits, and Jev checks each permission claim against the evidence, sending unclear consent to a human reviewer.
Discipline: Videography & Film (Creator rights management).
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 consent checks make permission scope visible and auditable instead of burying uncertainty in generated text.

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": <Contributor records, consent forms, and edit-use plan>, "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)
{
  "consent_covers_edit": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the evidence show consent covers this proposed edit and distribution?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The permission clearly covers the edit and intended distribution.",
      "false": "Permission is absent, limited, or insufficiently clear."
    }
  },
  "consent_scope": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which permission scope is being checked?",
    "criteria": {
      "editing": "Permission to edit or excerpt the clip.",
      "commercial": "Permission for commercial use.",
      "platform": "Permission for the planned distribution platform.",
      "attribution": "Required credit or attribution terms."
    }
  },
  "consent_evidence_quality": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How reliable and complete is the consent evidence?",
    "criteria": [
      "No consent evidence",
      "Informal or incomplete evidence",
      "Mostly complete with a small ambiguity",
      "Signed, attributable, and scope-specific evidence"
    ]
  }
}

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

---

## 0400. Event Recap Accuracy

ID: video-event-recap-accuracy
Sub-discipline: Event videography
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Paste an event schedule, shot log, and recap cut timestamps, and Jev verifies each scene's event or speaker label against records, escalating uncertain identifications to the editor.

Why typed decisions: Typed identification checks reduce incorrect names and event labels while preserving human judgment for ambiguous footage.

TAM: $200M+ event video operations
SAM: $30M US event production teams
SOM: $1M event videographers

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Event Recap Accuracy" 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 an event schedule, shot log, and recap cut timestamps, and Jev verifies each scene's event or speaker label against records, escalating uncertain identifications to the editor.
Discipline: Videography & Film (Event videography).
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 identification checks reduce incorrect names and event labels while preserving human judgment for ambiguous footage.

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": <Event schedule, shot log, clip timestamps, and labels>, "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)
{
  "scene_label_verified": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Do the supplied records verify this scene label or speaker identity?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Schedule, shot log, or direct source evidence supports the label.",
      "false": "Records conflict or do not reliably identify the scene or person."
    }
  },
  "label_type": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "What kind of label is being checked?",
    "criteria": {
      "speaker": "A speaker or performer identity.",
      "session": "A talk, panel, or scheduled session.",
      "venue": "A room, stage, or event location.",
      "sequence": "The scene's position or timing in the event."
    }
  },
  "identification_strength": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How strong is the evidence linking the clip to its label?",
    "criteria": [
      "No linking evidence",
      "Indirect or ambiguous link",
      "Strong link with a minor gap",
      "Direct match across reliable records"
    ]
  }
}

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

---

# Discipline: Photography

Audience: photographers, photo editors, photojournalists
Market anchor: the photo software market (~$2.4B) and >15M pro photographers

## 0401. Caption Risk Desk

ID: photography-caption-risk-desk
Sub-discipline: Photojournalism captions
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: Paste a caption and its reporting notes, and Jev routes it to a verification path while scoring attribution risk and flagging whether a named source needs confirmation.

Why typed decisions: Fixed review paths and calibrated risk scores are easier to act on than generated editorial advice.

TAM: $1–3B newsroom captioning tools
SAM: $100–300M photo desks
SOM: $1–5M initial newsroom subscriptions

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Caption Risk Desk" 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 caption and its reporting notes, and Jev routes it to a verification path while scoring attribution risk and flagging whether a named source needs confirmation.
Discipline: Photography (Photojournalism captions).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: Fixed review paths and calibrated risk scores are easier to act on than generated editorial advice.

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": <Caption, reporting notes, and newsroom caption policy>, "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)
{
  "review_route": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which caption issue should determine the review path?",
    "criteria": {
      "identity": "People, names, or roles may be misidentified",
      "location": "Place, date, or event context may be wrong",
      "claim": "A factual assertion needs sourcing",
      "sensitive_context": "Privacy, harm, or vulnerable subjects need review"
    }
  },
  "risk_level": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "For the selected path, how serious is the unresolved caption risk?",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Minimal; notes clearly support the caption",
      "2: Low; small ambiguity with limited impact",
      "3: High; material detail is uncertain",
      "4: Critical; likely error or serious potential harm"
    ]
  },
  "source_confirmation": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "For the selected path, is confirmation from a named source required before publication?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "A named source must confirm a material detail",
      "false": "No named-source confirmation is needed"
    }
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0402. Brief-to-Frame Router

ID: photography-brief-to-frame-router
Sub-discipline: Commercial photography production
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: Paste a client brief and planned shot list, and Jev routes each shot to a production category while scoring brief fit and flagging whether client approval is needed.

Why typed decisions: A consistent route and fit score expose coverage gaps without inventing new creative direction.

TAM: $2–5B commercial production software
SAM: $200–500M photography studios
SOM: $2–8M studio workflow subscriptions

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Brief-to-Frame Router" 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 client brief and planned shot list, and Jev routes each shot to a production category while scoring brief fit and flagging whether client approval is needed.
Discipline: Photography (Commercial photography production).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: A consistent route and fit score expose coverage gaps without inventing new creative direction.

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": <Client brief, shot list, and approval rules>, "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)
{
  "shot_route": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which production category best fits this planned shot?",
    "criteria": {
      "hero": "Primary campaign or product hero image",
      "detail": "Close-up, feature, or material detail",
      "lifestyle": "Product or subject in use or context",
      "compliance": "Required legal, label, or specification view"
    }
  },
  "brief_fit": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How well does the shot satisfy its relevant brief requirements?",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Poor fit; key requirements are missing",
      "2: Partial fit; several requirements remain unclear",
      "3: Good fit; requirements are mostly covered",
      "4: Exact fit; all relevant requirements are explicit"
    ]
  },
  "client_approval": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "For this route, is client approval needed before the shot is finalized?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Approval is required by the brief or workflow",
      "false": "The team can finalize without client approval"
    }
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0403. Archive Rights Sorter

ID: photography-archive-rights-sorter
Sub-discipline: Photo archive licensing
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: Paste an archive item's rights notes and intended use, and Jev routes it to a licensing path while scoring rights uncertainty and flagging whether written clearance is required.

Why typed decisions: Typed licensing pathways and uncertainty levels support repeatable triage better than free-form explanations.

TAM: $1–3B image-rights software
SAM: $100–300M photo archives and agencies
SOM: $1–5M archive licensing subscriptions

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Archive Rights Sorter" 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 an archive item's rights notes and intended use, and Jev routes it to a licensing path while scoring rights uncertainty and flagging whether written clearance is required.
Discipline: Photography (Photo archive licensing).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: Typed licensing pathways and uncertainty levels support repeatable triage better than free-form explanations.

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": <Rights notes, intended use, territory, and term>, "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)
{
  "license_route": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which licensing path best matches the stated rights and intended use?",
    "criteria": {
      "standard": "Rights appear clear for a standard license",
      "restricted": "Use may be limited by territory, term, or medium",
      "third_party": "A subject, artwork, property, or other third-party right may apply",
      "unknown": "Rights information is too incomplete to classify"
    }
  },
  "rights_uncertainty": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How uncertain is the rights position for this route?",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Low; documentation is clear and consistent",
      "2: Mild; one minor detail is missing",
      "3: High; material rights details are unclear",
      "4: Severe; conflicting or absent documentation"
    ]
  },
  "written_clearance": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "For the selected route, is written clearance needed before licensing?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Written permission or documented clearance is required",
      "false": "Existing documentation is sufficient"
    }
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0404. Selects Quality Gate

ID: photography-selects-quality-gate
Sub-discipline: Photo editing
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: Paste a contact-sheet manifest with filenames and brief descriptions, and Jev routes each frame to a culling category while scoring technical usability and flagging whether a human review is necessary.

Why typed decisions: Editors can filter consistent labels and scores more quickly than interpreting generated notes for every frame.

TAM: $2–5B photo editing software
SAM: $200–600M professional culling tools
SOM: $2–10M editing-team subscriptions

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Selects Quality 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 contact-sheet manifest with filenames and brief descriptions, and Jev routes each frame to a culling category while scoring technical usability and flagging whether a human review is necessary.
Discipline: Photography (Photo editing).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: Editors can filter consistent labels and scores more quickly than interpreting generated notes for every frame.

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": <Frame manifest, shoot brief, and culling thresholds>, "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)
{
  "cull_route": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which culling category best fits this frame against the brief?",
    "criteria": {
      "keep": "Strong candidate that meets the brief",
      "alternate": "Usable backup or secondary variation",
      "reject": "Does not meet the brief or is unusable",
      "uncertain": "Insufficient information to decide"
    }
  },
  "technical_usability": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How technically usable is the frame for its intended delivery?",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Unusable; major defect prevents delivery",
      "2: Weak; defect may limit use",
      "3: Usable; minor imperfections only",
      "4: Strong; technically clean for delivery"
    ]
  },
  "human_review": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "For this route, does a human need to inspect the image before the cull is final?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Textual information cannot establish the decision confidently",
      "false": "The supplied metadata and notes are sufficient"
    }
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0405. Light Continuity Check

ID: photography-light-continuity-check
Sub-discipline: Photo retouching
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: Paste frame notes from a sequence and its intended visual treatment, and Jev routes each frame to a continuity issue while scoring mismatch severity and flagging whether retouching is required.

Why typed decisions: A fixed issue taxonomy turns subjective continuity review into sortable, actionable decisions.

TAM: $1–4B imaging and retouching tools
SAM: $100–400M professional retouching teams
SOM: $1–6M team workflow subscriptions

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Light Continuity Check" 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 frame notes from a sequence and its intended visual treatment, and Jev routes each frame to a continuity issue while scoring mismatch severity and flagging whether retouching is required.
Discipline: Photography (Photo retouching).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: A fixed issue taxonomy turns subjective continuity review into sortable, actionable decisions.

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": <Frame notes, sequence order, and visual treatment rules>, "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)
{
  "continuity_route": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which continuity dimension is most likely to need attention?",
    "criteria": {
      "exposure": "Brightness or contrast differs from the sequence",
      "color": "White balance or color treatment differs",
      "background": "Backdrop, environment, or set details differ",
      "subject": "Pose, wardrobe, or subject appearance differs"
    }
  },
  "mismatch_severity": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How noticeable is the mismatch for the intended sequence?",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Barely noticeable",
      "2: Minor but detectable",
      "3: Obvious and distracting",
      "4: Severe; sequence consistency is broken"
    ]
  },
  "retouch_required": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "For the selected issue, is a retouching intervention required?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Correction is needed to meet the intended continuity",
      "false": "The difference is acceptable for this sequence"
    }
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0406. Privacy Frame Triage

ID: photography-privacy-frame-triage
Sub-discipline: Editorial privacy review
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: Paste frame descriptions and publication context, and Jev routes each frame to a privacy-review category while scoring exposure risk and flagging whether masking or cropping is required.

Why typed decisions: Consistent risk categories help editors make accountable privacy decisions without relying on generated prose.

TAM: $1–3B newsroom risk and workflow software
SAM: $100–300M editorial photo teams
SOM: $1–5M newsroom subscriptions

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Privacy Frame Triage" 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 frame descriptions and publication context, and Jev routes each frame to a privacy-review category while scoring exposure risk and flagging whether masking or cropping is required.
Discipline: Photography (Editorial privacy review).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: Consistent risk categories help editors make accountable privacy decisions without relying on generated prose.

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": <Frame descriptions, publication context, and privacy policy>, "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)
{
  "privacy_route": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which privacy concern best determines the review path?",
    "criteria": {
      "identifiable_person": "A person is identifiable in a sensitive context",
      "personal_data": "A screen, document, or sign reveals personal information",
      "private_location": "A private home or restricted location is visible",
      "vulnerable_subject": "A child or vulnerable person may be exposed"
    }
  },
  "exposure_risk": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How serious is the privacy exposure in the stated context?",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Negligible; no meaningful exposure",
      "2: Limited; low likelihood of harm",
      "3: Significant; identifiable or sensitive details are exposed",
      "4: Severe; publication could create substantial harm"
    ]
  },
  "mask_or_crop": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "For the selected concern, is masking or cropping required before publication?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "A visual alteration is needed to reduce exposure",
      "false": "No masking or cropping is required"
    }
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0407. Event Coverage Mapper

ID: photography-event-coverage-mapper
Sub-discipline: Event photography
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: Paste an event brief and planned coverage list, and Jev routes each item to a coverage moment while scoring schedule importance and flagging whether a backup shooter is needed.

Why typed decisions: Clear routes and priority scores let producers spot coverage gaps and allocate staff quickly.

TAM: $1–3B event media workflow tools
SAM: $100–300M event photography businesses
SOM: $1–5M production subscriptions

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Event Coverage Mapper" 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 an event brief and planned coverage list, and Jev routes each item to a coverage moment while scoring schedule importance and flagging whether a backup shooter is needed.
Discipline: Photography (Event photography).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: Clear routes and priority scores let producers spot coverage gaps and allocate staff quickly.

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": <Event brief, schedule, shot list, and staffing plan>, "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)
{
  "moment_route": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which event moment best fits this coverage item?",
    "criteria": {
      "arrival": "Arrival, registration, or opening",
      "program": "Speech, presentation, or formal program",
      "interaction": "Networking, candid interaction, or activity",
      "closing": "Awards, departure, or final group moment"
    }
  },
  "coverage_priority": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How important is capturing this moment to the event brief?",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Optional supporting coverage",
      "2: Useful but not essential",
      "3: Important deliverable",
      "4: Must-capture moment"
    ]
  },
  "backup_shooter": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "For this route, is a backup shooter needed to ensure coverage?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Timing, access, or importance warrants backup coverage",
      "false": "One shooter can reliably cover it"
    }
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0408. Image Desk Assignment

ID: photography-image-desk-assignment
Sub-discipline: News photo editing
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: Paste incoming image descriptions and an assignment brief, and Jev routes each image to a desk category while scoring assignment relevance and flagging whether immediate editor review is needed.

Why typed decisions: A fixed desk route and relevance score help photo editors prioritize incoming images at scale.

TAM: $2–5B media asset and newsroom software
SAM: $200–500M editorial photo desks
SOM: $2–8M newsroom subscriptions

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Image Desk Assignment" 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 incoming image descriptions and an assignment brief, and Jev routes each image to a desk category while scoring assignment relevance and flagging whether immediate editor review is needed.
Discipline: Photography (News photo editing).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: A fixed desk route and relevance score help photo editors prioritize incoming images at scale.

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": <Image descriptions, assignment brief, and desk taxonomy>, "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)
{
  "desk_route": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which desk category should receive this image first?",
    "criteria": {
      "breaking": "Developing or urgent news",
      "politics": "Government, elections, or public policy",
      "culture": "Arts, entertainment, or community life",
      "sports": "Competition, athletes, or sporting events"
    }
  },
  "assignment_relevance": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How directly does the image serve the stated assignment?",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Unrelated to the assignment",
      "2: Contextually relevant but not direct",
      "3: Strong supporting image",
      "4: Direct, essential assignment image"
    ]
  },
  "immediate_review": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "For this desk route, does the image need immediate editor review?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Urgency or editorial sensitivity warrants immediate review",
      "false": "It can enter the normal desk queue"
    }
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0409. Model Release Sort

ID: photography-model-release-sort
Sub-discipline: Commercial photo compliance
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: Paste shoot records and planned image uses, and Jev routes each image to a release status while scoring documentation confidence and flagging whether a new model release is required.

Why typed decisions: A small set of compliance decisions is easier to audit and automate than generated legal-sounding commentary.

TAM: $1–3B image compliance software
SAM: $100–300M commercial studios and agencies
SOM: $1–5M compliance subscriptions

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Model Release Sort" 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 shoot records and planned image uses, and Jev routes each image to a release status while scoring documentation confidence and flagging whether a new model release is required.
Discipline: Photography (Commercial photo compliance).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: A small set of compliance decisions is easier to audit and automate than generated legal-sounding commentary.

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": <Shoot records, planned use, release inventory, and policy>, "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)
{
  "release_route": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which release status best fits the people and intended use?",
    "criteria": {
      "covered": "Existing release appears to cover the intended use",
      "scope_check": "A release exists but scope needs checking",
      "missing": "No applicable release is recorded",
      "not_applicable": "No identifiable person or release requirement applies"
    }
  },
  "documentation_confidence": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How confident is the documentation match for this route?",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Low; records are absent or contradictory",
      "2: Partial; important details are unclear",
      "3: Good; records mostly align with intended use",
      "4: High; documentation clearly supports the use"
    ]
  },
  "new_release": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "For the selected route, is a new model release required before use?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "A new or expanded release is needed",
      "false": "No new release is required"
    }
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0410. Prop Rights Check

ID: photography-prop-rights-check
Sub-discipline: Commercial image clearance
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: Paste scene notes and intended campaign uses, and Jev routes each image to a property-clearance category while scoring clearance risk and flagging whether location permission is needed.

Why typed decisions: Typed clearance outcomes support reliable handoffs between photographers, producers, and legal teams.

TAM: $1–3B commercial rights and production tools
SAM: $100–300M advertising photography teams
SOM: $1–5M production subscriptions

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Prop Rights Check" 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 scene notes and intended campaign uses, and Jev routes each image to a property-clearance category while scoring clearance risk and flagging whether location permission is needed.
Discipline: Photography (Commercial image clearance).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: Typed clearance outcomes support reliable handoffs between photographers, producers, and legal teams.

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": <Scene notes, location details, intended use, and clearance policy>, "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)
{
  "property_route": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which property-related review path best fits the scene?",
    "criteria": {
      "private_property": "Private interior or controlled property is prominent",
      "artwork": "Artwork, design, or distinctive protected material is prominent",
      "trademark": "Brand marks or product identifiers are prominent",
      "low_concern": "No prominent property-rights trigger is apparent"
    }
  },
  "clearance_risk": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How significant is the potential property-clearance concern for the intended use?",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Minimal concern",
      "2: Low; minor or incidental appearance",
      "3: Material; prominent property may need review",
      "4: High; intended use has a clear unresolved concern"
    ]
  },
  "location_permission": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "For this route, is location permission required before the intended use?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Permission or documented clearance is needed",
      "false": "No additional location permission is needed"
    }
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0411. Delivery Spec Router

ID: photography-delivery-spec-router
Sub-discipline: Photo delivery operations
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: Paste client delivery specs and an asset manifest, and Jev routes each asset to a delivery profile while scoring spec readiness and flagging whether a technical re-export is required.

Why typed decisions: Route labels and readiness scores translate complex requirements into repeatable delivery checks.

TAM: $2–5B digital asset management tools
SAM: $200–500M professional photo delivery workflows
SOM: $2–8M studio and agency subscriptions

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Delivery Spec Router" 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 client delivery specs and an asset manifest, and Jev routes each asset to a delivery profile while scoring spec readiness and flagging whether a technical re-export is required.
Discipline: Photography (Photo delivery operations).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: Route labels and readiness scores translate complex requirements into repeatable delivery checks.

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": <Client specs, asset manifest, and export rules>, "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)
{
  "delivery_route": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which delivery profile best fits this asset and its intended destination?",
    "criteria": {
      "print": "Print publication, packaging, or large-format output",
      "web": "Website, editorial web, or social publishing",
      "archive": "Long-term master or preservation copy",
      "broadcast": "Video, broadcast, or motion-graphics pipeline"
    }
  },
  "spec_readiness": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How ready is the asset to satisfy the selected profile?",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Not ready; essential requirements fail",
      "2: Partly ready; multiple checks remain",
      "3: Nearly ready; minor adjustments needed",
      "4: Ready; stated requirements are met"
    ]
  },
  "technical_reexport": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "For the selected profile, is a technical re-export required?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "A new export is needed to meet destination specs",
      "false": "The current asset is suitable"
    }
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0412. Sequence Story Arc

ID: photography-sequence-story-arc
Sub-discipline: Photo essay editing
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: Paste a photo essay's frame descriptions and editorial outline, and Jev routes each frame to a narrative role while scoring story contribution and flagging whether sequence review is needed.

Why typed decisions: A shared role taxonomy and contribution score help editors shape a sequence without outsourcing the story to generated text.

TAM: $1–3B editorial publishing workflow tools
SAM: $100–300M documentary and magazine teams
SOM: $1–5M editorial subscriptions

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Sequence Story Arc" 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 photo essay's frame descriptions and editorial outline, and Jev routes each frame to a narrative role while scoring story contribution and flagging whether sequence review is needed.
Discipline: Photography (Photo essay editing).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: A shared role taxonomy and contribution score help editors shape a sequence without outsourcing the story to generated text.

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": <Frame descriptions, essay outline, and intended sequence>, "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)
{
  "narrative_role": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which narrative role best fits this frame in the essay?",
    "criteria": {
      "establishing": "Introduces place, time, or overall context",
      "action": "Shows the central event or activity",
      "character": "Builds understanding of a person or community",
      "transition": "Connects sections or shifts the story"
    }
  },
  "story_contribution": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How much does this frame contribute to the stated essay?",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Redundant or unrelated",
      "2: Adds limited context",
      "3: Meaningfully advances the story",
      "4: Essential to the essay's structure or meaning"
    ]
  },
  "sequence_review": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "For this role, does the frame need human sequence review before layout?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Its narrative position or relationship needs editorial review",
      "false": "Its role is clear enough for normal layout"
    }
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0413. Wildlife Moment Sorter

ID: photography-wildlife-moment-sorter
Sub-discipline: Wildlife photography
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: Paste field notes and image metadata, and Jev routes each frame to a wildlife documentation category while scoring observation significance and flagging whether species verification is needed.

Why typed decisions: Typed categories help photographers and editors organize field records consistently without turning uncertain observations into confident prose.

TAM: $1–3B nature media and conservation data tools
SAM: $100–300M wildlife photographers and organizations
SOM: $1–5M project subscriptions

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Wildlife Moment Sorter" 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 field notes and image metadata, and Jev routes each frame to a wildlife documentation category while scoring observation significance and flagging whether species verification is needed.
Discipline: Photography (Wildlife photography).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: Typed categories help photographers and editors organize field records consistently without turning uncertain observations into confident prose.

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": <Field notes, image metadata, location, and project taxonomy>, "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)
{
  "wildlife_route": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which documentation category best fits the recorded frame?",
    "criteria": {
      "behavior": "A behavior or interaction is central",
      "habitat": "Habitat or environmental conditions are central",
      "identification": "Species or individual identification is central",
      "human_impact": "Human activity or conservation impact is central"
    }
  },
  "observation_significance": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How significant is this observation to the stated project?",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Routine or weakly relevant",
      "2: Useful supporting record",
      "3: Important observation",
      "4: Rare or central project evidence"
    ]
  },
  "species_verification": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "For this route, is expert species verification needed before labeling?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Identification is uncertain or consequential",
      "false": "Available records support the species label"
    }
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0414. Food Frame Finish

ID: photography-food-frame-finish
Sub-discipline: Food photography editing
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: Paste a menu brief and frame descriptions, and Jev routes each image to a food-delivery use while scoring appetite and brief fit and flagging whether styling or retouching review is needed.

Why typed decisions: Separate use categories and fit scores make subjective selection easier to compare across a menu shoot.

TAM: $1–3B food marketing and content tools
SAM: $100–300M restaurant and food photography teams
SOM: $1–5M studio subscriptions

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Food Frame Finish" 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 menu brief and frame descriptions, and Jev routes each image to a food-delivery use while scoring appetite and brief fit and flagging whether styling or retouching review is needed.
Discipline: Photography (Food photography editing).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: Separate use categories and fit scores make subjective selection easier to compare across a menu shoot.

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": <Menu brief, frame descriptions, usage plan, and style guide>, "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)
{
  "food_use_route": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which menu or campaign use best fits this frame?",
    "criteria": {
      "menu_hero": "Primary dish image for a menu or listing",
      "campaign": "Promotional or seasonal campaign image",
      "process": "Preparation, ingredient, or behind-the-scenes image",
      "detail": "Texture, garnish, or close-up supporting image"
    }
  },
  "appetite_fit": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How well does the frame communicate the intended food appeal and brief?",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Poor; dish or brief is not clearly served",
      "2: Fair; appeal or key detail is weak",
      "3: Good; strong match with minor limitations",
      "4: Excellent; clear, appetizing, on-brief image"
    ]
  },
  "finish_review": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "For this use, is styling or retouching review needed before delivery?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "A visible issue needs styling or post-production review",
      "false": "The frame is ready for the normal delivery check"
    }
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0415. Fashion Look Continuity

ID: photography-fashion-look-continuity
Sub-discipline: Fashion photography production
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: Paste a lookbook plan and frame notes, and Jev routes each frame to a styling continuity category while scoring look consistency and flagging whether a stylist recheck is required.

Why typed decisions: Fixed continuity categories help teams catch wardrobe mismatches before a fashion sequence is finalized.

TAM: $1–3B fashion production and asset tools
SAM: $100–300M fashion studios and brands
SOM: $1–5M production subscriptions

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Fashion Look Continuity" 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 lookbook plan and frame notes, and Jev routes each frame to a styling continuity category while scoring look consistency and flagging whether a stylist recheck is required.
Discipline: Photography (Fashion photography production).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: Fixed continuity categories help teams catch wardrobe mismatches before a fashion sequence is finalized.

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": <Lookbook plan, frame notes, wardrobe references, and sequence>, "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)
{
  "look_route": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which styling continuity dimension best fits this frame?",
    "criteria": {
      "garment": "Garment, fastening, or layering differs",
      "accessory": "Jewelry, bag, eyewear, or prop differs",
      "hair_makeup": "Hair or makeup changes across the look",
      "sequence": "Look order or planned variation needs review"
    }
  },
  "look_consistency": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How consistent is the frame with the planned look and sequence?",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Major mismatch",
      "2: Noticeable mismatch",
      "3: Mostly consistent with minor variation",
      "4: Fully consistent with the reference"
    ]
  },
  "stylist_recheck": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "For this route, is a stylist recheck required before the look is approved?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The discrepancy may affect the approved look",
      "false": "The variation is acceptable or intentional"
    }
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0416. Travel Story Selector

ID: photography-travel-story-selector
Sub-discipline: Travel photography
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: Paste travel assignment criteria and image notes, and Jev routes each frame to an editorial travel theme while scoring assignment fit and flagging whether location details need verification.

Why typed decisions: Theme routes and evidence-based fit scores help editors assemble balanced travel coverage without generated descriptions.

TAM: $1–3B travel content and publishing tools
SAM: $100–300M travel photographers and editors
SOM: $1–5M editorial subscriptions

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Travel Story Selector" 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 travel assignment criteria and image notes, and Jev routes each frame to an editorial travel theme while scoring assignment fit and flagging whether location details need verification.
Discipline: Photography (Travel photography).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: Theme routes and evidence-based fit scores help editors assemble balanced travel coverage without generated descriptions.

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": <Assignment criteria, image notes, location records, and usage>, "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)
{
  "travel_route": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which editorial travel theme best fits this frame?",
    "criteria": {
      "landscape": "Scenery, geography, or natural environment",
      "culture": "Local customs, arts, or community life",
      "experience": "Travel activity, lodging, or visitor experience",
      "infrastructure": "Transport, development, or environmental change"
    }
  },
  "assignment_fit": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How strongly does the frame satisfy the assignment?",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Weak or unrelated fit",
      "2: Some relevance but limited editorial value",
      "3: Strong supporting fit",
      "4: Direct, distinctive fit"
    ]
  },
  "location_verify": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "For this route, should the place or context be independently verified before publication?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Location or contextual details remain uncertain",
      "false": "Records adequately support the location and context"
    }
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0417. Sports Peak Sorter

ID: photography-sports-peak-sorter
Sub-discipline: Sports photography
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: Paste a match assignment and frame notes, and Jev routes each frame to a sports coverage moment while scoring action value and flagging whether rights or league review is needed.

Why typed decisions: Fast categorical triage and consistent action scoring let desks prioritize decisive moments across large bursts.

TAM: $1–3B sports media workflow tools
SAM: $100–300M sports photo desks and agencies
SOM: $1–5M newsroom subscriptions

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Sports Peak Sorter" 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 match assignment and frame notes, and Jev routes each frame to a sports coverage moment while scoring action value and flagging whether rights or league review is needed.
Discipline: Photography (Sports photography).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: Fast categorical triage and consistent action scoring let desks prioritize decisive moments across large bursts.

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": <Match assignment, frame notes, event rules, and rights policy>, "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)
{
  "sports_route": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which coverage moment best describes this frame?",
    "criteria": {
      "competition": "Live play, race, or decisive sporting action",
      "reaction": "Athlete or crowd response and emotion",
      "context": "Venue, team, or event-setting image",
      "ceremony": "Podium, award, or post-event moment"
    }
  },
  "action_value": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How valuable is this frame to the stated sports assignment?",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Low value; weak or obstructed moment",
      "2: Supporting context or routine action",
      "3: Strong, clear moment",
      "4: Decisive or defining assignment moment"
    ]
  },
  "rights_review": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "For this route and intended use, is rights or league review needed?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Restrictions or credentials require additional review",
      "false": "The stated use is covered by existing permissions"
    }
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0418. Exhibit Wall Planner

ID: photography-exhibit-wall-planner
Sub-discipline: Gallery exhibition planning
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: Paste an exhibition theme and image inventory, and Jev routes each photograph to a wall-section role while scoring curatorial fit and flagging whether print-production review is required.

Why typed decisions: Consistent section roles and fit scores support practical sequencing and production decisions without generating curatorial statements.

TAM: $1–3B museum and exhibition software
SAM: $100–300M galleries and photography institutions
SOM: $1–5M institutional subscriptions

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Exhibit Wall Planner" 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 an exhibition theme and image inventory, and Jev routes each photograph to a wall-section role while scoring curatorial fit and flagging whether print-production review is required.
Discipline: Photography (Gallery exhibition planning).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: Consistent section roles and fit scores support practical sequencing and production decisions without generating curatorial statements.

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": <Exhibition theme, image inventory, print constraints, and section plan>, "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)
{
  "wall_route": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which exhibition role best fits this photograph?",
    "criteria": {
      "anchor": "Major work that can anchor a section",
      "opener": "Strong entry image for a section or exhibition",
      "bridge": "Connects themes or visual transitions",
      "support": "Supporting work that deepens a section"
    }
  },
  "curatorial_fit": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How well does the image fit the stated theme and section?",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Poor fit",
      "2: Partial fit with limited connection",
      "3: Strong fit",
      "4: Essential or defining fit"
    ]
  },
  "print_review": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "For this role, is print-production review required before the work is selected?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Resolution, dimensions, condition, or material needs review",
      "false": "The print specification appears suitable"
    }
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0419. Newborn Safety Gate

ID: photography-newborn-safety-gate
Sub-discipline: Newborn photography
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: Paste session notes and planned pose descriptions, and Jev routes each setup to a safety category while scoring concern level and flagging whether a pose must be stopped pending review.

Why typed decisions: Conservative typed safety outcomes are more actionable and auditable than generated suggestions for sensitive setups.

TAM: $1–3B photography studio management tools
SAM: $100–300M portrait studios
SOM: $1–5M studio subscriptions

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Newborn Safety 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 session notes and planned pose descriptions, and Jev routes each setup to a safety category while scoring concern level and flagging whether a pose must be stopped pending review.
Discipline: Photography (Newborn photography).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: Conservative typed safety outcomes are more actionable and auditable than generated suggestions for sensitive setups.

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": <Session notes, pose descriptions, studio safety rules, and review policy>, "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)
{
  "safety_route": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which safety review path best fits this setup?",
    "criteria": {
      "support": "Hands-on support or spotter arrangements need review",
      "position": "Pose or positioning needs review",
      "environment": "Temperature, surface, or prop conditions need review",
      "routine": "No specific elevated concern is described"
    }
  },
  "concern_level": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How serious is the potential safety concern described for this setup?",
    "criteria": [
      "1: No apparent concern in the supplied notes",
      "2: Minor concern; routine check is sufficient",
      "3: Significant concern; qualified review is needed",
      "4: Critical concern; do not proceed without resolution"
    ]
  },
  "stop_setup": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "For this route, should the setup be stopped until a qualified person reviews it?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Proceeding before review could create an unacceptable risk",
      "false": "The setup may proceed under the stated routine safeguards"
    }
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0420. Photo Essay Rights Desk

ID: photography-photo-essay-rights-desk
Sub-discipline: Documentary publishing
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: Paste an essay's image list, contributor records, and publication plan, and Jev routes each frame to a rights-check path while scoring documentation completeness and flagging whether contributor permission is missing.

Why typed decisions: A structured rights route and completeness score reveal publication blockers without creating ambiguous legal prose.

TAM: $1–3B publishing rights management software
SAM: $100–300M documentary publishers and agencies
SOM: $1–5M editorial subscriptions

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Photo Essay Rights Desk" 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 an essay's image list, contributor records, and publication plan, and Jev routes each frame to a rights-check path while scoring documentation completeness and flagging whether contributor permission is missing.
Discipline: Photography (Documentary publishing).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: A structured rights route and completeness score reveal publication blockers without creating ambiguous legal prose.

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": <Image list, contributor records, publication plan, and permissions policy>, "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)
{
  "rights_route": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which rights-check path best fits this image and publication plan?",
    "criteria": {
      "photographer": "Photographer ownership or license needs confirmation",
      "subject": "Subject consent or release needs confirmation",
      "archive": "Agency, archive, or third-party license needs confirmation",
      "editorial_exception": "A documented editorial-use basis needs review"
    }
  },
  "records_completeness": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How complete are the records relevant to this rights path?",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Missing essential records",
      "2: Several material details are unclear",
      "3: Mostly complete with a minor gap",
      "4: Complete and consistent for the planned use"
    ]
  },
  "permission_missing": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "For this route, is required written permission missing from the supplied records?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "A required permission is absent or cannot be confirmed",
      "false": "The supplied records show required permission"
    }
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0421. Caption Risk Gate

ID: photography-caption-risk-gate
Sub-discipline: Photojournalism captioning
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste a draft caption and image context; Jev checks whether identity and location claims are supported, and the desk holds publication if either check fails.

Why typed decisions: Independent yes/no evidence checks make a clear editorial gate easier to audit than generated prose.

TAM: Global photojournalism software
SAM: Newsroom caption workflows
SOM: Freelance and local desks

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Caption Risk 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 draft caption and image context; Jev checks whether identity and location claims are supported, and the desk holds publication if either check fails.
Discipline: Photography (Photojournalism captioning).
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: Independent yes/no evidence checks make a clear editorial gate easier to audit than generated prose.

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": <Draft caption, image notes, and reporting context>, "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)
{
  "identity_supported": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the supplied context support the caption's identification of people or groups?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The supplied context supports the identification.",
      "false": "The identification is unsupported, ambiguous, or contradicted."
    }
  },
  "location_supported": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the supplied context support the stated place?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The supplied context supports the location.",
      "false": "The location is unsupported, ambiguous, or contradicted."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0422. Release Form Sentinel

ID: photography-release-form-sentinel
Sub-discipline: Photo rights management
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste a shoot brief, subject notes, and release status; Jev checks for identifiable minors and commercial use, and the app blocks delivery when either is present without a matching release.

Why typed decisions: Two explicit risk flags create a consistent rights workflow without asking a model to explain legal obligations.

TAM: Global photography rights tools
SAM: Portrait and commercial studios
SOM: Independent studio users

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Release Form Sentinel" 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 shoot brief, subject notes, and release status; Jev checks for identifiable minors and commercial use, and the app blocks delivery when either is present without a matching release.
Discipline: Photography (Photo rights management).
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: Two explicit risk flags create a consistent rights workflow without asking a model to explain legal obligations.

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": <Shoot brief, subject notes, and release status>, "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)
{
  "minor_identifiable": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the material indicate an identifiable subject who is under 18?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "An identifiable minor is indicated.",
      "false": "No identifiable minor is indicated."
    }
  },
  "commercial_use": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is the intended use commercial rather than editorial or personal?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The intended use is commercial.",
      "false": "The intended use is editorial, personal, or otherwise noncommercial."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0423. Sequence Continuity Check

ID: photography-sequence-continuity-check
Sub-discipline: Photo editing
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste a sequence's frame notes and edit order; Jev flags repeated moments and continuity breaks, and the editor reviews the sequence if either check is positive.

Why typed decisions: Separate binary checks are easy to apply frame-by-frame and avoid vague narrative feedback.

TAM: Global photo editing market
SAM: Editorial sequencing tools
SOM: Small agency edit desks

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Sequence Continuity Check" 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 sequence's frame notes and edit order; Jev flags repeated moments and continuity breaks, and the editor reviews the sequence if either check is positive.
Discipline: Photography (Photo editing).
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: Separate binary checks are easy to apply frame-by-frame and avoid vague narrative feedback.

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": <Ordered frame notes and sequence context>, "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)
{
  "repeated_moment": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does this frame substantially repeat a nearby frame's decisive moment?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The moment is substantially repeated nearby.",
      "false": "The moment is meaningfully distinct."
    }
  },
  "continuity_break": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does this frame create a visual or temporal continuity break in the intended sequence?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "A continuity break is present.",
      "false": "No meaningful continuity break is present."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0424. Archive Sensitive Scan

ID: photography-archive-sensitive-scan
Sub-discipline: Photo archiving
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste image descriptions and collection notes; Jev checks for sensitive personal data and vulnerable subjects, and the app routes any positive case for restricted-access review.

Why typed decisions: Independent flags support predictable access rules instead of relying on a free-form explanation.

TAM: Global digital asset management
SAM: Institutional and documentary archives
SOM: Small photo archives

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Archive Sensitive Scan" 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 image descriptions and collection notes; Jev checks for sensitive personal data and vulnerable subjects, and the app routes any positive case for restricted-access review.
Discipline: Photography (Photo archiving).
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: Independent flags support predictable access rules instead of relying on a free-form explanation.

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": <Image descriptions and archive collection 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)
{
  "personal_data": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the material expose sensitive personal information beyond ordinary image metadata?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Sensitive personal information is exposed.",
      "false": "No sensitive personal information is exposed."
    }
  },
  "vulnerable_subject": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the material depict a subject whose safety could be put at risk by disclosure?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Disclosure could plausibly endanger a subject.",
      "false": "No such safety risk is indicated."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0425. Print Prep Sentinel

ID: photography-print-prep-sentinel
Sub-discipline: Fine-art printing
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste print specifications and image notes; Jev checks for likely crop conflicts and unsupported border requirements, and the app sends the job to proofing if either check is positive.

Why typed decisions: Typed checks map directly to proofing rules and prevent uncertain jobs from silently reaching production.

TAM: Global photo print services
SAM: Fine-art labs and print studios
SOM: Independent printmakers

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Print Prep Sentinel" 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 print specifications and image notes; Jev checks for likely crop conflicts and unsupported border requirements, and the app sends the job to proofing if either check is positive.
Discipline: Photography (Fine-art printing).
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: Typed checks map directly to proofing rules and prevent uncertain jobs from silently reaching production.

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": <Print dimensions, crop notes, and image composition description>, "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)
{
  "crop_conflict": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Would the requested print aspect ratio likely cut off an important described subject or detail?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The requested crop threatens an important subject or detail.",
      "false": "The crop appears compatible with the described composition."
    }
  },
  "border_mismatch": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Do the requested border or bleed instructions conflict with the stated print requirements?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The border or bleed instructions conflict.",
      "false": "The instructions are compatible or no conflict is indicated."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0426. Assignment Fit Filter

ID: photography-assignment-fit-filter
Sub-discipline: Editorial commissioning
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste a photo assignment brief and photographer portfolio notes; Jev checks for subject-matter fit and required access, and the editor shortlists only when both checks pass.

Why typed decisions: Two stable yes/no criteria make early assignment triage faster and more consistent across editors.

TAM: Global editorial photography services
SAM: News and magazine commissioning
SOM: Small newsroom teams

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Assignment Fit Filter" 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 photo assignment brief and photographer portfolio notes; Jev checks for subject-matter fit and required access, and the editor shortlists only when both checks pass.
Discipline: Photography (Editorial commissioning).
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: Two stable yes/no criteria make early assignment triage faster and more consistent across editors.

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": <Assignment brief and portfolio or access 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)
{
  "subject_fit": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the portfolio evidence relevant experience with the assignment's subject matter?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Relevant subject-matter experience is evident.",
      "false": "Relevant experience is not evident."
    }
  },
  "access_ready": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Do the supplied notes indicate the photographer can meet the assignment's access requirements?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Required access appears available.",
      "false": "Required access is unavailable or unverified."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0427. Metadata Integrity Gate

ID: photography-metadata-integrity-gate
Sub-discipline: Photo asset management
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste image metadata and a file's provenance notes; Jev checks for inconsistent capture dates and suspicious authorship changes, and the app quarantines files when either flag is raised.

Why typed decisions: Independent typed flags support repeatable provenance checks without producing speculative narratives.

TAM: Global digital asset management
SAM: Newsroom and agency libraries
SOM: Independent archive teams

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Metadata Integrity 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 image metadata and a file's provenance notes; Jev checks for inconsistent capture dates and suspicious authorship changes, and the app quarantines files when either flag is raised.
Discipline: Photography (Photo asset management).
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: Independent typed flags support repeatable provenance checks without producing speculative narratives.

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": <Image metadata and provenance 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)
{
  "date_inconsistent": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Do the stated capture date and surrounding event context materially conflict?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "A material date conflict is present.",
      "false": "No material date conflict is indicated."
    }
  },
  "author_change_suspicious": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Do the notes indicate an unexplained authorship or provenance change?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "An unexplained change is indicated.",
      "false": "No unexplained change is indicated."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0428. Field Safety Planner

ID: photography-field-safety-planner
Sub-discipline: Photojournalism safety
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste an assignment plan and location notes; Jev checks for hazardous conditions and missing contingency planning, and the app requires a safety review if either is flagged.

Why typed decisions: Separate risk checks produce actionable gates rather than an unreliable general safety summary.

TAM: Global news media operations
SAM: Photojournalism safety planning
SOM: Freelance field teams

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Field Safety Planner" 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 an assignment plan and location notes; Jev checks for hazardous conditions and missing contingency planning, and the app requires a safety review if either is flagged.
Discipline: Photography (Photojournalism safety).
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: Separate risk checks produce actionable gates rather than an unreliable general safety summary.

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": <Assignment plan, location notes, and contingency details>, "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)
{
  "hazard_present": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Do the supplied notes indicate a material physical or environmental hazard?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "A material hazard is indicated.",
      "false": "No material hazard is indicated."
    }
  },
  "contingency_missing": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is a plausible contingency or exit plan missing for the assignment described?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "A contingency or exit plan is missing.",
      "false": "A plan is supplied or no special contingency is indicated."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0429. Portfolio Rights Sweep

ID: photography-portfolio-rights-sweep
Sub-discipline: Portfolio publishing
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste portfolio captions, usage notes, and release records; Jev checks for third-party work and missing permissions, and the app holds publication when both checks are positive.

Why typed decisions: A deterministic combination of rights flags is more useful for publishing decisions than generated legal-sounding text.

TAM: Global creator portfolio platforms
SAM: Professional photography portfolios
SOM: Independent photographers

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Portfolio Rights Sweep" 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 portfolio captions, usage notes, and release records; Jev checks for third-party work and missing permissions, and the app holds publication when both checks are positive.
Discipline: Photography (Portfolio publishing).
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: A deterministic combination of rights flags is more useful for publishing decisions than generated legal-sounding text.

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": <Portfolio captions, usage notes, and release records>, "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)
{
  "third_party_work": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the portfolio entry appear to include work created by someone other than the portfolio owner?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Third-party-created work is indicated.",
      "false": "The entry appears to be the owner's work."
    }
  },
  "permission_missing": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is permission or a license missing for an indicated third-party use?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Required permission or licensing is absent or unverified.",
      "false": "Permission is supplied or no third-party permission is indicated."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0430. Event Coverage Gap

ID: photography-event-coverage-gap
Sub-discipline: Event photography
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste a shot list and event schedule; Jev checks whether required moments are uncovered and whether the plan has conflicting coverage, and the app alerts the lead when either condition is flagged.

Why typed decisions: Binary coverage checks let a producer fix gaps before the event rather than interpret a long generated report.

TAM: Global event photography services
SAM: Event production teams
SOM: Small and mid-sized events

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Event Coverage Gap" 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 shot list and event schedule; Jev checks whether required moments are uncovered and whether the plan has conflicting coverage, and the app alerts the lead when either condition is flagged.
Discipline: Photography (Event photography).
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: Binary coverage checks let a producer fix gaps before the event rather than interpret a long generated report.

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": <Event schedule, shot list, and photographer assignments>, "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)
{
  "required_moment_uncovered": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the shot list omit a moment explicitly required by the schedule or brief?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "An explicitly required moment is uncovered.",
      "false": "No explicitly required moment appears uncovered."
    }
  },
  "coverage_conflict": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Do assignments require one photographer to cover simultaneous locations or moments?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "A simultaneous coverage conflict is present.",
      "false": "No simultaneous coverage conflict is indicated."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0431. Color Match Watch

ID: photography-color-match-watch
Sub-discipline: Photo retouching
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste a set of image notes and target look specifications; Jev checks for inconsistent white balance and skin-tone treatment, and the editor flags the set if either check fails.

Why typed decisions: Independent judgments catch common batch inconsistencies while leaving the actual retouching decisions to the editor.

TAM: Global photo post-production
SAM: Professional retouching workflows
SOM: Small retouching teams

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Color Match Watch" 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 set of image notes and target look specifications; Jev checks for inconsistent white balance and skin-tone treatment, and the editor flags the set if either check fails.
Discipline: Photography (Photo retouching).
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: Independent judgments catch common batch inconsistencies while leaving the actual retouching decisions to the editor.

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": <Image set notes and target color-look specifications>, "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)
{
  "white_balance_inconsistent": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the described set contain inconsistent white balance across images intended to match?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "A meaningful white-balance inconsistency is present.",
      "false": "No meaningful inconsistency is indicated."
    }
  },
  "skin_tone_inconsistent": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the described set treat comparable skin tones inconsistently?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "A meaningful inconsistency is present.",
      "false": "No meaningful inconsistency is indicated."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0432. Embargo Release Check

ID: photography-embargo-release-check
Sub-discipline: News photo distribution
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste an image's distribution notes and story timeline; Jev checks for an active embargo and premature release timing, and the app blocks distribution when both checks are positive.

Why typed decisions: Typed decisions make release timing enforceable and auditable without generating ambiguous guidance.

TAM: Global news distribution systems
SAM: News agency photo desks
SOM: Local publishers

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Embargo Release Check" 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 an image's distribution notes and story timeline; Jev checks for an active embargo and premature release timing, and the app blocks distribution when both checks are positive.
Discipline: Photography (News photo distribution).
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: Typed decisions make release timing enforceable and auditable without generating ambiguous guidance.

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": <Distribution notes, embargo terms, and story timeline>, "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)
{
  "active_embargo": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Do the supplied terms indicate an active embargo on this image?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "An active embargo is indicated.",
      "false": "No active embargo is indicated."
    }
  },
  "before_release_time": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is the planned distribution time earlier than the stated permitted release time?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Distribution is planned before the permitted time.",
      "false": "Distribution is at or after the permitted time."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0433. Wildlife Ethics Monitor

ID: photography-wildlife-ethics-monitor
Sub-discipline: Wildlife photography
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste field notes and a planned image-use description; Jev checks for animal disturbance and sensitive-location disclosure, and the app routes either positive case to an ethics review.

Why typed decisions: Two focused flags support consistent review while avoiding an opaque single ethics score.

TAM: Global wildlife imaging tools
SAM: Conservation photographers and publishers
SOM: Specialist photo teams

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Wildlife Ethics Monitor" 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 field notes and a planned image-use description; Jev checks for animal disturbance and sensitive-location disclosure, and the app routes either positive case to an ethics review.
Discipline: Photography (Wildlife photography).
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: Two focused flags support consistent review while avoiding an opaque single ethics score.

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": <Wildlife field notes and planned image-use description>, "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)
{
  "disturbance_indicated": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Do the notes indicate that obtaining the image disturbed or endangered wildlife?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Disturbance or endangerment is indicated.",
      "false": "No disturbance or endangerment is indicated."
    }
  },
  "sensitive_location_exposed": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Would the planned use reveal a location that could put wildlife at risk?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "A sensitive location would be exposed.",
      "false": "No sensitive location would be exposed."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0434. Model Call Fit

ID: photography-model-call-fit
Sub-discipline: Portrait photography
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste a portrait brief and model availability notes; Jev checks for brief-to-portfolio fit and schedule compatibility, and the app advances a candidate only when both checks pass.

Why typed decisions: Independent suitability checks create a simple shortlist rule without generating subjective casting commentary.

TAM: Global portrait photography market
SAM: Commercial portrait studios
SOM: Independent casting teams

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Model Call Fit" 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 portrait brief and model availability notes; Jev checks for brief-to-portfolio fit and schedule compatibility, and the app advances a candidate only when both checks pass.
Discipline: Photography (Portrait photography).
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: Independent suitability checks create a simple shortlist rule without generating subjective casting commentary.

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": <Portrait brief, portfolio notes, and availability>, "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)
{
  "brief_fit": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the portfolio appear suited to the visual requirements described in the brief?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The portfolio appears suited to the brief.",
      "false": "The portfolio does not appear suited or evidence is insufficient."
    }
  },
  "schedule_compatible": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Do the availability notes match the required shoot schedule?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Availability matches the schedule.",
      "false": "Availability conflicts with or does not confirm the schedule."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0435. Crop Safe Checker

ID: photography-crop-safe-checker
Sub-discipline: Social photo publishing
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste image descriptions and platform crop specifications; Jev checks for subject loss and context loss, and the app requests a manual crop whenever either flag is positive.

Why typed decisions: Separate crop-risk decisions are clearer and more actionable than a generated recommendation about framing.

TAM: Global social publishing tools
SAM: Professional social photo workflows
SOM: Independent creators

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Crop Safe Checker" 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 image descriptions and platform crop specifications; Jev checks for subject loss and context loss, and the app requests a manual crop whenever either flag is positive.
Discipline: Photography (Social photo publishing).
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: Separate crop-risk decisions are clearer and more actionable than a generated recommendation about framing.

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": <Image composition notes and platform crop specifications>, "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)
{
  "subject_at_risk": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Would the platform crop likely remove or obscure a key subject?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "A key subject is likely to be lost or obscured.",
      "false": "No key subject is likely to be lost or obscured."
    }
  },
  "context_at_risk": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Would the crop remove context necessary to understand the image?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Necessary context is likely to be removed.",
      "false": "Necessary context is likely to remain."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0436. Before After Integrity

ID: photography-before-after-integrity
Sub-discipline: Photojournalism standards
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste an edit description and the original image's scene notes; Jev checks for content addition and content removal, and the desk escalates the edit if either check is positive.

Why typed decisions: Separate manipulation flags map directly to editorial policy and avoid relying on a model's prose judgment.

TAM: Global newsroom image workflows
SAM: Editorial photo desks
SOM: Small news organizations

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Before After Integrity" 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 an edit description and the original image's scene notes; Jev checks for content addition and content removal, and the desk escalates the edit if either check is positive.
Discipline: Photography (Photojournalism standards).
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: Separate manipulation flags map directly to editorial policy and avoid relying on a model's prose 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": <Edit description, original scene notes, and outlet policy>, "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)
{
  "content_added": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the edit description indicate adding or synthesizing scene content?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Scene content was added or synthesized.",
      "false": "No scene content was added or synthesized."
    }
  },
  "content_removed": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the edit description indicate removing meaningful scene content?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Meaningful scene content was removed.",
      "false": "No meaningful scene content was removed."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0437. Lens Rental Match

ID: photography-lens-rental-match
Sub-discipline: Photography equipment rental
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste a shoot brief and rental kit inventory; Jev checks for required focal coverage and incompatible equipment, and the app confirms a kit only when coverage is adequate and no conflict is flagged.

Why typed decisions: Typed compatibility checks make kit selection faster and less error-prone than descriptive suggestions.

TAM: Global photography equipment services
SAM: Rental houses and production crews
SOM: Regional rental desks

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Lens Rental Match" 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 shoot brief and rental kit inventory; Jev checks for required focal coverage and incompatible equipment, and the app confirms a kit only when coverage is adequate and no conflict is flagged.
Discipline: Photography (Photography equipment rental).
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: Typed compatibility checks make kit selection faster and less error-prone than descriptive suggestions.

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": <Shoot brief, camera system, and available rental kit>, "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)
{
  "coverage_sufficient": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the listed kit cover the focal-length needs implied by the shoot brief?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The kit appears to cover the stated needs.",
      "false": "Coverage appears insufficient or unclear."
    }
  },
  "equipment_conflict": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the kit include a compatibility conflict with the stated camera system?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "A compatibility conflict is indicated.",
      "false": "No compatibility conflict is indicated."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0438. Stock Submission Scout

ID: photography-stock-submission-scout
Sub-discipline: Stock photography
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste image descriptions and a stock site's submission rules; Jev checks for recognizable brands and model-release gaps, and the app sends any flagged image to manual review.

Why typed decisions: Separate submission-risk checks enable consistent triage without pretending to replace the platform's final review.

TAM: Global stock photography market
SAM: Stock contributors and agencies
SOM: Independent contributors

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Stock Submission Scout" 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 image descriptions and a stock site's submission rules; Jev checks for recognizable brands and model-release gaps, and the app sends any flagged image to manual review.
Discipline: Photography (Stock photography).
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: Separate submission-risk checks enable consistent triage without pretending to replace the platform's final review.

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": <Image descriptions, release records, and stock submission rules>, "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)
{
  "recognizable_brand": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the description indicate a recognizable trademark or branded product?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "A recognizable brand is indicated.",
      "false": "No recognizable brand is indicated."
    }
  },
  "release_gap": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the image appear to need a model release that is absent or unverified?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "A needed release is absent or unverified.",
      "false": "No release gap is indicated."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0439. Contact Sheet Curator

ID: photography-contact-sheet-curator
Sub-discipline: Photo selection
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste frame notes and client selection criteria; Jev checks for brief relevance and near-duplicate frames, and the app advances relevant non-duplicates to the review shortlist.

Why typed decisions: Two small decisions reduce culling workload while keeping final image selection human-led.

TAM: Global photo editing software
SAM: Studio and agency culling workflows
SOM: Small photography teams

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Contact Sheet Curator" 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 frame notes and client selection criteria; Jev checks for brief relevance and near-duplicate frames, and the app advances relevant non-duplicates to the review shortlist.
Discipline: Photography (Photo selection).
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: Two small decisions reduce culling workload while keeping final image selection human-led.

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": <Frame notes and client selection criteria>, "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)
{
  "brief_relevant": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does this frame appear to satisfy a stated client selection criterion?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The frame appears to satisfy a stated criterion.",
      "false": "The frame does not appear to satisfy a criterion or evidence is insufficient."
    }
  },
  "near_duplicate": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is this frame substantially redundant with a stronger frame in the same set?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "A stronger, substantially similar frame is present.",
      "false": "No stronger near-duplicate is indicated."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0440. Exhibit Pairing Desk

ID: photography-exhibit-pairing-desk
Sub-discipline: Photography exhibition curation
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste artwork descriptions and an exhibition theme; Jev checks for thematic fit and pairwise repetition, and the app suggests a wall-plan candidate only when the work fits and adds variety.

Why typed decisions: Independent fit and repetition decisions support transparent curation rules without generating curatorial text.

TAM: Global exhibition and gallery tools
SAM: Photography galleries and curators
SOM: Independent exhibition organizers

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Exhibit Pairing Desk" 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 artwork descriptions and an exhibition theme; Jev checks for thematic fit and pairwise repetition, and the app suggests a wall-plan candidate only when the work fits and adds variety.
Discipline: Photography (Photography exhibition curation).
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: Independent fit and repetition decisions support transparent curation rules without generating curatorial text.

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": <Artwork descriptions, exhibition theme, and selected works>, "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)
{
  "theme_fit": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does this work connect meaningfully to the stated exhibition theme?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "A meaningful thematic connection is evident.",
      "false": "A meaningful connection is not evident."
    }
  },
  "pair_repetitive": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Would adding this work make the selected set substantially repetitive in subject or visual treatment?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The selected set would become substantially repetitive.",
      "false": "The work adds meaningful variety."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0441. Portfolio Sequence Studio

ID: photography-portfolio-sequence-studio
Sub-discipline: Portfolio editing
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste a portfolio’s image notes and rank each frame by visual impact, thematic fit, and sequence value using adjustable weights.

Why typed decisions: Comparable typed scores make it easy to reorder frames consistently without relying on generated critiques.

TAM: $4B global photo software
SAM: $500M portfolio professionals
SOM: $10M independent photographers

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Portfolio Sequence Studio" 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 portfolio’s image notes and rank each frame by visual impact, thematic fit, and sequence value using adjustable weights.
Discipline: Photography (Portfolio editing).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: Comparable typed scores make it easy to reorder frames consistently without relying on generated critiques.

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": <Candidate frame notes and portfolio theme>, "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)
{
  "visual_impact": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score each frame's visual impact using the same scale.",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Weak or unclear focal point",
      "2: Some visual interest, limited impact",
      "3: Strong, memorable image",
      "4: Exceptional, immediately compelling image"
    ]
  },
  "theme_fit": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score how well each frame supports the stated portfolio theme.",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Off theme",
      "2: Loose connection",
      "3: Clear thematic fit",
      "4: Essential expression of the theme"
    ]
  },
  "sequence_value": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score each frame's value in creating a compelling sequence.",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Disrupts the flow",
      "2: Adds little sequence value",
      "3: Builds a useful transition or rhythm",
      "4: Creates a defining opening, turn, or ending"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0442. Deadline Select Desk

ID: photography-deadline-select-desk
Sub-discipline: Photojournalism
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste assignment requirements and candidate frame descriptions to rank selects by story relevance, news value, and evidentiary clarity with adjustable weights.

Why typed decisions: A shared scoring scale helps editors compare frames quickly against the assignment rather than sort through prose recommendations.

TAM: $4B global photo software
SAM: $700M editorial photography
SOM: $15M newsrooms and freelancers

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Deadline Select Desk" 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 assignment requirements and candidate frame descriptions to rank selects by story relevance, news value, and evidentiary clarity with adjustable weights.
Discipline: Photography (Photojournalism).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: A shared scoring scale helps editors compare frames quickly against the assignment rather than sort through prose recommendations.

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": <Assignment brief and candidate frame metadata>, "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)
{
  "assignment_relevance": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score each frame's relevance to the same assignment brief.",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Unrelated",
      "2: Marginally relevant",
      "3: Directly relevant",
      "4: Central to the assignment"
    ]
  },
  "news_value": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score each frame's news value relative to the other candidates.",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Little news significance",
      "2: Adds modest context",
      "3: Clearly newsworthy",
      "4: Captures a highly consequential moment"
    ]
  },
  "evidentiary_clarity": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score how clearly each frame communicates verifiable event details.",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Ambiguous or unclear",
      "2: Some details discernible",
      "3: Key details clear",
      "4: Strong, unambiguous visual evidence"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0443. Contact Sheet Cull

ID: photography-contact-sheet-cull
Sub-discipline: Event photography
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste burst metadata and brief image descriptions to rank near-duplicate frames by expression, sharpness, and composition using your own weights.

Why typed decisions: Typed scores reveal why a frame outranks its neighbors and support repeatable culling rules.

TAM: $4B global photo software
SAM: $600M event photography tools
SOM: $12M working event photographers

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Contact Sheet Cull" 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 burst metadata and brief image descriptions to rank near-duplicate frames by expression, sharpness, and composition using your own weights.
Discipline: Photography (Event photography).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: Typed scores reveal why a frame outranks its neighbors and support repeatable culling rules.

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": <Burst groups with frame notes and capture metadata>, "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)
{
  "expression_quality": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score each frame's subject expression against the other frames in its burst.",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Unflattering or obscured",
      "2: Neutral or slightly mistimed",
      "3: Natural and engaging",
      "4: Exceptional, decisive expression"
    ]
  },
  "sharpness": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score each frame's subject sharpness on the same scale.",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Critical subject is blurred",
      "2: Noticeably soft",
      "3: Acceptably sharp",
      "4: Precisely sharp where it matters"
    ]
  },
  "composition": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score each frame's composition relative to the burst.",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Distracting or poorly framed",
      "2: Usable with notable flaws",
      "3: Balanced and effective",
      "4: Distinctive, polished framing"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0444. Caption Match Sorter

ID: photography-caption-match-sorter
Sub-discipline: Editorial captioning
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste candidate captions alongside image facts to rank each caption by factual support, subject identification, and relevance without generating replacements.

Why typed decisions: Typed scores compare existing captions against known facts while avoiding invented caption text.

TAM: $4B global photo software
SAM: $350M editorial workflows
SOM: $8M publishers and agencies

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Caption Match Sorter" 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 candidate captions alongside image facts to rank each caption by factual support, subject identification, and relevance without generating replacements.
Discipline: Photography (Editorial captioning).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: Typed scores compare existing captions against known facts while avoiding invented caption text.

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": <Image facts, source notes, and candidate captions>, "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)
{
  "factual_support": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score how strongly the image facts support each candidate caption.",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Contains unsupported claims",
      "2: Several details are uncertain",
      "3: Claims are mostly supported",
      "4: Every material claim is well supported"
    ]
  },
  "subject_identification": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score how clearly and correctly each caption identifies the subject.",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Misidentifies or omits the subject",
      "2: Identification is incomplete",
      "3: Correctly identifies the subject",
      "4: Precisely identifies subject and relevant role"
    ]
  },
  "editorial_relevance": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score each caption's relevance to the intended story.",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Irrelevant",
      "2: Peripheral context",
      "3: Useful story context",
      "4: Directly conveys a key story detail"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0445. License Fit Finder

ID: photography-license-fit-finder
Sub-discipline: Photo licensing
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste an image inventory and buyer brief to rank candidate images by usage fit, release readiness, and visual suitability with adjustable weights.

Why typed decisions: Comparable scores separate creative fit from practical licensing readiness for fast, auditable shortlists.

TAM: $4B global photo software
SAM: $800M image licensing tools
SOM: $12M agencies and photo libraries

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "License Fit Finder" 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 an image inventory and buyer brief to rank candidate images by usage fit, release readiness, and visual suitability with adjustable weights.
Discipline: Photography (Photo licensing).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: Comparable scores separate creative fit from practical licensing readiness for fast, auditable shortlists.

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": <Image metadata, release flags, and buyer brief>, "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)
{
  "usage_fit": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score each image's fit for the same stated usage and audience.",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Poor fit",
      "2: Limited fit",
      "3: Good fit",
      "4: Excellent fit for the intended use"
    ]
  },
  "release_readiness": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score each image's apparent readiness for the buyer's stated release requirements.",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Major release obstacles",
      "2: Important checks unresolved",
      "3: Likely ready with minor checks",
      "4: Clearly meets stated release needs"
    ]
  },
  "visual_suitability": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score each image's visual suitability for the requested placement.",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Unsuitable framing or content",
      "2: Usable only with compromises",
      "3: Suits the placement",
      "4: Particularly effective for the placement"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0446. Essay Arc Finder

ID: photography-essay-arc-finder
Sub-discipline: Photo essays
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste a photo essay outline and frame summaries to rank candidates by narrative contribution, emotional range, and connective value using adjustable weights.

Why typed decisions: Typed dimensions make narrative roles comparable without asking a model to write the essay for the photographer.

TAM: $4B global photo software
SAM: $300M documentary workflows
SOM: $6M independent visual storytellers

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Essay Arc Finder" 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 photo essay outline and frame summaries to rank candidates by narrative contribution, emotional range, and connective value using adjustable weights.
Discipline: Photography (Photo essays).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: Typed dimensions make narrative roles comparable without asking a model to write the essay for the photographer.

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": <Essay premise, outline, and candidate frame summaries>, "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)
{
  "narrative_contribution": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score each frame's contribution to the same essay premise.",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Adds no narrative information",
      "2: Repeats existing information",
      "3: Advances the story",
      "4: Reveals a pivotal aspect of the premise"
    ]
  },
  "emotional_range": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score each frame's contribution to the essay's emotional range.",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Adds no distinct emotional note",
      "2: Slight variation",
      "3: Meaningful emotional contrast",
      "4: Essential emotional turning point"
    ]
  },
  "connective_value": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score how well each frame connects neighboring essay sections.",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Breaks continuity",
      "2: Weak transition",
      "3: Connects sections effectively",
      "4: Creates a strong, purposeful transition"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0447. Color Grade Consistency

ID: photography-color-grade-consistency
Sub-discipline: Photo editing
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste edit settings and visual notes for a shoot to rank images by palette cohesion, exposure consistency, and skin-tone naturalness with adjustable weights.

Why typed decisions: Typed per-image scores expose outliers for human review instead of prescribing or generating edits.

TAM: $4B global photo software
SAM: $1B editing workflow tools
SOM: $15M studios and retouchers

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Color Grade Consistency" 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 edit settings and visual notes for a shoot to rank images by palette cohesion, exposure consistency, and skin-tone naturalness with adjustable weights.
Discipline: Photography (Photo editing).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: Typed per-image scores expose outliers for human review instead of prescribing or generating edits.

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": <Image edit settings and visual review 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)
{
  "palette_cohesion": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score each image's palette consistency with the intended set look.",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Strongly clashes",
      "2: Noticeable mismatch",
      "3: Consistent with the set",
      "4: Exemplary match to the intended palette"
    ]
  },
  "exposure_consistency": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score each image's exposure consistency against the set reference.",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Major inconsistency",
      "2: Noticeable deviation",
      "3: Close to reference",
      "4: Excellent match while preserving image detail"
    ]
  },
  "skin_tone_naturalness": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score skin-tone naturalness where skin is present.",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Clearly unnatural",
      "2: Some visible color cast",
      "3: Generally natural",
      "4: Natural and consistent with the scene"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0448. Print Crop Compass

ID: photography-print-crop-compass
Sub-discipline: Fine-art printing
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste image summaries and print-size requirements to rank candidate crops by subject preservation, compositional balance, and aspect-ratio fit with adjustable weights.

Why typed decisions: Normalized scores let printmakers compare crop options against practical constraints and artistic priorities.

TAM: $4B global photo software
SAM: $250M fine-art print workflows
SOM: $5M print studios and artists

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Print Crop Compass" 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 image summaries and print-size requirements to rank candidate crops by subject preservation, compositional balance, and aspect-ratio fit with adjustable weights.
Discipline: Photography (Fine-art printing).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: Normalized scores let printmakers compare crop options against practical constraints and artistic priorities.

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": <Image summaries, crop options, and print specifications>, "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)
{
  "subject_preservation": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score how well each crop preserves the image's important subject matter.",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Cuts off essential content",
      "2: Loses meaningful context",
      "3: Preserves the key subject",
      "4: Preserves all critical details effectively"
    ]
  },
  "compositional_balance": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score each crop's compositional balance.",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Unbalanced or awkward",
      "2: Some imbalance",
      "3: Balanced and readable",
      "4: Especially strong visual balance"
    ]
  },
  "format_fit": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score how well each crop fits the requested print format.",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Poor fit or excessive loss",
      "2: Fit requires major compromise",
      "3: Good fit with minor compromise",
      "4: Naturally suits the format"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0449. Archive Gap Scout

ID: photography-archive-gap-scout
Sub-discipline: Photo archiving
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste archive inventories and collection priorities to rank candidate images by subject coverage, time-period importance, and geographic representation with adjustable weights.

Why typed decisions: Comparable scores help archivists prioritize meaningful gaps instead of relying on keyword counts alone.

TAM: $4B global photo software
SAM: $500M archive and DAM tools
SOM: $8M cultural institutions

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Archive Gap Scout" 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 archive inventories and collection priorities to rank candidate images by subject coverage, time-period importance, and geographic representation with adjustable weights.
Discipline: Photography (Photo archiving).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: Comparable scores help archivists prioritize meaningful gaps instead of relying on keyword counts alone.

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": <Archive inventory, collection priorities, and candidate metadata>, "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)
{
  "subject_coverage": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score each candidate's contribution to the collection's subject coverage.",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Adds no missing subject coverage",
      "2: Slightly broadens coverage",
      "3: Fills a clear subject gap",
      "4: Fills a major collection gap"
    ]
  },
  "period_importance": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score the importance of each candidate's time period to the collection.",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Period is already well represented",
      "2: Adds limited temporal value",
      "3: Represents an undercovered period",
      "4: Documents a critically missing period"
    ]
  },
  "geographic_representation": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score each candidate's contribution to geographic representation.",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Adds no geographic breadth",
      "2: Adds modest breadth",
      "3: Represents an undercovered location",
      "4: Fills a major geographic gap"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0450. Ethics Review Queue

ID: photography-ethics-review-queue
Sub-discipline: Visual journalism ethics
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste image descriptions, sourcing notes, and editorial standards to rank frames by consent sensitivity, context risk, and public-interest value for human review.

Why typed decisions: Typed risk and value scores create a transparent review queue without automating ethical approval.

TAM: $4B global photo software
SAM: $200M newsroom standards tools
SOM: $4M editorial organizations

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Ethics Review Queue" 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 image descriptions, sourcing notes, and editorial standards to rank frames by consent sensitivity, context risk, and public-interest value for human review.
Discipline: Photography (Visual journalism ethics).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: Typed risk and value scores create a transparent review queue without automating ethical approval.

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": <Frame notes, sourcing details, and newsroom standards>, "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)
{
  "consent_sensitivity": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score each frame's sensitivity around consent and subject vulnerability.",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Low apparent sensitivity",
      "2: Some sensitivity to consider",
      "3: Significant consent concerns",
      "4: Acute vulnerability requiring careful review"
    ]
  },
  "context_risk": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score the risk that each frame could mislead without additional context.",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Low risk of misinterpretation",
      "2: Some context would help",
      "3: Easily misunderstood out of context",
      "4: High risk of serious misrepresentation"
    ]
  },
  "public_interest": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score each frame's contribution to the stated public interest.",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Little public-interest value",
      "2: Limited relevance",
      "3: Meaningful public value",
      "4: Essential evidence of a matter of public concern"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0451. Stock Submission Scout

ID: photography-stock-submission-scout-1
Sub-discipline: Stock photography
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste a stock library's brief and candidate image metadata to rank submissions by buyer relevance, commercial versatility, and technical readiness with adjustable weights.

Why typed decisions: Structured scores help photographers prioritize submissions against a specific brief and practical quality criteria.

TAM: $4B global photo software
SAM: $700M stock image workflows
SOM: $10M independent contributors

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Stock Submission Scout" 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 stock library's brief and candidate image metadata to rank submissions by buyer relevance, commercial versatility, and technical readiness with adjustable weights.
Discipline: Photography (Stock photography).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: Structured scores help photographers prioritize submissions against a specific brief and practical quality criteria.

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": <Library brief and candidate image metadata>, "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)
{
  "buyer_relevance": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score each image's relevance to the same buyer brief.",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Poor match",
      "2: Weak or indirect match",
      "3: Clear match",
      "4: Direct, high-value match"
    ]
  },
  "commercial_versatility": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score each image's usefulness across plausible commercial placements.",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Very limited use",
      "2: Suitable for one narrow use",
      "3: Useful in several contexts",
      "4: Broadly usable across relevant placements"
    ]
  },
  "technical_readiness": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score each image's readiness against the stated technical requirements.",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Fails key requirements",
      "2: Needs substantial correction",
      "3: Meets most requirements",
      "4: Clearly ready for submission"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0452. Restoration Priority Board

ID: photography-restoration-priority-board
Sub-discipline: Photo restoration
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste a digitization backlog and preservation goals to rank photographs by physical urgency, historical significance, and restoration feasibility with adjustable weights.

Why typed decisions: Comparable scores help conservators allocate limited restoration time while keeping urgency distinct from significance.

TAM: $4B global photo software
SAM: $400M conservation workflows
SOM: $7M archives and museums

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Restoration Priority Board" 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 digitization backlog and preservation goals to rank photographs by physical urgency, historical significance, and restoration feasibility with adjustable weights.
Discipline: Photography (Photo restoration).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: Comparable scores help conservators allocate limited restoration time while keeping urgency distinct from significance.

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": <Backlog records, condition notes, and preservation goals>, "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)
{
  "physical_urgency": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score each photograph's urgency for preservation intervention.",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Stable; no near-term action",
      "2: Monitor over time",
      "3: Intervention advisable soon",
      "4: At immediate risk of irreversible loss"
    ]
  },
  "historical_significance": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score each photograph's significance to the stated collection.",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Limited collection significance",
      "2: Useful supporting material",
      "3: Important historical record",
      "4: Uniquely significant record"
    ]
  },
  "restoration_feasibility": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score the feasibility of restoring each photograph with available resources.",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Not feasible with current resources",
      "2: Difficult and resource-intensive",
      "3: Feasible with specialist work",
      "4: Straightforward with available capacity"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0453. Location Scout Sorter

ID: photography-location-scout-sorter
Sub-discipline: Location photography
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste a shoot brief and location notes to rank potential spots by light conditions, logistical access, and visual fit using adjustable weights.

Why typed decisions: Comparable location scores help crews shortlist sites against both creative intent and practical constraints.

TAM: $4B global photo software
SAM: $300M production planning tools
SOM: $5M photo and film crews

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Location Scout Sorter" 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 shoot brief and location notes to rank potential spots by light conditions, logistical access, and visual fit using adjustable weights.
Discipline: Photography (Location photography).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: Comparable location scores help crews shortlist sites against both creative intent and practical constraints.

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": <Shoot brief, location notes, and access details>, "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)
{
  "light_conditions": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score each location's likely light for the planned shoot time.",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Poor light for the brief",
      "2: Significant lighting limitations",
      "3: Suitable light with some planning",
      "4: Excellent natural-light potential"
    ]
  },
  "logistical_access": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score how practical each location is for the crew and equipment.",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Access is impractical",
      "2: Major logistical hurdles",
      "3: Manageable access",
      "4: Easy, reliable access"
    ]
  },
  "visual_fit": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score each location's visual fit with the shoot brief.",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Conflicts with the intended look",
      "2: Weak visual match",
      "3: Good visual match",
      "4: Ideal setting for the brief"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0454. Portrait Session Keeper

ID: photography-portrait-session-keeper
Sub-discipline: Portrait photography
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste portrait frame notes and client preferences to rank candidates by likeness, expression, and lighting quality with adjustable weights.

Why typed decisions: Typed scores let photographers compare portraits against client priorities without replacing their final aesthetic judgment.

TAM: $4B global photo software
SAM: $500M portrait studio tools
SOM: $9M portrait photographers

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Portrait Session Keeper" 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 portrait frame notes and client preferences to rank candidates by likeness, expression, and lighting quality with adjustable weights.
Discipline: Photography (Portrait photography).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: Typed scores let photographers compare portraits against client priorities without replacing their final aesthetic 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": <Portrait frame notes and client preferences>, "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)
{
  "likeness": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score how well each portrait represents the subject as the client wants to be seen.",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Unflattering or unlike the subject",
      "2: Partial likeness or presentation",
      "3: Strong, recognizable likeness",
      "4: Exceptionally authentic and flattering likeness"
    ]
  },
  "expression": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score each portrait's expression for the intended use.",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Awkward or mistimed",
      "2: Acceptable but unremarkable",
      "3: Natural and engaging",
      "4: Especially expressive and memorable"
    ]
  },
  "lighting_quality": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score the lighting quality relative to the portrait brief.",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Distracting or unflattering",
      "2: Usable with visible issues",
      "3: Effective and flattering",
      "4: Distinctive, polished lighting"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0455. Wedding Story Sorter

ID: photography-wedding-story-sorter
Sub-discipline: Wedding photography
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste a wedding timeline and candidate frame notes to rank images by event significance, emotional resonance, and album storytelling value with adjustable weights.

Why typed decisions: A shared scale makes it easier to build balanced albums that honor both key moments and quieter transitions.

TAM: $4B global photo software
SAM: $450M wedding photography tools
SOM: $10M wedding studios

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Wedding Story Sorter" 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 wedding timeline and candidate frame notes to rank images by event significance, emotional resonance, and album storytelling value with adjustable weights.
Discipline: Photography (Wedding photography).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: A shared scale makes it easier to build balanced albums that honor both key moments and quieter transitions.

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": <Wedding timeline and candidate frame 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)
{
  "event_significance": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score each frame's importance within the wedding timeline.",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Incidental moment",
      "2: Minor event detail",
      "3: Important documented moment",
      "4: Defining milestone of the day"
    ]
  },
  "emotional_resonance": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score each frame's emotional resonance for the couple and guests.",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Little emotional connection",
      "2: Mildly engaging",
      "3: Meaningfully moving",
      "4: Exceptionally intimate or affecting"
    ]
  },
  "album_story_value": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score each frame's contribution to a complete wedding album narrative.",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Adds no story value",
      "2: Repeats other coverage",
      "3: Adds useful narrative context",
      "4: Essential to the day's visual story"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0456. Wildlife Frame Triage

ID: photography-wildlife-frame-triage
Sub-discipline: Wildlife photography
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste field notes and candidate wildlife frame descriptions to rank images by behavioral significance, species visibility, and ethical field practice with adjustable weights.

Why typed decisions: Typed scores distinguish compelling behavior from simple image quality and flag ethical concerns for a photographer's review.

TAM: $4B global photo software
SAM: $250M wildlife image tools
SOM: $5M field photographers

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Wildlife Frame Triage" 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 field notes and candidate wildlife frame descriptions to rank images by behavioral significance, species visibility, and ethical field practice with adjustable weights.
Discipline: Photography (Wildlife photography).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: Typed scores distinguish compelling behavior from simple image quality and flag ethical concerns for a photographer's review.

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": <Field notes, species details, and candidate frame descriptions>, "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)
{
  "behavioral_significance": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score the significance of the observed animal behavior in each frame.",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Common or unclear behavior",
      "2: Mildly informative behavior",
      "3: Distinctive behavior documented clearly",
      "4: Rare or especially important behavior"
    ]
  },
  "species_visibility": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score how clearly each frame shows useful species-identification details.",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Species cannot be identified",
      "2: Limited identifying details",
      "3: Species is clearly identifiable",
      "4: Clear, rich diagnostic detail"
    ]
  },
  "ethical_practice": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score alignment with the stated wildlife ethics guidelines.",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Strong apparent guideline conflict",
      "2: Potential concern needs review",
      "3: Appears consistent with guidance",
      "4: Clearly supports low-impact practice"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0457. Product Shot Selector

ID: photography-product-shot-selector
Sub-discipline: Commercial photography
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste a product brief and image summaries to rank candidate shots by product clarity, brand alignment, and layout flexibility with adjustable weights.

Why typed decisions: Normalized dimensions help creative teams compare functional product coverage alongside brand feel.

TAM: $4B global photo software
SAM: $600M commercial image production
SOM: $12M studios and in-house teams

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Product Shot Selector" 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 product brief and image summaries to rank candidate shots by product clarity, brand alignment, and layout flexibility with adjustable weights.
Discipline: Photography (Commercial photography).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: Normalized dimensions help creative teams compare functional product coverage alongside brand feel.

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": <Product brief, brand notes, and candidate image summaries>, "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)
{
  "product_clarity": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score how clearly each frame shows the product's important features.",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Product is obscured or unclear",
      "2: Key features are hard to see",
      "3: Product is clearly presented",
      "4: Critical features are exceptionally legible"
    ]
  },
  "brand_alignment": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score each frame's fit with the stated brand visual direction.",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Conflicts with the brand",
      "2: Weak alignment",
      "3: Consistent with the brand",
      "4: Exemplifies the brand direction"
    ]
  },
  "layout_flexibility": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score how flexibly each frame can support the intended layouts.",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Very difficult to place",
      "2: Limited layout options",
      "3: Works in likely placements",
      "4: Adaptable across multiple placements"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0458. Travel Set Curator

ID: photography-travel-set-curator
Sub-discipline: Travel photography
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste a travel story outline and image notes to rank frames by place identity, cultural context, and visual variety with adjustable weights.

Why typed decisions: Comparable scores help curators avoid repetitive views while preserving the details that make a place legible.

TAM: $4B global photo software
SAM: $350M travel photography tools
SOM: $6M travel publishers and creators

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Travel Set Curator" 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 travel story outline and image notes to rank frames by place identity, cultural context, and visual variety with adjustable weights.
Discipline: Photography (Travel photography).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: Comparable scores help curators avoid repetitive views while preserving the details that make a place legible.

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": <Travel story outline and candidate image 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)
{
  "place_identity": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score how strongly each frame conveys the specific place.",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Place is unrecognizable",
      "2: Generic sense of place",
      "3: Clear local identity",
      "4: Distinctive, unmistakable sense of place"
    ]
  },
  "cultural_context": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score the frame's contribution to nuanced cultural context.",
    "criteria": [
      "1: No useful context or a misleading impression",
      "2: Limited context",
      "3: Useful, respectful context",
      "4: Rich and specific cultural context"
    ]
  },
  "visual_variety": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score the frame's contribution to visual variety in the set.",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Repeats existing views",
      "2: Slight variation",
      "3: Adds a distinct visual perspective",
      "4: Provides a vital change in scale, subject, or rhythm"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0459. Exhibition Wall Planner

ID: photography-exhibition-wall-planner
Sub-discipline: Gallery curation
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste an exhibition concept and work descriptions to rank candidate photographs by thematic relevance, wall presence, and adjacency value with adjustable weights.

Why typed decisions: Typed scores help curators balance each work's individual strength with its contribution to the overall hang.

TAM: $4B global photo software
SAM: $250M exhibition planning tools
SOM: $5M galleries and curators

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Exhibition Wall Planner" 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 an exhibition concept and work descriptions to rank candidate photographs by thematic relevance, wall presence, and adjacency value with adjustable weights.
Discipline: Photography (Gallery curation).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: Typed scores help curators balance each work's individual strength with its contribution to the overall hang.

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": <Exhibition concept and candidate work descriptions>, "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)
{
  "thematic_relevance": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score each work's relevance to the same exhibition concept.",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Outside the concept",
      "2: Indirect connection",
      "3: Clear conceptual fit",
      "4: Foundational work for the concept"
    ]
  },
  "wall_presence": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score each work's likely visual presence at its intended display scale.",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Likely to disappear on the wall",
      "2: Modest presence",
      "3: Strong viewing presence",
      "4: Dominant and memorable presence"
    ]
  },
  "adjacency_value": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score each work's value beside the proposed neighboring works.",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Weakens the grouping",
      "2: Adds little to the grouping",
      "3: Creates a useful dialogue",
      "4: Transforms the neighboring works' meaning"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0460. Rights Risk Sorter

ID: photography-rights-risk-sorter
Sub-discipline: Image rights management
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste image records and usage plans to rank assets by rights certainty, restriction severity, and intended-use compatibility with adjustable weights.

Why typed decisions: Comparable decision scores bring uncertain assets to human review before publication without pretending to provide legal advice.

TAM: $4B global photo software
SAM: $500M rights management tools
SOM: $8M publishers and agencies

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Rights Risk Sorter" 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 image records and usage plans to rank assets by rights certainty, restriction severity, and intended-use compatibility with adjustable weights.
Discipline: Photography (Image rights management).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: Comparable decision scores bring uncertain assets to human review before publication without pretending to provide legal advice.

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": <Image rights records and proposed usage details>, "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)
{
  "rights_certainty": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score the clarity of each asset's documented rights status.",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Rights status unknown",
      "2: Major documentation gaps",
      "3: Mostly documented with checks remaining",
      "4: Clear, well-documented rights status"
    ]
  },
  "restriction_severity": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score the severity of known restrictions for the proposed use.",
    "criteria": [
      "1: No material restrictions found",
      "2: Minor limitations",
      "3: Significant limitations",
      "4: Restrictions likely prevent the proposed use"
    ]
  },
  "usage_compatibility": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score each asset's compatibility with the stated usage plan.",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Incompatible",
      "2: Compatible only after major review",
      "3: Likely compatible with checks",
      "4: Clearly compatible with documented terms"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0461. Caption Fact Picker

ID: photography-caption-fact-picker
Sub-discipline: Photojournalism captions
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: A photojournalist pastes a draft caption and extracted names, dates, places, and event phrases, and Jev selects which candidate span best identifies the event and whether the caption contains an unsupported claim.

Why typed decisions: Selecting an exact extracted phrase preserves verifiable wording instead of risking a plausible but invented caption detail.

TAM: Global photojournalism software: $1B+
SAM: Captioning and newsroom tools: $100M+
SOM: Initial newsroom customers: $1M+

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Caption Fact Picker" 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
A photojournalist pastes a draft caption and extracted names, dates, places, and event phrases, and Jev selects which candidate span best identifies the event and whether the caption contains an unsupported claim.
Discipline: Photography (Photojournalism captions).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: Selecting an exact extracted phrase preserves verifiable wording instead of risking a plausible but invented caption detail.

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": <Draft caption plus extracted entity and event spans>, "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)
{
  "event_span": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which candidate span most specifically identifies the event being captioned?",
    "criteria": {
      "span_1": "Names the specific event",
      "span_2": "Names a broader related event",
      "span_3": "Provides context but not the event",
      "none": "No candidate identifies the event"
    }
  },
  "unsupported_claim": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the draft state a factual detail not supported by the supplied source text?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "At least one factual detail lacks support in the supplied text",
      "false": "All factual details are supported by the supplied text"
    }
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0462. Alt Text Selector

ID: photography-alt-text-selector
Sub-discipline: Accessibility editing
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: An editor pastes a photo description and candidate phrases extracted from its notes, and Jev selects the phrase that best conveys the visible subject and scores its accessibility usefulness.

Why typed decisions: Choosing a real, reviewed phrase avoids introducing visual details that were never present in the source.

TAM: Accessibility content tools: $1B+
SAM: Image accessibility tooling: $100M+
SOM: Initial publisher and agency customers: $1M+

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Alt Text Selector" 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
An editor pastes a photo description and candidate phrases extracted from its notes, and Jev selects the phrase that best conveys the visible subject and scores its accessibility usefulness.
Discipline: Photography (Accessibility editing).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: Choosing a real, reviewed phrase avoids introducing visual details that were never present in the source.

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": <Photo description plus extracted subject and action phrases>, "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)
{
  "subject_phrase": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which candidate phrase best names the main visible subject?",
    "criteria": {
      "span_1": "Names the main subject directly",
      "span_2": "Names a secondary subject",
      "span_3": "Names a broad scene or category",
      "none": "No candidate accurately names the main subject"
    }
  },
  "usefulness": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How useful is the selected phrase for a reader who cannot see the image?",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Vague or uninformative",
      "2: Identifies a subject but omits key context",
      "3: Clearly conveys the main subject or action",
      "4: Concise and conveys the essential visual context"
    ]
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0463. Rights Clause Finder

ID: photography-rights-clause-finder
Sub-discipline: Image licensing
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: A photographer pastes a license agreement and extracted clauses, and Jev selects the clause that governs editorial reuse and flags whether it explicitly grants commercial use.

Why typed decisions: Selecting an exact contract clause is safer and easier to audit than generating a paraphrase of legal terms.

TAM: Creative rights software: $1B+
SAM: Photography licensing tools: $100M+
SOM: Initial independent photographers: $1M+

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Rights Clause Finder" 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
A photographer pastes a license agreement and extracted clauses, and Jev selects the clause that governs editorial reuse and flags whether it explicitly grants commercial use.
Discipline: Photography (Image licensing).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: Selecting an exact contract clause is safer and easier to audit than generating a paraphrase of legal terms.

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": <License text plus extracted usage and rights clauses>, "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)
{
  "reuse_clause": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which candidate clause governs editorial reuse of the image?",
    "criteria": {
      "span_1": "Explicitly covers editorial reuse",
      "span_2": "Covers general reproduction rights",
      "span_3": "Limits or excludes editorial reuse",
      "none": "No candidate addresses editorial reuse"
    }
  },
  "commercial_grant": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does a candidate clause explicitly grant commercial use?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "A clause explicitly permits commercial use",
      "false": "No clause explicitly permits commercial use"
    }
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0464. Contact Sheet Scout

ID: photography-contact-sheet-scout
Sub-discipline: Image curation
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: A photographer pastes frame notes or a contact-sheet export with extracted subject, action, and setting phrases, and Jev selects the phrase that best distinguishes each frame’s moment.

Why typed decisions: Selecting a source phrase gives curators a traceable frame distinction without inventing a description.

TAM: Photo workflow software: $1B+
SAM: Culling and selection tools: $100M+
SOM: Initial studio and editorial users: $1M+

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Contact Sheet Scout" 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
A photographer pastes frame notes or a contact-sheet export with extracted subject, action, and setting phrases, and Jev selects the phrase that best distinguishes each frame’s moment.
Discipline: Photography (Image curation).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: Selecting a source phrase gives curators a traceable frame distinction without inventing a description.

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": <Frame notes plus extracted subject, action, and setting spans>, "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)
{
  "defining_moment": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which candidate phrase best distinguishes this frame from neighboring frames?",
    "criteria": {
      "span_1": "Captures a distinct action or gesture",
      "span_2": "Identifies a distinctive subject interaction",
      "span_3": "Describes setting but not a unique moment",
      "none": "No candidate distinguishes this frame"
    }
  },
  "sequence_value": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How valuable is this frame as a distinct selection in a sequence?",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Redundant or unclear",
      "2: Some useful variation",
      "3: Strong distinct moment",
      "4: Essential moment for the sequence"
    ]
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0465. Credit Line Match

ID: photography-credit-line-match
Sub-discipline: Photo credits
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: An editor pastes a story draft and a credit sheet with extracted photographer names and credit lines, and Jev selects the matching credit candidate and checks whether the draft names a different photographer.

Why typed decisions: Exact selection preserves the supplied credit wording and reduces attribution errors.

TAM: Publishing workflow software: $1B+
SAM: Photo credit and asset management: $100M+
SOM: Initial publisher customers: $1M+

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Credit Line Match" 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
An editor pastes a story draft and a credit sheet with extracted photographer names and credit lines, and Jev selects the matching credit candidate and checks whether the draft names a different photographer.
Discipline: Photography (Photo credits).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: Exact selection preserves the supplied credit wording and reduces attribution errors.

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": <Story text plus extracted names and credit-line candidates>, "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)
{
  "credit_candidate": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which candidate credit line matches the photographer named in the story?",
    "criteria": {
      "span_1": "Exact photographer and supplied credit wording",
      "span_2": "Photographer matches but wording is incomplete",
      "span_3": "Credit line names a different photographer",
      "none": "No candidate matches the story"
    }
  },
  "name_conflict": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the story name a photographer different from the supplied credit sheet?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "A conflicting photographer name appears",
      "false": "No conflicting photographer name appears"
    }
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0466. Date Provenance Desk

ID: photography-date-provenance-desk
Sub-discipline: Photo metadata
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: A photographer pastes image notes and extracted date references, and Jev selects the candidate date best supported by the source and scores its provenance strength.

Why typed decisions: Selecting an existing date reference avoids fabricating dates and makes uncertainty visible to editors.

TAM: Digital asset management: $2B+
SAM: Photo metadata and provenance: $200M+
SOM: Initial newsroom and archive customers: $1M+

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Date Provenance Desk" 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
A photographer pastes image notes and extracted date references, and Jev selects the candidate date best supported by the source and scores its provenance strength.
Discipline: Photography (Photo metadata).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: Selecting an existing date reference avoids fabricating dates and makes uncertainty visible to editors.

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": <Image notes plus extracted dates and source phrases>, "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)
{
  "supported_date": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which candidate date is best supported as the date the photograph was made?",
    "criteria": {
      "span_1": "Explicit capture date",
      "span_2": "Date explicitly tied to the photographed event",
      "span_3": "Publication or upload date only",
      "none": "No candidate supports a capture date"
    }
  },
  "provenance_strength": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How strong is the source evidence for the selected date?",
    "criteria": [
      "1: No clear source connection",
      "2: Indirect or ambiguous connection",
      "3: Explicitly tied to the image or event",
      "4: Explicit and corroborated by multiple supplied sources"
    ]
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0467. Location Label Picker

ID: photography-location-label-picker
Sub-discipline: Photo archiving
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: An archivist pastes a field log and extracted place names, and Jev selects the most specific location supported by the log and flags whether it is explicitly identified.

Why typed decisions: Choosing only from supplied place names prevents an archive from acquiring confidently worded but guessed locations.

TAM: Photo archive and DAM software: $2B+
SAM: Location tagging tools: $100M+
SOM: Initial archive customers: $1M+

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Location Label Picker" 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
An archivist pastes a field log and extracted place names, and Jev selects the most specific location supported by the log and flags whether it is explicitly identified.
Discipline: Photography (Photo archiving).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: Choosing only from supplied place names prevents an archive from acquiring confidently worded but guessed locations.

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": <Field log plus extracted place-name candidates>, "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)
{
  "location_label": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which candidate is the most specific supported location for the image?",
    "criteria": {
      "span_1": "Exact named site or address",
      "span_2": "Named neighborhood or district",
      "span_3": "Named city or region",
      "none": "No candidate is supported as the location"
    }
  },
  "explicit_location": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is the selected location explicitly identified in the supplied log?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The log directly identifies the location",
      "false": "The location is inferred or not stated"
    }
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0468. Embargo Phrase Guard

ID: photography-embargo-phrase-guard
Sub-discipline: Editorial compliance
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: An editor pastes a press release and a photo package’s extracted date and restriction phrases, and Jev selects the applicable embargo phrase and checks whether the draft publishes before it.

Why typed decisions: Selecting the original restriction wording preserves its exact terms and helps prevent costly timing mistakes.

TAM: Newsroom compliance tools: $500M+
SAM: Editorial embargo management: $100M+
SOM: Initial publisher customers: $1M+

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Embargo Phrase Guard" 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
An editor pastes a press release and a photo package’s extracted date and restriction phrases, and Jev selects the applicable embargo phrase and checks whether the draft publishes before it.
Discipline: Photography (Editorial compliance).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: Selecting the original restriction wording preserves its exact terms and helps prevent costly timing mistakes.

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": <Press release and draft plus extracted embargo phrases and dates>, "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)
{
  "embargo_phrase": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which candidate phrase states the applicable photo embargo?",
    "criteria": {
      "span_1": "Explicit embargo date and time",
      "span_2": "Explicit embargo date without a time",
      "span_3": "General release or availability timing",
      "none": "No candidate states an embargo"
    }
  },
  "early_publish": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the draft’s scheduled publication time precede the stated embargo time?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Scheduled publication is before the embargo lifts",
      "false": "It is not before the stated embargo"
    }
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0469. Scene Quote Locator

ID: photography-scene-quote-locator
Sub-discipline: Photojournalism research
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: A photojournalist pastes interview notes and extracted quotations, and Jev selects the quote most directly connected to the pictured moment and scores its contextual relevance.

Why typed decisions: Picking a verbatim source quote maintains attribution and avoids manufacturing a subject’s words.

TAM: News and media software: $2B+
SAM: Photojournalism research tools: $100M+
SOM: Initial editorial teams: $1M+

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Scene Quote Locator" 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
A photojournalist pastes interview notes and extracted quotations, and Jev selects the quote most directly connected to the pictured moment and scores its contextual relevance.
Discipline: Photography (Photojournalism research).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: Picking a verbatim source quote maintains attribution and avoids manufacturing a subject’s words.

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": <Interview notes plus extracted verbatim quotations and frame 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)
{
  "relevant_quote": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which extracted quote most directly relates to the pictured moment?",
    "criteria": {
      "span_1": "Directly describes the pictured moment",
      "span_2": "Explains the broader event shown",
      "span_3": "Provides background about the subject",
      "none": "No quote relates to the pictured moment"
    }
  },
  "context_fit": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How well does the selected quote fit the image’s context?",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Unrelated or misleading",
      "2: Broadly related but weakly connected",
      "3: Clearly relevant",
      "4: Directly contextualizes the moment without overclaiming"
    ]
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0470. Usage Window Checker

ID: photography-usage-window-checker
Sub-discipline: Image licensing
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: A photo editor pastes a license and campaign brief with extracted dates and usage terms, and Jev selects the governing license period and flags whether the campaign falls outside it.

Why typed decisions: Selecting the actual license term makes compliance checks traceable to the source rather than a generated summary.

TAM: Image licensing software: $1B+
SAM: Rights compliance tools: $100M+
SOM: Initial agency and brand customers: $1M+

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Usage Window Checker" 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
A photo editor pastes a license and campaign brief with extracted dates and usage terms, and Jev selects the governing license period and flags whether the campaign falls outside it.
Discipline: Photography (Image licensing).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: Selecting the actual license term makes compliance checks traceable to the source rather than a generated summary.

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": <License and campaign brief plus extracted dates and usage terms>, "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)
{
  "license_period": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which candidate states the license period governing this campaign?",
    "criteria": {
      "span_1": "Explicit start and end dates",
      "span_2": "Explicit duration from a named start date",
      "span_3": "Perpetual or ongoing term",
      "none": "No candidate states a license period"
    }
  },
  "outside_window": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the campaign run outside the selected license period?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Campaign dates extend beyond the permitted period",
      "false": "Campaign dates fit within the permitted period"
    }
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0471. Model Release Matcher

ID: photography-model-release-matcher
Sub-discipline: Photography permissions
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: A studio pastes a model release and shoot manifest with extracted person names and permitted-use phrases, and Jev selects the matching release clause and checks whether the planned use is covered.

Why typed decisions: An exact clause match helps studios verify permission without inventing legal coverage.

TAM: Creative rights management: $1B+
SAM: Release and consent management: $100M+
SOM: Initial studio customers: $1M+

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Model Release Matcher" 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
A studio pastes a model release and shoot manifest with extracted person names and permitted-use phrases, and Jev selects the matching release clause and checks whether the planned use is covered.
Discipline: Photography (Photography permissions).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: An exact clause match helps studios verify permission without inventing legal coverage.

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": <Release and shoot manifest plus extracted names and use clauses>, "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)
{
  "permission_clause": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which candidate clause covers the planned use?",
    "criteria": {
      "span_1": "Explicitly permits the planned use",
      "span_2": "Permits a related but narrower use",
      "span_3": "Restricts or excludes the planned use",
      "none": "No candidate addresses the planned use"
    }
  },
  "use_covered": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is the planned use covered by the supplied release text?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The release explicitly covers the planned use",
      "false": "The release does not explicitly cover it"
    }
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0472. Headline Image Link

ID: photography-headline-image-link
Sub-discipline: Editorial matching
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: An editor pastes a headline and extracted phrases from a photo caption, and Jev selects the phrase that most directly supports the headline and scores the match’s strength.

Why typed decisions: Selecting source-backed evidence helps editors avoid pairing an image with a headline it does not actually support.

TAM: Digital publishing tools: $2B+
SAM: Editorial image workflow: $200M+
SOM: Initial publisher customers: $1M+

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Headline Image Link" 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
An editor pastes a headline and extracted phrases from a photo caption, and Jev selects the phrase that most directly supports the headline and scores the match’s strength.
Discipline: Photography (Editorial matching).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: Selecting source-backed evidence helps editors avoid pairing an image with a headline it does not actually support.

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": <Headline plus caption and extracted subject or event phrases>, "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)
{
  "supporting_phrase": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which candidate phrase best supports the headline’s central claim?",
    "criteria": {
      "span_1": "Directly supports the central claim",
      "span_2": "Supports a related detail",
      "span_3": "Shares a subject but not the claim",
      "none": "No candidate supports the headline"
    }
  },
  "match_strength": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How strong is the evidence that this image supports the headline?",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Misleading or unsupported pairing",
      "2: Loose topical connection",
      "3: Clear contextual match",
      "4: Direct visual and factual support"
    ]
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0473. Sequence Anchor Finder

ID: photography-sequence-anchor-finder
Sub-discipline: Photo editing
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: A photographer pastes a project statement and extracted frame notes, and Jev selects the frame phrase that best anchors the project’s stated theme and scores its narrative importance.

Why typed decisions: Selecting a documented frame note supports a defensible edit without generating a storyline that the photographs may not show.

TAM: Photo editing and portfolio tools: $1B+
SAM: Visual storytelling workflow: $100M+
SOM: Initial independent photographers: $1M+

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Sequence Anchor Finder" 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
A photographer pastes a project statement and extracted frame notes, and Jev selects the frame phrase that best anchors the project’s stated theme and scores its narrative importance.
Discipline: Photography (Photo editing).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: Selecting a documented frame note supports a defensible edit without generating a storyline that the photographs may not show.

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": <Project statement plus extracted frame-note phrases>, "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)
{
  "anchor_frame": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which candidate frame phrase most clearly embodies the stated theme?",
    "criteria": {
      "span_1": "Directly embodies the central theme",
      "span_2": "Shows a key supporting moment",
      "span_3": "Provides atmosphere or background",
      "none": "No candidate clearly fits the theme"
    }
  },
  "narrative_importance": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How important is this frame to communicating the project’s theme?",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Little thematic contribution",
      "2: Adds secondary context",
      "3: Strongly advances the theme",
      "4: Essential to understanding the project"
    ]
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0474. Disclosure Line Sorter

ID: photography-disclosure-line-sorter
Sub-discipline: Photo ethics
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: A photo editor pastes an image’s edit log and extracted manipulation descriptions, and Jev selects the phrase that best describes the documented alteration and flags whether it changes factual meaning.

Why typed decisions: Selecting the documented edit description makes disclosure consistent while avoiding unsupported claims about image manipulation.

TAM: Media integrity tools: $1B+
SAM: Editorial image ethics software: $100M+
SOM: Initial newsroom customers: $1M+

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Disclosure Line Sorter" 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
A photo editor pastes an image’s edit log and extracted manipulation descriptions, and Jev selects the phrase that best describes the documented alteration and flags whether it changes factual meaning.
Discipline: Photography (Photo ethics).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: Selecting the documented edit description makes disclosure consistent while avoiding unsupported claims about image manipulation.

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": <Edit log plus extracted alteration descriptions>, "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)
{
  "edit_description": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which candidate best describes the documented alteration?",
    "criteria": {
      "span_1": "Color or exposure adjustment",
      "span_2": "Cropping or reframing",
      "span_3": "Content removal, addition, or compositing",
      "none": "No candidate accurately describes the documented edit"
    }
  },
  "meaning_changed": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the documented alteration change the factual meaning of the image?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The alteration changes or misrepresents depicted facts",
      "false": "The alteration does not change depicted facts"
    }
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0475. Archive Name Resolver

ID: photography-archive-name-resolver
Sub-discipline: Photo archives
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: An archivist pastes a folder record and extracted person-name variants, and Jev selects the name form supported by the record and scores confidence that two variants refer to the same person.

Why typed decisions: Selecting a recorded name form protects archival accuracy instead of normalizing identities by guesswork.

TAM: Digital archive software: $2B+
SAM: Photo archive cataloguing: $200M+
SOM: Initial archives and agencies: $1M+

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Archive Name Resolver" 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
An archivist pastes a folder record and extracted person-name variants, and Jev selects the name form supported by the record and scores confidence that two variants refer to the same person.
Discipline: Photography (Photo archives).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: Selecting a recorded name form protects archival accuracy instead of normalizing identities by guesswork.

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": <Folder record plus extracted name variants and contextual phrases>, "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)
{
  "preferred_name": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which candidate name form is best supported for the archive record?",
    "criteria": {
      "span_1": "Full name explicitly given in the record",
      "span_2": "Name form repeated consistently in the record",
      "span_3": "Partial or abbreviated name",
      "none": "No candidate is adequately supported"
    }
  },
  "identity_confidence": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How strong is the evidence that the name variants refer to the same person?",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Likely different or insufficient evidence",
      "2: Possible match with ambiguity",
      "3: Strong contextual match",
      "4: Explicitly linked in the supplied record"
    ]
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0476. Print Caption Pairer

ID: photography-print-caption-pairer
Sub-discipline: Exhibition production
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: A curator pastes wall labels and extracted artwork titles, dates, and photographer names, and Jev selects the label matching each photograph and flags whether a key attribution is missing.

Why typed decisions: Selecting among supplied label text reduces mix-ups and preserves curatorial wording exactly.

TAM: Exhibition and collection software: $1B+
SAM: Gallery label and photo cataloguing: $100M+
SOM: Initial galleries and museums: $1M+

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Print Caption Pairer" 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
A curator pastes wall labels and extracted artwork titles, dates, and photographer names, and Jev selects the label matching each photograph and flags whether a key attribution is missing.
Discipline: Photography (Exhibition production).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: Selecting among supplied label text reduces mix-ups and preserves curatorial wording exactly.

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": <Wall labels plus extracted titles, dates, and photographer names>, "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)
{
  "matching_label": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which candidate label matches this photograph’s supplied details?",
    "criteria": {
      "span_1": "Matches title and photographer",
      "span_2": "Matches title but not all attribution details",
      "span_3": "Matches photographer but a different work",
      "none": "No candidate matches the photograph"
    }
  },
  "missing_attribution": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is a required photographer or source attribution absent from the matching label?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "A required attribution is missing",
      "false": "Required attribution is present"
    }
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0477. Geotag Risk Screen

ID: photography-geotag-risk-screen
Sub-discipline: Photo safety
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: A photographer pastes a field note and extracted location references, and Jev selects the most sensitive location phrase and scores the risk of exposing it publicly.

Why typed decisions: Choosing the exact risky source phrase helps teams redact sensitive locations without inventing or over-redacting details.

TAM: Creator safety and privacy tools: $500M+
SAM: Photo location privacy tools: $100M+
SOM: Initial journalists and NGOs: $1M+

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Geotag Risk Screen" 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
A photographer pastes a field note and extracted location references, and Jev selects the most sensitive location phrase and scores the risk of exposing it publicly.
Discipline: Photography (Photo safety).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: Choosing the exact risky source phrase helps teams redact sensitive locations without inventing or over-redacting details.

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": <Field note plus extracted location phrases and subject context>, "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)
{
  "sensitive_location": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which candidate location phrase is most sensitive to publish?",
    "criteria": {
      "span_1": "Exact private residence or shelter",
      "span_2": "Specific small site or vulnerable location",
      "span_3": "Broad public area or city",
      "none": "No candidate poses a location privacy concern"
    }
  },
  "exposure_risk": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "What is the risk of exposing the selected location publicly?",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Negligible public-location risk",
      "2: Some privacy or safety concern",
      "3: Significant exposure risk",
      "4: Could directly endanger a person or protected site"
    ]
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0478. Event Tag Selector

ID: photography-event-tag-selector
Sub-discipline: Photo organization
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: A photographer pastes shoot notes and extracted event phrases, and Jev selects the tag that best categorizes the photographed occasion and scores how specifically the source supports it.

Why typed decisions: Selecting a source phrase creates consistent searchable tags without adding assumptions about an event.

TAM: Photo management software: $2B+
SAM: Photo tagging and search: $200M+
SOM: Initial photographer customers: $1M+

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Event Tag Selector" 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
A photographer pastes shoot notes and extracted event phrases, and Jev selects the tag that best categorizes the photographed occasion and scores how specifically the source supports it.
Discipline: Photography (Photo organization).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: Selecting a source phrase creates consistent searchable tags without adding assumptions about an event.

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": <Shoot notes plus extracted event and occasion phrases>, "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)
{
  "event_tag": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which candidate phrase best categorizes the photographed occasion?",
    "criteria": {
      "span_1": "Names the specific event",
      "span_2": "Names the event type",
      "span_3": "Describes a general gathering",
      "none": "No candidate describes the occasion"
    }
  },
  "tag_specificity": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How specifically does the source support the selected event tag?",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Unsupported or speculative",
      "2: Broadly implied",
      "3: Clearly stated",
      "4: Specific event explicitly named"
    ]
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0479. Series Duplicate Detector

ID: photography-series-duplicate-detector
Sub-discipline: Photo editing
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: An editor pastes notes for a proposed photo series and extracted frame descriptions, and Jev selects the closest semantic duplicate for each frame or none and scores the series’ visual variety.

Why typed decisions: Choosing from existing descriptions identifies editorial redundancy without generating subjective replacement captions.

TAM: Photo editing workflow software: $1B+
SAM: Photo selection and culling tools: $200M+
SOM: Initial editorial and studio users: $1M+

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Series Duplicate Detector" 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
An editor pastes notes for a proposed photo series and extracted frame descriptions, and Jev selects the closest semantic duplicate for each frame or none and scores the series’ visual variety.
Discipline: Photography (Photo editing).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: Choosing from existing descriptions identifies editorial redundancy without generating subjective replacement captions.

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": <Series notes plus extracted frame descriptions>, "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)
{
  "closest_duplicate": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which candidate frame description is most redundant with this frame?",
    "criteria": {
      "span_1": "Same moment and action",
      "span_2": "Same subject and very similar composition",
      "span_3": "Related subject but distinct moment",
      "none": "No candidate is meaningfully redundant"
    }
  },
  "series_variety": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How much distinct visual variety does this frame add to the series?",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Nearly duplicates another frame",
      "2: Slight variation",
      "3: Adds a distinct visual beat",
      "4: Adds an essential new perspective or moment"
    ]
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0480. Publicity Credit Guard

ID: photography-publicity-credit-guard
Sub-discipline: Commercial photography
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: A photographer pastes a campaign brief and extracted credit requirements, and Jev selects the applicable credit phrase and checks whether the proposed placement omits a required credit.

Why typed decisions: Selecting the actual requirement text makes credit checks auditable and avoids inventing contract obligations.

TAM: Commercial creative operations: $1B+
SAM: Photography rights and credit tools: $100M+
SOM: Initial photographers and agencies: $1M+

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Publicity Credit Guard" 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
A photographer pastes a campaign brief and extracted credit requirements, and Jev selects the applicable credit phrase and checks whether the proposed placement omits a required credit.
Discipline: Photography (Commercial photography).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: Selecting the actual requirement text makes credit checks auditable and avoids inventing contract obligations.

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": <Campaign brief plus extracted credit requirements and placement text>, "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)
{
  "required_credit": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which candidate phrase states the applicable credit requirement?",
    "criteria": {
      "span_1": "Names a mandatory photographer credit",
      "span_2": "Requests a credit but does not require it",
      "span_3": "Specifies a credit format or placement",
      "none": "No candidate sets a credit requirement"
    }
  },
  "credit_omitted": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the proposed placement omit a mandatory credit stated in the source?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "A required credit is absent from the placement",
      "false": "The required credit is present or none is mandatory"
    }
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0481. Caption Evidence Desk

ID: photography-caption-evidence-desk
Sub-discipline: Photojournalism captions
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Paste draft captions beside image notes and metadata; Jev checks each factual claim against the evidence, routes low- or mid-confidence checks to human review, and classifies the issue.

Why typed decisions: Typed claim checks and issue categories make unsupported facts visible without inventing replacement captions.

TAM: Global editorial photography: $3B+
SAM: Newsroom caption workflows: $400M
SOM: Initial newsroom users: $1M ARR

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Caption Evidence Desk" 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 draft captions beside image notes and metadata; Jev checks each factual claim against the evidence, routes low- or mid-confidence checks to human review, and classifies the issue.
Discipline: Photography (Photojournalism captions).
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 claim checks and issue categories make unsupported facts visible without inventing replacement captions.

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": <Caption claims, image notes, and metadata>, "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)
{
  "claim_supported": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is each factual caption claim supported by the supplied evidence?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Every claim is supported by the evidence.",
      "false": "At least one claim is unsupported, contradicted, or not verifiable."
    }
  },
  "issue_type": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "What best describes the main caption concern?",
    "criteria": {
      "unsupported_claim": "A factual detail lacks evidence.",
      "contradiction": "Evidence conflicts with a claim.",
      "ambiguity": "The wording permits materially different readings.",
      "no_issue": "No material concern is apparent."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0482. Rights Receipt Checker

ID: photography-rights-receipt-checker
Sub-discipline: Image licensing
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Paste a license record, usage brief, and image metadata; Jev verifies each usage-right claim against the records, escalates low- or mid-confidence checks, and classifies the mismatch.

Why typed decisions: A typed verification outcome is easier to audit than generated legal-sounding guidance.

TAM: Global image licensing: $5B+
SAM: Rights review tools: $500M
SOM: Initial agency customers: $1M ARR

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Rights Receipt Checker" 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 license record, usage brief, and image metadata; Jev verifies each usage-right claim against the records, escalates low- or mid-confidence checks, and classifies the mismatch.
Discipline: Photography (Image licensing).
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: A typed verification outcome is easier to audit than generated legal-sounding guidance.

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": <License terms, usage brief, and image metadata>, "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)
{
  "usage_authorized": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the record support the proposed usage and its stated rights?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The supplied record supports the stated usage.",
      "false": "The usage is unsupported, contradicted, or not covered."
    }
  },
  "rights_issue": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which rights issue best fits the evidence?",
    "criteria": {
      "scope": "Usage falls outside the documented scope.",
      "territory": "Territory is unsupported or conflicting.",
      "duration": "Usage dates exceed or lack documented term.",
      "none": "No material rights mismatch is apparent."
    }
  },
  "evidence_strength": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How complete is the supplied rights evidence?",
    "criteria": [
      "Missing or contradictory",
      "Partial; key terms unclear",
      "Mostly complete; minor gaps",
      "Complete and consistent"
    ]
  }
}

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

---

## 0483. Release Form Sentinel

ID: photography-release-form-sentinel-1
Sub-discipline: Model release management
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Paste release fields alongside shoot and subject records; Jev checks each identity, date, and permitted-use claim against the evidence, escalating low- or mid-confidence fields for review.

Why typed decisions: Field-level decisions expose specific gaps while avoiding fabricated legal details.

TAM: Global release administration: $2B+
SAM: Photo release workflows: $250M
SOM: Initial studio users: $750K ARR

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Release Form Sentinel" 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 release fields alongside shoot and subject records; Jev checks each identity, date, and permitted-use claim against the evidence, escalating low- or mid-confidence fields for review.
Discipline: Photography (Model release management).
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: Field-level decisions expose specific gaps while avoiding fabricated legal details.

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": <Release fields, shoot log, and subject records>, "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)
{
  "identity_match": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Do the release identity fields match the supplied subject and shoot evidence?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The identity fields are supported and consistent.",
      "false": "A field is missing, conflicting, or unverified."
    }
  },
  "use_scope_match": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the documented permission support the planned use?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The recorded permission supports the planned use.",
      "false": "Permission is absent, conflicting, or too unclear to verify."
    }
  },
  "review_reason": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "What best explains a needed review?",
    "criteria": {
      "identity_gap": "Identity evidence is incomplete.",
      "scope_gap": "Use permission is unclear or insufficient.",
      "date_gap": "Date or session details conflict.",
      "none": "No material review issue is apparent."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0484. Metadata Provenance Gate

ID: photography-metadata-provenance-gate
Sub-discipline: Image metadata integrity
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Paste an image’s metadata and provenance record; Jev verifies each origin and edit-history claim against the supplied evidence, routing low- or mid-confidence claims to a human.

Why typed decisions: Typed checks separate supported provenance from unresolved claims without manufacturing a narrative.

TAM: Digital imaging integrity: $3B+
SAM: Professional provenance tools: $300M
SOM: Initial newsroom and agency users: $900K ARR

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Metadata Provenance 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 an image’s metadata and provenance record; Jev verifies each origin and edit-history claim against the supplied evidence, routing low- or mid-confidence claims to a human.
Discipline: Photography (Image metadata integrity).
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 checks separate supported provenance from unresolved claims without manufacturing a narrative.

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": <Metadata fields, edit log, and provenance record>, "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)
{
  "origin_supported": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is the stated origin supported by the supplied metadata and records?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Origin details are consistent and supported.",
      "false": "Origin is unsupported, conflicting, or unverifiable."
    }
  },
  "edit_history_supported": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the evidence support the stated edit history?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The edit-history claim matches the supplied record.",
      "false": "The claim is unsupported or conflicts with the record."
    }
  },
  "provenance_status": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "What is the main provenance status?",
    "criteria": {
      "consistent": "Evidence is consistent.",
      "missing": "A key provenance record is absent.",
      "conflicting": "Records materially disagree.",
      "tampered": "Evidence indicates possible metadata alteration."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0485. Location Claim Review

ID: photography-location-claim-review
Sub-discipline: Photojournalism geolocation
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Paste proposed location captions with image clues and reporting notes; Jev checks each place claim against that evidence, sends low- or mid-confidence results to review, and categorizes the discrepancy.

Why typed decisions: A typed confidence and discrepancy label can prevent unsupported locations from being published.

TAM: News verification software: $2B+
SAM: Geolocation review workflows: $200M
SOM: Initial newsroom users: $600K ARR

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Location Claim Review" 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 proposed location captions with image clues and reporting notes; Jev checks each place claim against that evidence, sends low- or mid-confidence results to review, and categorizes the discrepancy.
Discipline: Photography (Photojournalism geolocation).
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: A typed confidence and discrepancy label can prevent unsupported locations from being published.

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": <Location claims, visual clues, and reporting 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)
{
  "location_supported": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is each named location supported by the supplied evidence?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The location is supported by consistent evidence.",
      "false": "The location is uncertain, unsupported, or contradicted."
    }
  },
  "discrepancy_type": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "What best describes the location evidence?",
    "criteria": {
      "match": "Evidence supports the named location.",
      "partial": "Evidence supports only a broader area.",
      "conflict": "Evidence points to a different place.",
      "insufficient": "Evidence cannot establish a location."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0486. Wildlife Context Guard

ID: photography-wildlife-context-guard
Sub-discipline: Wildlife photography ethics
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Paste a wildlife image’s caption, field notes, and capture disclosures; Jev checks claims about species, behavior, and conditions against the evidence, escalating low- or mid-confidence checks for expert review.

Why typed decisions: Typed verification can flag unsupported natural-history claims without generating authoritative-sounding misinformation.

TAM: Wildlife media and conservation tools: $1B+
SAM: Ethical review workflows: $100M
SOM: Initial specialist users: $300K ARR

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Wildlife Context Guard" 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 wildlife image’s caption, field notes, and capture disclosures; Jev checks claims about species, behavior, and conditions against the evidence, escalating low- or mid-confidence checks for expert review.
Discipline: Photography (Wildlife photography ethics).
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 verification can flag unsupported natural-history claims without generating authoritative-sounding misinformation.

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": <Caption, field notes, and capture disclosures>, "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)
{
  "species_supported": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is the species identification supported by the supplied evidence?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The identification is supported by consistent evidence.",
      "false": "The identification is uncertain, unsupported, or contradicted."
    }
  },
  "behavior_supported": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is the described animal behavior supported by the supplied notes?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The behavior claim is supported by the evidence.",
      "false": "The claim is unsupported or overstates what is known."
    }
  },
  "ethics_flag": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "What concern, if any, is indicated by the capture disclosure?",
    "criteria": {
      "none": "No material concern is evident.",
      "baiting": "Disclosure indicates baiting or luring.",
      "disturbance": "Disclosure indicates possible disturbance.",
      "unclear": "Disclosure is absent or ambiguous."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0487. Archive Tag Auditor

ID: photography-archive-tag-auditor
Sub-discipline: Photographic archives
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Paste archive tags and catalog notes for a photograph; Jev checks each identity, date, and event claim against the notes, escalating low- or mid-confidence fields and classifying the issue.

Why typed decisions: Typed field-level outcomes help archivists repair catalogs without auto-asserting uncertain facts.

TAM: Photo archive software: $2B+
SAM: Catalog quality tools: $250M
SOM: Initial archives and collections: $700K ARR

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Archive Tag Auditor" 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 archive tags and catalog notes for a photograph; Jev checks each identity, date, and event claim against the notes, escalating low- or mid-confidence fields and classifying the issue.
Discipline: Photography (Photographic archives).
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 field-level outcomes help archivists repair catalogs without auto-asserting uncertain facts.

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": <Archive tags, catalog notes, and source references>, "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)
{
  "identity_verified": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is each named person supported by the catalog evidence?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Named identities are supported by reliable supplied evidence.",
      "false": "At least one identity is uncertain, unsupported, or conflicting."
    }
  },
  "date_verified": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is the assigned date supported by the supplied records?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Date is supported by consistent records.",
      "false": "Date is missing, uncertain, or contradicted."
    }
  },
  "catalog_issue": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which catalog issue is most evident?",
    "criteria": {
      "identity": "Person identification needs review.",
      "date": "Date or date range needs review.",
      "event": "Event attribution needs review.",
      "none": "No material issue is apparent."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0488. Product Detail Verifier

ID: photography-product-detail-verifier
Sub-discipline: Commercial product photography
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Paste product-photo labels alongside a product specification sheet; Jev checks each visible-feature claim against the supplied facts, routes low- or mid-confidence checks to a reviewer, and classifies the mismatch.

Why typed decisions: Structured verification helps prevent inaccurate product listings without generating marketing copy.

TAM: E-commerce photography workflows: $4B+
SAM: Listing quality review: $500M
SOM: Initial retailers and studios: $1M ARR

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Product Detail Verifier" 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 product-photo labels alongside a product specification sheet; Jev checks each visible-feature claim against the supplied facts, routes low- or mid-confidence checks to a reviewer, and classifies the mismatch.
Discipline: Photography (Commercial product photography).
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: Structured verification helps prevent inaccurate product listings without generating marketing copy.

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": <Product labels, specifications, and image annotations>, "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)
{
  "feature_matches": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does each stated visible feature match the supplied product evidence?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "All checked features are supported and consistent.",
      "false": "A feature is unsupported, contradicted, or not visible as claimed."
    }
  },
  "mismatch_kind": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "What kind of listing mismatch is most evident?",
    "criteria": {
      "color": "Color claim conflicts with the evidence.",
      "variant": "Model or variant appears mismatched.",
      "accessory": "Included accessory claim is unsupported.",
      "none": "No material mismatch is apparent."
    }
  },
  "image_accuracy": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How well does the evidence support the listing’s image-related claims?",
    "criteria": [
      "Mostly unsupported",
      "Several claims uncertain",
      "Minor uncertainty",
      "Claims consistently supported"
    ]
  }
}

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

---

## 0489. Color Proof Check

ID: photography-color-proof-check
Sub-discipline: Photo editing and print
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Paste a color-proof report, delivery specs, and edit notes; Jev verifies each compliance claim against the supplied measurements, escalating low- or mid-confidence checks and classifying the deviation.

Why typed decisions: Typed pass, fail, and deviation decisions fit repeatable proofing better than generated explanations.

TAM: Photo post-production tools: $3B+
SAM: Proofing and quality assurance: $300M
SOM: Initial print studios: $800K ARR

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Color Proof Check" 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 color-proof report, delivery specs, and edit notes; Jev verifies each compliance claim against the supplied measurements, escalating low- or mid-confidence checks and classifying the deviation.
Discipline: Photography (Photo editing and print).
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 pass, fail, and deviation decisions fit repeatable proofing better than generated explanations.

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": <Proof report, delivery specs, and edit 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)
{
  "profile_compliant": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the evidence support the stated color-profile compliance?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The supplied measurements support compliance.",
      "false": "Measurements are missing, out of spec, or contradictory."
    }
  },
  "crop_compliant": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the delivered crop match the documented framing requirements?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The crop evidence matches the requirements.",
      "false": "The crop is unsupported or conflicts with the requirements."
    }
  },
  "deviation": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "What best describes the main proofing deviation?",
    "criteria": {
      "color": "Color or profile differs from specification.",
      "crop": "Framing or crop differs from specification.",
      "resolution": "Resolution or dimensions differ from specification.",
      "none": "No material deviation is apparent."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0490. Duplicate Credit Resolver

ID: photography-duplicate-credit-resolver
Sub-discipline: Photo credit and attribution
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Paste credit lines, assignment records, and image metadata; Jev checks each authorship claim against the evidence, escalates low- or mid-confidence cases, and identifies the likely attribution issue.

Why typed decisions: Typed attribution checks preserve human judgment in disputes instead of generating a definitive but unsupported credit.

TAM: Media asset attribution: $2B+
SAM: Credit verification tools: $200M
SOM: Initial agencies and publishers: $600K ARR

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Duplicate Credit Resolver" 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 credit lines, assignment records, and image metadata; Jev checks each authorship claim against the evidence, escalates low- or mid-confidence cases, and identifies the likely attribution issue.
Discipline: Photography (Photo credit and attribution).
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 attribution checks preserve human judgment in disputes instead of generating a definitive but unsupported credit.

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": <Credit lines, assignment records, and metadata>, "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)
{
  "credit_supported": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is the stated photographer credit supported by the supplied records?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Credit is supported by consistent records.",
      "false": "Credit is missing, disputed, or contradicted."
    }
  },
  "work_match": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Do the assignment and image records refer to the same photograph?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Records consistently identify the same work.",
      "false": "Records conflict or cannot be matched."
    }
  },
  "credit_issue": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "What attribution issue best fits the evidence?",
    "criteria": {
      "wrong_author": "Evidence points to a different photographer.",
      "missing_credit": "A required credit appears absent.",
      "duplicate": "Conflicting or duplicated credits appear.",
      "none": "No material attribution issue is apparent."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0491. Retouch Disclosure Audit

ID: photography-retouch-disclosure-audit
Sub-discipline: Editorial photo editing
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Paste edit logs, disclosure statements, and publication rules; Jev checks each retouching disclosure claim against the evidence, routes low- or mid-confidence checks to an editor, and classifies the concern.

Why typed decisions: Typed policy checks make disclosure gaps reviewable without inventing what edits occurred.

TAM: Editorial image integrity: $1B+
SAM: Newsroom editing review: $150M
SOM: Initial publisher customers: $500K ARR

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Retouch Disclosure Audit" 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 edit logs, disclosure statements, and publication rules; Jev checks each retouching disclosure claim against the evidence, routes low- or mid-confidence checks to an editor, and classifies the concern.
Discipline: Photography (Editorial photo editing).
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 policy checks make disclosure gaps reviewable without inventing what edits occurred.

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": <Edit log, disclosure statement, and publication rules>, "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)
{
  "disclosure_matches": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the disclosure accurately reflect the edits documented in the log?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Disclosure and edit log are consistent.",
      "false": "Disclosure omits, misstates, or cannot verify documented edits."
    }
  },
  "policy_compliant": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the documented editing comply with the supplied publication rule?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Documented edits align with the rule.",
      "false": "Edits conflict with or cannot be assessed against the rule."
    }
  },
  "edit_concern": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "What kind of disclosure concern is indicated?",
    "criteria": {
      "omission": "A material edit may be undisclosed.",
      "alteration": "An edit may exceed the stated policy.",
      "record_gap": "Edit evidence is incomplete.",
      "none": "No material concern is apparent."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0492. Event Sequence Inspector

ID: photography-event-sequence-inspector
Sub-discipline: Event photography delivery
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Paste a delivery manifest, timestamps, and event schedule; Jev checks each sequence and timing claim against the records, escalating low- or mid-confidence items and flagging the sequence issue.

Why typed decisions: Typed anomaly labels help editors find missing or misordered coverage without rewriting event narratives.

TAM: Event photography workflow software: $2B+
SAM: Delivery and curation tools: $250M
SOM: Initial event studios: $700K ARR

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Event Sequence Inspector" 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 delivery manifest, timestamps, and event schedule; Jev checks each sequence and timing claim against the records, escalating low- or mid-confidence items and flagging the sequence issue.
Discipline: Photography (Event photography delivery).
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 anomaly labels help editors find missing or misordered coverage without rewriting event narratives.

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": <Delivery manifest, timestamps, and event schedule>, "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)
{
  "sequence_supported": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the delivered sequence support the stated event order?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Timestamps and schedule support the order.",
      "false": "Order is unsupported, inconsistent, or unclear."
    }
  },
  "coverage_claim_supported": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the manifest support the claimed coverage of key moments?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Manifest evidence supports the coverage claim.",
      "false": "A claimed moment is missing or cannot be verified."
    }
  },
  "sequence_issue": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "What is the most likely delivery issue?",
    "criteria": {
      "gap": "A scheduled moment appears missing.",
      "order": "Sequence order is inconsistent.",
      "timestamp": "Timing data conflicts or is absent.",
      "none": "No material sequence issue is apparent."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0493. Stock Keyword Evidence

ID: photography-stock-keyword-evidence
Sub-discipline: Stock photography metadata
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Paste proposed stock keywords with image annotations and photographer notes; Jev checks each keyword against the evidence, sends low- or mid-confidence terms to human review, and classifies the mismatch.

Why typed decisions: Per-keyword decisions reduce misleading search metadata without auto-generating tags.

TAM: Stock photography platforms and tools: $3B+
SAM: Metadata review workflows: $300M
SOM: Initial contributor communities: $800K ARR

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Stock Keyword Evidence" 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 proposed stock keywords with image annotations and photographer notes; Jev checks each keyword against the evidence, sends low- or mid-confidence terms to human review, and classifies the mismatch.
Discipline: Photography (Stock photography metadata).
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: Per-keyword decisions reduce misleading search metadata without auto-generating tags.

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": <Proposed keywords, image annotations, and 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)
{
  "keyword_supported": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is each proposed keyword supported by the supplied image evidence?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Each keyword is relevant and supported.",
      "false": "At least one keyword is unsupported, misleading, or unverifiable."
    }
  },
  "keyword_issue": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "What best describes the main keyword problem?",
    "criteria": {
      "subject": "A subject label is incorrect or uncertain.",
      "context": "A setting or event label is unsupported.",
      "technical": "A technical or stylistic label is inaccurate.",
      "none": "No material keyword issue is apparent."
    }
  },
  "tag_relevance": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How relevant are the proposed keywords to the evidence?",
    "criteria": [
      "Mostly irrelevant or misleading",
      "Several weak or uncertain terms",
      "Mostly relevant; minor issues",
      "All terms clearly relevant"
    ]
  }
}

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

---

## 0494. Face Match Review Queue

ID: photography-face-match-review-queue
Sub-discipline: Photo desk identification
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Paste a proposed subject identification with authorized reference records and image notes; Jev checks the identity claim against the evidence, escalates low- or mid-confidence matches, and classifies the evidence gap.

Why typed decisions: A typed review signal keeps uncertain identification in human hands rather than presenting a generated identity as fact.

TAM: Visual media identification workflows: $2B+
SAM: Editorial identity review: $200M
SOM: Initial photo desks: $600K ARR

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Face Match Review Queue" 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 proposed subject identification with authorized reference records and image notes; Jev checks the identity claim against the evidence, escalates low- or mid-confidence matches, and classifies the evidence gap.
Discipline: Photography (Photo desk identification).
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: A typed review signal keeps uncertain identification in human hands rather than presenting a generated identity as fact.

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": <Identity claim, authorized references, and image 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)
{
  "identity_supported": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the supplied evidence support the proposed subject identification?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Authorized evidence supports the identification.",
      "false": "The identification is unsupported, conflicting, or inconclusive."
    }
  },
  "reference_appropriate": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is the reference record appropriate and authorized for this identification check?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The record is relevant and authorized.",
      "false": "The record is irrelevant, unauthorized, or unclear."
    }
  },
  "review_cause": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "What best explains a human review need?",
    "criteria": {
      "weak_match": "Available evidence is inconclusive.",
      "record_conflict": "References disagree.",
      "authorization": "Reference authorization is unclear.",
      "none": "No material concern is apparent."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0495. Sensitive Scene Safeguard

ID: photography-sensitive-scene-safeguard
Sub-discipline: Trauma-informed photo editing
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Paste a proposed publication note, image description, and editorial policy; Jev checks each sensitivity-related claim against the supplied context, escalating low- or mid-confidence decisions for editor review.

Why typed decisions: Typed risk categories support consistent human review without generating or softening sensitive language.

TAM: Editorial standards and review tools: $1B+
SAM: Sensitive-image review: $120M
SOM: Initial publisher users: $400K ARR

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Sensitive Scene Safeguard" 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 proposed publication note, image description, and editorial policy; Jev checks each sensitivity-related claim against the supplied context, escalating low- or mid-confidence decisions for editor review.
Discipline: Photography (Trauma-informed photo editing).
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 risk categories support consistent human review without generating or softening sensitive language.

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": <Publication note, image context, and editorial policy>, "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)
{
  "context_supported": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Are claims about depicted circumstances supported by the supplied context?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Claims are supported by the supplied records.",
      "false": "Claims are unsupported, overstated, or unverifiable."
    }
  },
  "policy_flag": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "What concern, if any, is indicated by the policy and context?",
    "criteria": {
      "graphic": "Graphic content may need policy review.",
      "privacy": "Identifiable private details may need review.",
      "dignity": "Context raises a dignity or portrayal concern.",
      "none": "No material concern is apparent."
    }
  },
  "context_sufficiency": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How sufficient is the context for an editor to assess the proposed use?",
    "criteria": [
      "Insufficient or conflicting",
      "Important context missing",
      "Mostly sufficient; minor gaps",
      "Sufficient and consistent"
    ]
  }
}

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

---

## 0496. Restoration Artifact Watch

ID: photography-restoration-artifact-watch
Sub-discipline: Photo restoration
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Paste restoration notes, source-image description, and quality checks; Jev verifies each claim about preserved versus reconstructed detail, routing low- or mid-confidence checks to a conservator or editor.

Why typed decisions: Typed preservation checks distinguish documented source detail from uncertain reconstruction without generating historical claims.

TAM: Photo restoration and preservation: $2B+
SAM: Restoration quality tools: $180M
SOM: Initial labs and archives: $550K ARR

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Restoration Artifact Watch" 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 restoration notes, source-image description, and quality checks; Jev verifies each claim about preserved versus reconstructed detail, routing low- or mid-confidence checks to a conservator or editor.
Discipline: Photography (Photo restoration).
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 preservation checks distinguish documented source detail from uncertain reconstruction without generating historical claims.

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": <Restoration notes, source description, and quality checks>, "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)
{
  "detail_preserved": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is the claim that a detail was preserved supported by the supplied source evidence?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Source evidence supports preservation of the detail.",
      "false": "The detail is unsupported, reconstructed, or unverifiable."
    }
  },
  "reconstruction_disclosed": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the documentation disclose reconstructed areas indicated by the evidence?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Reconstruction is documented where evidence indicates it.",
      "false": "Reconstruction may be undisclosed or cannot be assessed."
    }
  },
  "restoration_risk": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "What restoration concern best fits the evidence?",
    "criteria": {
      "reconstruction": "Reconstructed detail needs review.",
      "source_mismatch": "Output may conflict with source evidence.",
      "documentation": "Restoration notes are incomplete.",
      "none": "No material concern is apparent."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0497. Embargo Release Monitor

ID: photography-embargo-release-monitor
Sub-discipline: Press photo distribution
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Paste a distribution manifest, embargo terms, and release schedule; Jev checks each timing and recipient claim against the records, escalating low- or mid-confidence checks and categorizing the risk.

Why typed decisions: Typed release decisions make distribution exceptions actionable without relying on free-form summaries.

TAM: Media distribution operations: $2B+
SAM: Embargo workflow tools: $180M
SOM: Initial wire and agency users: $500K ARR

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Embargo Release Monitor" 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 distribution manifest, embargo terms, and release schedule; Jev checks each timing and recipient claim against the records, escalating low- or mid-confidence checks and categorizing the risk.
Discipline: Photography (Press photo distribution).
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 release decisions make distribution exceptions actionable without relying on free-form summaries.

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": <Distribution manifest, embargo terms, and release schedule>, "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)
{
  "release_time_valid": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the evidence support that release occurred after the embargo time?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Records show release at or after the embargo time.",
      "false": "Release timing is early, conflicting, or unverifiable."
    }
  },
  "recipient_authorized": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Are listed recipients authorized by the supplied distribution terms?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Recipients are covered by the terms.",
      "false": "A recipient is unsupported, excluded, or unclear."
    }
  },
  "release_risk": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "What is the main distribution concern?",
    "criteria": {
      "early": "Release may precede the embargo.",
      "recipient": "Recipient authorization needs review.",
      "schedule": "Schedule or timestamp evidence conflicts.",
      "none": "No material concern is apparent."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0498. Print Order Matchdesk

ID: photography-print-order-matchdesk
Sub-discipline: Fine-art photo printing
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Paste a print order, approved proof details, and fulfillment record; Jev checks each size, edition, and finish claim against the evidence, escalating low- or mid-confidence fields for staff review.

Why typed decisions: Typed order-field checks catch costly production mismatches without generating customer-facing promises.

TAM: Fine-art print production: $1B+
SAM: Print order quality workflows: $120M
SOM: Initial print labs: $400K ARR

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Print Order Matchdesk" 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 print order, approved proof details, and fulfillment record; Jev checks each size, edition, and finish claim against the evidence, escalating low- or mid-confidence fields for staff review.
Discipline: Photography (Fine-art photo printing).
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 order-field checks catch costly production mismatches without generating customer-facing promises.

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": <Print order, proof details, and fulfillment record>, "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)
{
  "edition_matches": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the fulfillment record support the ordered edition and numbering?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Edition details match the order and proof.",
      "false": "Numbering is missing, conflicting, or incorrect."
    }
  },
  "specs_match": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Do delivered size and finish match the approved order?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Recorded specifications match the order.",
      "false": "A specification is unsupported or mismatched."
    }
  },
  "order_issue": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "What production issue is most evident?",
    "criteria": {
      "edition": "Edition or numbering mismatch.",
      "size": "Print dimensions mismatch.",
      "finish": "Paper or finish mismatch.",
      "none": "No material issue is apparent."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0499. Accessibility Claim Check

ID: photography-accessibility-claim-check
Sub-discipline: Accessible photo publishing
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Paste an alt-text draft with image annotations and editorial notes; Jev checks each descriptive claim against the evidence, routes low- or mid-confidence fields to a human, and classifies the omission or mismatch.

Why typed decisions: Typed accuracy checks help editors review descriptions while keeping authorship and phrasing with people.

TAM: Digital accessibility publishing tools: $2B+
SAM: Accessible media review: $200M
SOM: Initial publisher teams: $600K ARR

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Accessibility Claim Check" 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 an alt-text draft with image annotations and editorial notes; Jev checks each descriptive claim against the evidence, routes low- or mid-confidence fields to a human, and classifies the omission or mismatch.
Discipline: Photography (Accessible photo publishing).
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 accuracy checks help editors review descriptions while keeping authorship and phrasing with people.

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": <Alt-text draft, image annotations, and editorial 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)
{
  "description_accurate": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Are the draft’s concrete visual claims supported by the supplied image evidence?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Concrete claims are accurate and supported.",
      "false": "A claim is inaccurate, unsupported, or unverifiable."
    }
  },
  "key_info_included": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the draft include the key visual information identified in the editorial notes?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The noted key information is represented.",
      "false": "Key information is omitted or cannot be verified."
    }
  },
  "alt_text_issue": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "What best describes the main review need?",
    "criteria": {
      "inaccuracy": "A visual detail appears incorrect.",
      "omission": "A noted key detail appears missing.",
      "overdetail": "Specific claims exceed available evidence.",
      "none": "No material issue is apparent."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0500. Photo Essay Fact Gate

ID: photography-photo-essay-fact-gate
Sub-discipline: Documentary photo essays
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Paste an essay’s image sequence, factual annotations, and source notes; Jev checks each claim against its cited evidence, escalates low- or mid-confidence checks to an editor, and classifies the concern.

Why typed decisions: Claim-level typed decisions help protect documentary accuracy without generating narrative prose.

TAM: Documentary photography tools: $1B+
SAM: Essay fact-review workflows: $100M
SOM: Initial documentary teams: $350K ARR

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Photo Essay Fact 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 an essay’s image sequence, factual annotations, and source notes; Jev checks each claim against its cited evidence, escalates low- or mid-confidence checks to an editor, and classifies the concern.
Discipline: Photography (Documentary photo essays).
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: Claim-level typed decisions help protect documentary accuracy without generating narrative prose.

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": <Sequence annotations, factual claims, and source 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)
{
  "claim_cited": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does each factual annotation have supporting evidence in the supplied source notes?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Each checked claim has relevant supporting evidence.",
      "false": "At least one claim lacks relevant evidence or conflicts with it."
    }
  },
  "sequence_context": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the sequence support the stated temporal or causal relationship?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Evidence supports the stated relationship.",
      "false": "The relationship is unsupported, misleading, or unclear."
    }
  },
  "essay_issue": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "What is the main factual-review concern?",
    "criteria": {
      "source_gap": "A claim lacks a supporting source.",
      "sequence": "Sequence implies an unsupported relationship.",
      "conflict": "Notes contradict an annotation.",
      "none": "No material concern is apparent."
    }
  }
}

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

---

# Discipline: Writing, Poetry & Narrative

Audience: writers, poets, screenwriters, narrative designers
Market anchor: the writing tools market (~$1.5B) and >100M working writers

## 0501. Scene Revision Compass

ID: writing-scene-revision-compass
Sub-discipline: Screenwriting revision
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: Paste a screenplay scene and Jev routes it to a revision focus, then scores the selected craft issue and flags whether it disrupts the scene’s intended turn.

Why typed decisions: A consistent focus and severity score make revision priorities comparable across scenes without relying on generated notes.

TAM: $1.5B global screenwriting software
SAM: $220M screenplay revision tools
SOM: $2M early-adopter subscriptions

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Scene Revision Compass" 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 screenplay scene and Jev routes it to a revision focus, then scores the selected craft issue and flags whether it disrupts the scene’s intended turn.
Discipline: Writing, Poetry & Narrative (Screenwriting revision).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: A consistent focus and severity score make revision priorities comparable across scenes without relying on generated notes.

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": <Genre, scene goal, and current draft stage>, "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)
{
  "revision_focus": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Route this scene to its primary revision focus.",
    "criteria": {
      "dramatic_turn": "The scene’s situation or power dynamic changes",
      "character_intent": "A character’s goal or tactic is unclear",
      "pacing": "The scene feels rushed, stalled, or overextended",
      "dialogue": "Spoken lines lack clarity, subtext, or distinction"
    }
  },
  "craft_severity": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "For the selected focus, how strongly does the scene need revision?",
    "criteria": [
      "Minor polish only",
      "A noticeable weakness with limited impact",
      "A substantial issue affecting the scene",
      "A fundamental issue that undermines the scene"
    ]
  },
  "turn_present": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "For the selected focus, does the scene contain a legible dramatic turn?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "A discernible shift in stakes, knowledge, or power occurs",
      "false": "No discernible shift occurs"
    }
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0502. Poem Submission Sorter

ID: writing-poem-submission-sorter
Sub-discipline: Poetry submissions
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: Paste a poem and Jev routes it to a suitable submission category, then scores fit for the selected category and checks whether its form matches that market.

Why typed decisions: Typed fit and form decisions help poets shortlist venues quickly and consistently without inventing editorial commentary.

TAM: $600M global poetry publishing market
SAM: $45M digital submission and contest tools
SOM: $500K poet subscriptions

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Poem Submission Sorter" 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 poem and Jev routes it to a suitable submission category, then scores fit for the selected category and checks whether its form matches that market.
Discipline: Writing, Poetry & Narrative (Poetry submissions).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: Typed fit and form decisions help poets shortlist venues quickly and consistently without inventing editorial commentary.

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": <Poem text, length, and target publication profile>, "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)
{
  "submission_category": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Route this poem to its strongest submission category.",
    "criteria": {
      "lyric": "Primarily voice, image, and emotional movement",
      "narrative": "A story or sequence of events drives the poem",
      "experimental": "Language, structure, or typography takes formal risks",
      "formal": "Meter, rhyme, or a recognized verse form is central"
    }
  },
  "category_fit": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "For the selected category, how strong is the poem’s fit?",
    "criteria": [
      "Weak fit",
      "Partial fit",
      "Strong fit",
      "Exceptional fit"
    ]
  },
  "form_consistent": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "For the selected category, is the poem’s form internally consistent?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Its structural choices are sustained or clearly intentional",
      "false": "Its structure appears inconsistent or unintentional"
    }
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0503. Dialogue Voice Ledger

ID: writing-dialogue-voice-ledger
Sub-discipline: Fiction editing
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: Paste a passage with multiple speakers and Jev routes each dialogue turn to a voice-consistency issue, then scores how distinct the selected speaker’s voice is.

Why typed decisions: Speaker-level categories and ratings reveal where voices blur without rewriting any lines.

TAM: $1.2B global fiction editing software
SAM: $90M dialogue and character analysis tools
SOM: $1M writer subscriptions

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Dialogue Voice Ledger" 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 passage with multiple speakers and Jev routes each dialogue turn to a voice-consistency issue, then scores how distinct the selected speaker’s voice is.
Discipline: Writing, Poetry & Narrative (Fiction editing).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: Speaker-level categories and ratings reveal where voices blur without rewriting any lines.

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": <Passage, speaker names, and character voice 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)
{
  "voice_issue": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Route the passage to its main dialogue voice concern.",
    "criteria": {
      "distinctiveness": "Speakers sound too similar",
      "register": "A speaker’s formality or diction shifts unexpectedly",
      "character_match": "A line conflicts with known character traits",
      "subtext": "Dialogue states intentions too directly"
    }
  },
  "voice_distinction": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "For the selected concern, how clearly does the passage establish distinct voices?",
    "criteria": [
      "Voices are difficult to distinguish",
      "Some voices have identifiable traits",
      "Most voices are distinct",
      "Each voice is readily recognizable"
    ]
  },
  "voice_break": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "For the selected concern, is there a clear voice break for at least one speaker?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "At least one line noticeably conflicts with the established voice",
      "false": "No clear voice break is present"
    }
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0504. Plot Hole Switchboard

ID: writing-plot-hole-switchboard
Sub-discipline: Narrative continuity
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: Paste a scene or outline and Jev routes it to a continuity domain, then scores the risk and checks whether the selected detail conflicts with earlier story facts.

Why typed decisions: A fixed issue taxonomy and severity level turn continuity review into actionable triage instead of speculative prose.

TAM: $900M global story development software
SAM: $75M continuity management tools
SOM: $900K writer-room licenses

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Plot Hole Switchboard" 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 scene or outline and Jev routes it to a continuity domain, then scores the risk and checks whether the selected detail conflicts with earlier story facts.
Discipline: Writing, Poetry & Narrative (Narrative continuity).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: A fixed issue taxonomy and severity level turn continuity review into actionable triage instead of speculative prose.

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": <Current excerpt plus a compact story-facts JSON>, "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)
{
  "continuity_domain": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Route the possible continuity issue to its domain.",
    "criteria": {
      "timeline": "Dates, duration, or event order conflict",
      "character_knowledge": "A character knows or forgets information implausibly",
      "object_location": "A prop, document, or other object changes location unexpectedly",
      "world_rule": "An established setting rule is contradicted"
    }
  },
  "continuity_risk": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "For the selected domain, how serious is the potential continuity risk?",
    "criteria": [
      "No meaningful risk",
      "Small discrepancy",
      "Likely audience distraction",
      "Major contradiction affecting the story"
    ]
  },
  "fact_conflict": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "For the selected domain, does the excerpt contradict a supplied story fact?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "A supplied fact is contradicted",
      "false": "No supplied fact is contradicted"
    }
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0505. Quest Beat Router

ID: writing-quest-beat-router
Sub-discipline: Narrative game design
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: Paste a quest beat and Jev routes it to a quest function, then scores player agency and checks whether the selected function is clear from the beat.

Why typed decisions: Structured function and agency decisions help teams balance quests across a game without generating replacement content.

TAM: $2B global narrative game development tools
SAM: $180M quest design and planning software
SOM: $1.5M studio subscriptions

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Quest Beat Router" 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 quest beat and Jev routes it to a quest function, then scores player agency and checks whether the selected function is clear from the beat.
Discipline: Writing, Poetry & Narrative (Narrative game design).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: Structured function and agency decisions help teams balance quests across a game without generating replacement content.

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": <Quest beat, player role, and design pillars>, "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)
{
  "quest_function": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Route this beat to its primary quest function.",
    "criteria": {
      "exploration": "Encourages discovery of places or information",
      "choice": "Asks the player to make a consequential decision",
      "combat": "Centers a tactical or survival challenge",
      "relationship": "Changes a character relationship or faction standing",
      "transition": "Moves the player between larger story phases"
    }
  },
  "player_agency": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "For the selected function, how much meaningful agency does the player have?",
    "criteria": [
      "Little or none",
      "Limited options with minor consequences",
      "Meaningful options or tactics",
      "Substantial control over outcome or approach"
    ]
  },
  "function_clear": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "For the selected function, is the beat’s intended player-facing purpose clear?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The purpose is apparent from the beat",
      "false": "The purpose is unclear or mixed"
    }
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0506. Workshop Draft Triage

ID: writing-workshop-draft-triage
Sub-discipline: Creative writing workshops
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: Paste a workshop submission and Jev routes it to a feedback lens, then scores how actionable that lens is and checks whether the draft offers evidence for it.

Why typed decisions: A shared feedback taxonomy helps workshop groups focus discussion and compare observations without auto-writing critique.

TAM: $500M global writing education services
SAM: $60M workshop and critique platforms
SOM: $600K cohort and school licenses

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Workshop Draft Triage" 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 workshop submission and Jev routes it to a feedback lens, then scores how actionable that lens is and checks whether the draft offers evidence for it.
Discipline: Writing, Poetry & Narrative (Creative writing workshops).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: A shared feedback taxonomy helps workshop groups focus discussion and compare observations without auto-writing critique.

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": <Draft excerpt, genre, and workshop goals>, "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)
{
  "feedback_lens": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Route this draft to its most useful workshop lens.",
    "criteria": {
      "opening": "The opening’s hook, orientation, or promise",
      "structure": "The sequence of scenes, sections, or ideas",
      "character": "Character motivation, change, or presence",
      "language": "Sentence-level style, imagery, or clarity"
    }
  },
  "actionability": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "For the selected lens, how actionable is the draft’s current state for discussion?",
    "criteria": [
      "Too little evidence to assess",
      "Some evidence, but focus is diffuse",
      "A clear issue or strength to discuss",
      "A highly specific, consequential discussion point"
    ]
  },
  "text_evidence": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "For the selected lens, is there concrete evidence in the excerpt?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "A specific passage or pattern supports assessment",
      "false": "The excerpt lacks clear supporting evidence"
    }
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0507. Adaptation Rights Desk

ID: writing-adaptation-rights-desk
Sub-discipline: Literary adaptation
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: Paste a synopsis and Jev routes it to an adaptation-risk area, then scores how much of the source’s core identity is affected and checks whether that element is essential.

Why typed decisions: Typed risk and essentiality judgments help adaptation teams prioritize human review without producing unauthorized rewrite suggestions.

TAM: $1B global adaptation and rights services
SAM: $100M adaptation planning tools
SOM: $800K agency and studio accounts

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Adaptation Rights Desk" 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 synopsis and Jev routes it to an adaptation-risk area, then scores how much of the source’s core identity is affected and checks whether that element is essential.
Discipline: Writing, Poetry & Narrative (Literary adaptation).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: Typed risk and essentiality judgments help adaptation teams prioritize human review without producing unauthorized rewrite suggestions.

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": <Synopsis, source-medium notes, and adaptation brief>, "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)
{
  "adaptation_risk": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Route this adaptation decision to its main risk area.",
    "criteria": {
      "plot_structure": "Changing event order or causal links",
      "character_identity": "Changing defining traits or relationships",
      "world_logic": "Changing the rules or setting logic",
      "theme_tone": "Changing the source’s central themes or tonal identity"
    }
  },
  "identity_impact": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "For the selected area, how strongly could the proposed change affect source identity?",
    "criteria": [
      "Negligible impact",
      "Limited impact",
      "Substantial impact",
      "Could redefine the adaptation"
    ]
  },
  "source_essential": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "For the selected area, is the affected element essential to the source’s identity?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The element is a defining part of the source",
      "false": "The element is not essential to the source’s identity"
    }
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0508. Memoir Boundary Check

ID: writing-memoir-boundary-check
Sub-discipline: Memoir writing
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: Paste a memoir passage and Jev routes it to a privacy or ethics concern, then scores exposure risk and checks whether the passage identifies a living person.

Why typed decisions: Explicit risk categories and a yes-or-no identification flag support responsible review without making legal judgments or rewriting the memoir.

TAM: $700M global memoir publishing services
SAM: $55M privacy and editorial review tools
SOM: $500K author and publisher subscriptions

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Memoir Boundary Check" 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 memoir passage and Jev routes it to a privacy or ethics concern, then scores exposure risk and checks whether the passage identifies a living person.
Discipline: Writing, Poetry & Narrative (Memoir writing).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: Explicit risk categories and a yes-or-no identification flag support responsible review without making legal judgments or rewriting the memoir.

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": <Passage, anonymization notes, and publication context>, "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)
{
  "ethics_concern": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Route this passage to its primary memoir review concern.",
    "criteria": {
      "identifiability": "A person may be recognizable from details",
      "consent": "A private account may be used without permission",
      "sensitive_disclosure": "The passage reveals intimate or sensitive information",
      "factual_uncertainty": "Memory, attribution, or factual certainty is unclear"
    }
  },
  "exposure_risk": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "For the selected concern, how high is the potential exposure risk?",
    "criteria": [
      "Low risk",
      "Limited risk",
      "Significant risk",
      "High risk requiring careful review"
    ]
  },
  "living_person_identified": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "For the selected concern, does the passage identify or plausibly identify a living person?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "A living person is identifiable from the passage",
      "false": "No living person is identifiable"
    }
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0509. Stage Direction Monitor

ID: writing-stage-direction-monitor
Sub-discipline: Playwriting
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: Paste a scene and Jev routes stage directions to a production concern, then scores how playable they are and checks whether the selected direction requires an unavailable effect.

Why typed decisions: Categorized production flags let playwrights and directors spot staging friction without turning the tool into a script editor.

TAM: $400M global theatre production software
SAM: $35M playwriting and stage-planning tools
SOM: $400K theatre company licenses

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Stage Direction Monitor" 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 scene and Jev routes stage directions to a production concern, then scores how playable they are and checks whether the selected direction requires an unavailable effect.
Discipline: Writing, Poetry & Narrative (Playwriting).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: Categorized production flags let playwrights and directors spot staging friction without turning the tool into a script editor.

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": <Scene text, venue scale, and production constraints>, "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)
{
  "staging_concern": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Route the scene to its primary staging concern.",
    "criteria": {
      "physicality": "Movement or business is unclear or impractical",
      "set_transition": "A location or scene change may stall performance",
      "technical_effect": "Lighting, sound, projection, or machinery is demanding",
      "blocking_clarity": "Entrances, exits, or spatial relationships are unclear"
    }
  },
  "playability": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "For the selected concern, how playable is the scene under the stated constraints?",
    "criteria": [
      "Not currently playable",
      "Playable with major adjustments",
      "Playable with minor adjustments",
      "Straightforward to stage"
    ]
  },
  "special_effect_required": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "For the selected concern, does the scene require a special technical effect?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "A non-routine technical effect is required",
      "false": "No non-routine technical effect is required"
    }
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0510. Synopsis Signal Sorter

ID: writing-synopsis-signal-sorter
Sub-discipline: Publishing operations
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: Paste a novel synopsis and Jev routes it to a positioning category, then scores premise clarity and checks whether the synopsis signals a complete narrative arc.

Why typed decisions: Stable positioning labels and quality checks support catalog review and pitch preparation more reliably than generated blurbs.

TAM: $1.4B global book publishing services
SAM: $110M metadata and catalog tools
SOM: $1M publisher subscriptions

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Synopsis Signal Sorter" 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 novel synopsis and Jev routes it to a positioning category, then scores premise clarity and checks whether the synopsis signals a complete narrative arc.
Discipline: Writing, Poetry & Narrative (Publishing operations).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: Stable positioning labels and quality checks support catalog review and pitch preparation more reliably than generated blurbs.

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": <Synopsis, genre, and intended readership>, "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)
{
  "positioning_category": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Route this synopsis to its strongest positioning category.",
    "criteria": {
      "romance": "A relationship arc is the central reader promise",
      "mystery": "A question, crime, or investigation drives the plot",
      "speculative": "An invented world or speculative premise leads",
      "literary": "Style, interiority, or thematic exploration leads",
      "upmarket": "Literary emphasis combines with a clear commercial hook"
    }
  },
  "premise_clarity": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "For the selected category, how clearly does the synopsis communicate its premise?",
    "criteria": [
      "Unclear premise",
      "Partly clear premise",
      "Clear premise",
      "Distinctive and immediately legible premise"
    ]
  },
  "arc_complete": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "For the selected category, does the synopsis indicate a resolved main narrative arc?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The central arc appears to reach a meaningful resolution",
      "false": "The central arc appears unresolved or absent"
    }
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0511. Character Arc Gauge

ID: writing-character-arc-gauge
Sub-discipline: Character development
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: Paste a character’s scenes or outline and Jev routes the arc to a change pattern, then scores transformation strength and checks whether the ending reflects the stated pressure.

Why typed decisions: Typed arc classifications and evidence checks let writers compare character journeys across drafts without prescribing a new arc.

TAM: $1.2B global character-writing tools
SAM: $85M story planning software
SOM: $900K writer subscriptions

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Character Arc Gauge" 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 character’s scenes or outline and Jev routes the arc to a change pattern, then scores transformation strength and checks whether the ending reflects the stated pressure.
Discipline: Writing, Poetry & Narrative (Character development).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: Typed arc classifications and evidence checks let writers compare character journeys across drafts without prescribing a new arc.

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": <Character profile, key scenes, and planned ending>, "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)
{
  "arc_pattern": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Route this character journey to its dominant arc pattern.",
    "criteria": {
      "growth": "The character develops a new capacity or belief",
      "fall": "The character worsens through choices or pressures",
      "steadfast": "The character remains stable while changing others or the world",
      "flat": "The character’s inner stance changes little and the plot tests it"
    }
  },
  "transformation_strength": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "For the selected pattern, how clearly is the arc demonstrated?",
    "criteria": [
      "No clear arc evidence",
      "Weak or intermittent evidence",
      "Clear evidence across key moments",
      "Strong, consequential evidence throughout"
    ]
  },
  "ending_matches_pressure": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "For the selected pattern, does the ending reflect the pressures established in the arc?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The ending meaningfully follows from the established pressures",
      "false": "The ending does not clearly follow from those pressures"
    }
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0512. Trope Balance Meter

ID: writing-trope-balance-meter
Sub-discipline: Genre fiction
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: Paste a chapter and Jev routes it to a trope-handling pattern, then scores how deliberately the trope is used and checks whether the chapter meaningfully subverts it.

Why typed decisions: Consistent trope labels and intent signals help authors manage genre expectations without receiving formulaic prose.

TAM: $900M global genre writing market
SAM: $70M genre planning and analysis tools
SOM: $700K author subscriptions

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Trope Balance Meter" 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 chapter and Jev routes it to a trope-handling pattern, then scores how deliberately the trope is used and checks whether the chapter meaningfully subverts it.
Discipline: Writing, Poetry & Narrative (Genre fiction).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: Consistent trope labels and intent signals help authors manage genre expectations without receiving formulaic prose.

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": <Chapter, genre, and chosen trope list>, "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)
{
  "trope_pattern": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Route the chapter’s trope use to its dominant pattern.",
    "criteria": {
      "conventional": "Uses a familiar trope in an expected way",
      "subverted": "Turns an expected trope outcome in a new direction",
      "reinforced": "Emphasizes a genre convention for reader satisfaction",
      "mixed": "Combines multiple trope expectations or treatments"
    }
  },
  "trope_control": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "For the selected pattern, how deliberately does the chapter handle its trope expectations?",
    "criteria": [
      "Uncontrolled or confusing",
      "Partly deliberate",
      "Mostly deliberate",
      "Highly deliberate and coherent"
    ]
  },
  "meaningful_subversion": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "For the selected pattern, does the chapter meaningfully subvert a familiar expectation?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "A familiar expectation is clearly redirected",
      "false": "No meaningful subversion is present"
    }
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0513. Narrator Reliability Desk

ID: writing-narrator-reliability-desk
Sub-discipline: Narrative point of view
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: Paste a narrative passage and Jev routes it to a point-of-view concern, then scores reliability signals and checks whether the passage contains a contradiction in the narrator’s account.

Why typed decisions: A fixed POV taxonomy helps editors locate viewpoint risks and assess them consistently without interpreting the passage in prose.

TAM: $750M global fiction editing market
SAM: $65M manuscript analysis tools
SOM: $600K editorial team subscriptions

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Narrator Reliability Desk" 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 narrative passage and Jev routes it to a point-of-view concern, then scores reliability signals and checks whether the passage contains a contradiction in the narrator’s account.
Discipline: Writing, Poetry & Narrative (Narrative point of view).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: A fixed POV taxonomy helps editors locate viewpoint risks and assess them consistently without interpreting the passage in prose.

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": <Passage, intended viewpoint, and narrator profile>, "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)
{
  "pov_concern": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Route this passage to its primary point-of-view concern.",
    "criteria": {
      "head_hop": "Access shifts between minds without clear control",
      "distance_shift": "Narrative distance changes unexpectedly",
      "knowledge_limit": "The narrator knows information they should not know",
      "reliability": "The account may be distorted or self-contradictory"
    }
  },
  "reliability_signal": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "For the selected concern, how strong is the evidence of a viewpoint issue?",
    "criteria": [
      "No clear signal",
      "A weak or ambiguous signal",
      "A noticeable signal",
      "An unmistakable viewpoint issue"
    ]
  },
  "account_contradiction": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "For the selected concern, does the narrator contradict their own account within the passage?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The passage contains a direct or consequential contradiction",
      "false": "The passage contains no clear contradiction"
    }
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0514. Children’s Readability Router

ID: writing-children-s-readability-router
Sub-discipline: Children’s publishing
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: Paste a children’s story excerpt and Jev routes it to a reading-fit concern, then scores suitability for the intended age band and checks whether a key concept may exceed it.

Why typed decisions: Age-targeted ratings and concept flags support editorial screening without simplifying or generating the story text.

TAM: $1.3B global children’s publishing market
SAM: $95M children’s editorial software
SOM: $800K publisher and educator licenses

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Children’s Readability Router" 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 children’s story excerpt and Jev routes it to a reading-fit concern, then scores suitability for the intended age band and checks whether a key concept may exceed it.
Discipline: Writing, Poetry & Narrative (Children’s publishing).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: Age-targeted ratings and concept flags support editorial screening without simplifying or generating the story text.

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": <Excerpt, intended age band, and reading context>, "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)
{
  "readability_concern": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Route the excerpt to its main age-fit concern.",
    "criteria": {
      "vocabulary": "Word choice may exceed the intended reader level",
      "sentence_load": "Sentence structure may be difficult to follow",
      "emotional_content": "Themes or intensity may not fit the age band",
      "context_gaps": "Required background knowledge may be missing"
    }
  },
  "age_fit": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "For the selected concern, how suitable is the excerpt for its intended age band?",
    "criteria": [
      "Poor fit",
      "Uneven fit",
      "Good fit",
      "Excellent fit"
    ]
  },
  "advanced_concept": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "For the selected concern, does the excerpt rely on a concept likely unfamiliar to the intended age band?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "A likely unfamiliar concept is important to understanding",
      "false": "No likely unfamiliar concept is essential"
    }
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0515. Serial Cliffhanger Classifier

ID: writing-serial-cliffhanger-classifier
Sub-discipline: Serialized fiction
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: Paste an episode ending and Jev routes it to a cliffhanger type, then scores its pull into the next installment and checks whether the unresolved question is specific.

Why typed decisions: Typed cliffhanger patterns and strength ratings help serial writers balance episode endings and audience momentum.

TAM: $800M global serialized fiction market
SAM: $70M serial publishing platforms
SOM: $700K creator subscriptions

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Serial Cliffhanger Classifier" 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 an episode ending and Jev routes it to a cliffhanger type, then scores its pull into the next installment and checks whether the unresolved question is specific.
Discipline: Writing, Poetry & Narrative (Serialized fiction).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: Typed cliffhanger patterns and strength ratings help serial writers balance episode endings and audience momentum.

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": <Episode ending, series format, and next-episode plan>, "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)
{
  "cliffhanger_type": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Route this ending to its dominant cliffhanger type.",
    "criteria": {
      "danger": "Immediate physical threat or imminent loss",
      "revelation": "New information changes the reader’s understanding",
      "decision": "A consequential choice is presented but unresolved",
      "relationship": "A relationship rupture, reveal, or uncertainty remains"
    }
  },
  "next_episode_pull": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "For the selected type, how strongly does the ending motivate continuation?",
    "criteria": [
      "Little reason to continue",
      "Some curiosity",
      "Strong continuation pull",
      "Compelling urgent pull"
    ]
  },
  "specific_open_question": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "For the selected type, does the ending leave a specific unresolved question?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "A clear question remains open",
      "false": "No specific question remains open"
    }
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0516. Poetry Form Auditor

ID: writing-poetry-form-auditor
Sub-discipline: Poetic form
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: Paste a poem and Jev routes it to a form family, then scores how consistently the poem follows that family’s conventions and checks whether its pattern appears intentional.

Why typed decisions: Formal classification and adherence scores provide fast, repeatable checks while leaving artistic choices to the poet.

TAM: $600M global poetry publishing market
SAM: $40M poetry craft and assessment tools
SOM: $400K poet subscriptions

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Poetry Form Auditor" 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 poem and Jev routes it to a form family, then scores how consistently the poem follows that family’s conventions and checks whether its pattern appears intentional.
Discipline: Writing, Poetry & Narrative (Poetic form).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: Formal classification and adherence scores provide fast, repeatable checks while leaving artistic choices to the poet.

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": <Poem text and declared form, if any>, "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)
{
  "form_family": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Route the poem to its dominant form family.",
    "criteria": {
      "fixed_form": "A recognized form has defined structural rules",
      "metered": "Regular meter or rhythm is a primary organizing feature",
      "free_verse": "Lineation and rhythm are flexible rather than fixed",
      "visual": "Page layout or spatial arrangement is central"
    }
  },
  "form_adherence": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "For the selected family, how consistently does the poem follow its conventions?",
    "criteria": [
      "Little or no consistency",
      "Some consistent features",
      "Mostly consistent",
      "Highly consistent or purposefully controlled"
    ]
  },
  "pattern_intentional": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "For the selected family, do deviations from its pattern appear intentional?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Deviations appear purposeful or expressive",
      "false": "Deviations appear accidental or unexplained"
    }
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0517. Fact-Fiction Boundary

ID: writing-fact-fiction-boundary
Sub-discipline: Creative nonfiction
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: Paste a nonfiction passage and Jev routes it to a fact-boundary risk, then scores how consequential the uncertainty is and checks whether the passage signals reconstruction.

Why typed decisions: Structured uncertainty flags support transparent nonfiction review without claiming to verify facts or generate disclosures.

TAM: $650M global creative nonfiction market
SAM: $50M editorial fact-review tools
SOM: $450K author and publisher subscriptions

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Fact-Fiction Boundary" 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 nonfiction passage and Jev routes it to a fact-boundary risk, then scores how consequential the uncertainty is and checks whether the passage signals reconstruction.
Discipline: Writing, Poetry & Narrative (Creative nonfiction).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: Structured uncertainty flags support transparent nonfiction review without claiming to verify facts or generate disclosures.

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": <Passage, source notes, and author certainty labels>, "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)
{
  "fact_boundary_risk": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Route the passage to its main fact-boundary risk.",
    "criteria": {
      "dialogue_reconstruction": "Spoken words may be reconstructed from memory",
      "compressed_timeline": "Events may be combined or reordered",
      "interior_access": "Another person’s thoughts or motives are stated as fact",
      "sensory_memory": "A remembered sensory detail may be uncertain"
    }
  },
  "uncertainty_impact": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "For the selected risk, how consequential would uncertainty be to the passage?",
    "criteria": [
      "Minimal consequence",
      "Limited consequence",
      "Material consequence",
      "Could undermine the account’s credibility"
    ]
  },
  "reconstruction_disclosed": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "For the selected risk, does the passage signal that the material is reconstructed or uncertain?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The passage indicates reconstruction or uncertainty",
      "false": "The passage presents it without such a signal"
    }
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0518. Screenplay Coverage Router

ID: writing-screenplay-coverage-router
Sub-discipline: Film development
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: Paste a screenplay excerpt and Jev routes it to a coverage dimension, then scores the excerpt on that dimension and checks whether it establishes the intended genre signal.

Why typed decisions: Standardized coverage categories and graded assessments make early script triage faster and more comparable than freeform generated notes.

TAM: $1.6B global film development market
SAM: $130M screenplay coverage software
SOM: $1.2M production company licenses

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Screenplay Coverage Router" 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 screenplay excerpt and Jev routes it to a coverage dimension, then scores the excerpt on that dimension and checks whether it establishes the intended genre signal.
Discipline: Writing, Poetry & Narrative (Film development).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: Standardized coverage categories and graded assessments make early script triage faster and more comparable than freeform generated notes.

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": <Excerpt, logline, and target genre>, "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)
{
  "coverage_dimension": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Route the excerpt to its most relevant coverage dimension.",
    "criteria": {
      "concept": "The premise or central dramatic engine",
      "character": "Character appeal, agency, or motivation",
      "structure": "Scene progression and causal development",
      "dialogue": "Dialogue clarity and character-specific voice",
      "market_tone": "Genre, tone, or audience positioning"
    }
  },
  "dimension_strength": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "For the selected dimension, how strong is the excerpt?",
    "criteria": [
      "Weak",
      "Developing",
      "Strong",
      "Exceptional"
    ]
  },
  "genre_signal_present": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "For the selected dimension, does the excerpt clearly signal the intended genre?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The intended genre is apparent in the excerpt",
      "false": "The intended genre is not clearly signaled"
    }
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0519. Lore Consistency Switchboard

ID: writing-lore-consistency-switchboard
Sub-discipline: Worldbuilding
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: Paste a fictional-world passage and Jev routes it to a lore domain, then scores consistency with the supplied canon and checks for an explicit canon conflict.

Why typed decisions: Typed lore domains and conflict signals make growing story bibles easier to audit without fabricating world details.

TAM: $1.1B global game and fiction worldbuilding tools
SAM: $90M story-bible software
SOM: $900K studio and author subscriptions

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Lore Consistency Switchboard" 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 fictional-world passage and Jev routes it to a lore domain, then scores consistency with the supplied canon and checks for an explicit canon conflict.
Discipline: Writing, Poetry & Narrative (Worldbuilding).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: Typed lore domains and conflict signals make growing story bibles easier to audit without fabricating world details.

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": <Passage and canon JSON for rules, places, groups, and history>, "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)
{
  "lore_domain": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Route the passage to its primary lore domain.",
    "criteria": {
      "magic_technology": "Abilities, tools, or system limitations",
      "geography_ecology": "Places, climate, species, or resources",
      "culture_faction": "Customs, institutions, groups, or social rules",
      "history_timeline": "Past events, dates, or historical relationships"
    }
  },
  "canon_consistency": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "For the selected domain, how consistently does the passage follow supplied canon?",
    "criteria": [
      "Clear contradiction",
      "Several inconsistencies",
      "Mostly consistent",
      "Fully consistent with supplied canon"
    ]
  },
  "canon_conflict": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "For the selected domain, does the passage explicitly conflict with a supplied canon fact?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "At least one supplied canon fact is contradicted",
      "false": "No supplied canon fact is contradicted"
    }
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0520. Book Club Question Sorter

ID: writing-book-club-question-sorter
Sub-discipline: Literary engagement
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: Paste discussion questions for a book and Jev routes each question to a discussion mode, then scores its openness and checks whether it can be answered from the text.

Why typed decisions: Typed question modes and quality checks help facilitators build balanced discussions without having the tool compose prompts.

TAM: $1B global book clubs and reader engagement
SAM: $85M literary discussion tools
SOM: $750K library and educator subscriptions

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Book Club Question Sorter" 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 discussion questions for a book and Jev routes each question to a discussion mode, then scores its openness and checks whether it can be answered from the text.
Discipline: Writing, Poetry & Narrative (Literary engagement).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: Typed question modes and quality checks help facilitators build balanced discussions without having the tool compose prompts.

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": <Question list, book title, and group reading level>, "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)
{
  "discussion_mode": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Route this question to its primary discussion mode.",
    "criteria": {
      "interpretive": "Invites meaning or multiple readings",
      "character": "Focuses on motivation, change, or relationships",
      "craft": "Examines form, voice, structure, or style",
      "contextual": "Connects the text to history, culture, or lived experience"
    }
  },
  "openness": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "For the selected mode, how open is the question to meaningful discussion?",
    "criteria": [
      "Closed or factual only",
      "Limited room for interpretation",
      "Invites multiple supported responses",
      "Supports substantial, varied discussion"
    ]
  },
  "text_answerable": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "For the selected mode, can readers ground an answer in the text?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The text offers evidence relevant to an answer",
      "false": "The question cannot be grounded in the text"
    }
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0521. Scene Readiness Gate

ID: writing-scene-readiness-gate
Sub-discipline: Screenwriting
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste a screenplay scene and Jev independently checks whether its objective, conflict, and turn are present, while fixed rules combine the results into a revision flag.

Why typed decisions: Separate yes-or-no checks make the flag auditable instead of relying on a generated critique.

TAM: Global screenwriting software: ~$1B
SAM: Script development tools: ~$120M
SOM: Indie screenwriters: ~$1M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Scene Readiness 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 screenplay scene and Jev independently checks whether its objective, conflict, and turn are present, while fixed rules combine the results into a revision flag.
Discipline: Writing, Poetry & Narrative (Screenwriting).
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: Separate yes-or-no checks make the flag auditable instead of relying on a generated critique.

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": <Scene text and scene purpose>, "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)
{
  "clear_objective": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the protagonist have a discernible objective in this scene?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "A specific objective is evident from the scene.",
      "false": "No specific objective is discernible."
    }
  },
  "active_conflict": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does an obstacle actively oppose that objective?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "A person, force, or circumstance resists the objective.",
      "false": "The objective meets no meaningful resistance."
    }
  },
  "meaningful_turn": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the scene change the situation by its end?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The ending changes stakes, knowledge, or direction.",
      "false": "The situation is essentially unchanged."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0522. Poem Submission Sieve

ID: writing-poem-submission-sieve
Sub-discipline: Poetry publishing
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste a poem and submission requirements, and Jev checks each requirement independently before rules identify likely eligibility issues.

Why typed decisions: Independent compliance decisions are easier to verify than a prose summary of submission fit.

TAM: Global poetry publishing tools: ~$300M
SAM: Submission workflow software: ~$30M
SOM: Poetry journals and writers: ~$500K

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Poem Submission Sieve" 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 poem and submission requirements, and Jev checks each requirement independently before rules identify likely eligibility issues.
Discipline: Writing, Poetry & Narrative (Poetry publishing).
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: Independent compliance decisions are easier to verify than a prose summary of submission fit.

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": <Poem text and submission rules>, "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)
{
  "within_length": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the poem meet the stated length limit?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The poem is within the stated limit.",
      "false": "The poem exceeds or falls outside the limit."
    }
  },
  "matches_form": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the poem meet any required form or format?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The required form or format is satisfied.",
      "false": "A required form or format is not satisfied."
    }
  },
  "eligible_content": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the poem avoid any explicitly prohibited content?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "No listed content restriction is violated.",
      "false": "At least one listed restriction appears violated."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0523. Continuity Drift Alarm

ID: writing-continuity-drift-alarm
Sub-discipline: Narrative design
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste character and world-bible notes alongside a scene, and Jev checks defined continuity conditions that code combines into a drift alert.

Why typed decisions: Discrete contradiction checks expose specific risks without inventing explanations.

TAM: Global narrative production tools: ~$900M
SAM: Continuity management: ~$90M
SOM: Story teams: ~$1M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Continuity Drift Alarm" 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 character and world-bible notes alongside a scene, and Jev checks defined continuity conditions that code combines into a drift alert.
Discipline: Writing, Poetry & Narrative (Narrative 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: Discrete contradiction checks expose specific risks without inventing explanations.

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": <Scene text and continuity 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)
{
  "character_fact_match": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the scene preserve the supplied character facts?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "No supplied character fact is contradicted.",
      "false": "At least one supplied character fact is contradicted."
    }
  },
  "world_rule_match": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the scene obey the supplied world rules?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "No supplied world rule is contradicted.",
      "false": "At least one supplied world rule is contradicted."
    }
  },
  "timeline_match": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the scene fit the supplied timeline?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Events fit the stated chronology.",
      "false": "An event conflicts with the stated chronology."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0524. Dialogue Voice Monitor

ID: writing-dialogue-voice-monitor
Sub-discipline: Character writing
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste dialogue samples and a new scene, and Jev checks distinct voice conditions that rules combine into a voice-drift warning.

Why typed decisions: Independent voice checks produce actionable signals without rewriting dialogue.

TAM: Global writing software: ~$2B
SAM: Dialogue craft tools: ~$100M
SOM: Screenwriters and game writers: ~$1M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Dialogue Voice Monitor" 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 dialogue samples and a new scene, and Jev checks distinct voice conditions that rules combine into a voice-drift warning.
Discipline: Writing, Poetry & Narrative (Character writing).
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: Independent voice checks produce actionable signals without rewriting dialogue.

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": <Character samples and scene dialogue>, "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)
{
  "lexicon_consistent": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does each speaker use vocabulary consistent with their reference sample?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Vocabulary broadly matches the supplied samples.",
      "false": "A speaker's vocabulary noticeably departs from their sample."
    }
  },
  "syntax_consistent": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does each speaker's sentence style remain consistent with their reference sample?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Sentence patterns broadly match the samples.",
      "false": "A speaker's sentence patterns noticeably depart."
    }
  },
  "voices_distinct": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Are the speakers distinguishable without relying on dialogue tags?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Speakers have discernibly different voices.",
      "false": "Speakers are difficult to distinguish by voice alone."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0525. Plot Hole Triage

ID: writing-plot-hole-triage
Sub-discipline: Plot development
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste a beat outline and story rules, and Jev checks causal, knowledge, and resource conditions that code combines into plot-risk levels.

Why typed decisions: Explicit binary findings help writers locate structural risks without receiving speculative fixes.

TAM: Global story development tools: ~$700M
SAM: Plot planning software: ~$70M
SOM: Independent writing teams: ~$800K

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Plot Hole Triage" 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 beat outline and story rules, and Jev checks causal, knowledge, and resource conditions that code combines into plot-risk levels.
Discipline: Writing, Poetry & Narrative (Plot development).
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 binary findings help writers locate structural risks without receiving speculative fixes.

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": <Beat outline and story rules>, "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)
{
  "causal_link": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does each major beat follow plausibly from an earlier event?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Major beats have supported causal links.",
      "false": "A major beat appears without adequate causal support."
    }
  },
  "knowledge_access": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Do characters act only on information they could know?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Actions fit characters' available knowledge.",
      "false": "A character appears to use unavailable information."
    }
  },
  "resource_consistency": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Are important resources used consistently across the outline?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Resource use fits previously established limits.",
      "false": "A resource is used in a way that conflicts with its limits."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0526. Adaptation Rights Lens

ID: writing-adaptation-rights-lens
Sub-discipline: Literary adaptation
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste source and adaptation excerpts with a rights checklist, and Jev checks specified protected-element conditions for human review.

Why typed decisions: Typed flags support consistent triage while leaving legal interpretation to qualified people.

TAM: Global adaptation industry tools: ~$500M
SAM: Rights review workflow: ~$50M
SOM: Small studios and estates: ~$500K

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Adaptation Rights Lens" 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 source and adaptation excerpts with a rights checklist, and Jev checks specified protected-element conditions for human review.
Discipline: Writing, Poetry & Narrative (Literary adaptation).
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: Typed flags support consistent triage while leaving legal interpretation to qualified people.

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": <Source excerpts, adaptation, and rights checklist>, "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)
{
  "protected_character_present": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the adaptation retain a character identified as protected in the checklist?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "A listed protected character appears retained.",
      "false": "No listed protected character appears retained."
    }
  },
  "distinctive_scene_present": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the adaptation retain a scene identified as distinctive in the checklist?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "A listed distinctive scene appears retained.",
      "false": "No listed distinctive scene appears retained."
    }
  },
  "permission_documented": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the supplied material document permission for the identified elements?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The supplied material documents relevant permission.",
      "false": "Relevant permission is not documented in the supplied material."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0527. Workshop Safety Screen

ID: writing-workshop-safety-screen
Sub-discipline: Writing workshops
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste a workshop submission and community guidelines, and Jev checks guideline conditions that organizers combine into a review queue.

Why typed decisions: Consistent flags help facilitators prioritize human review without automating moderation outcomes.

TAM: Global creator community platforms: ~$1B
SAM: Workshop administration tools: ~$80M
SOM: Writing groups and programs: ~$600K

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Workshop Safety Screen" 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 workshop submission and community guidelines, and Jev checks guideline conditions that organizers combine into a review queue.
Discipline: Writing, Poetry & Narrative (Writing workshops).
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: Consistent flags help facilitators prioritize human review without automating moderation outcomes.

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": <Submission text and workshop guidelines>, "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)
{
  "content_warning_match": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the submission match any content-warning trigger listed in the guidelines?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "A listed warning trigger appears present.",
      "false": "No listed warning trigger appears present."
    }
  },
  "privacy_risk": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the submission include personal information prohibited by the guidelines?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Prohibited personal information appears present.",
      "false": "No prohibited personal information appears present."
    }
  },
  "conduct_issue": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the submission appear to violate an explicit conduct rule?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "An explicit conduct rule appears violated.",
      "false": "No explicit conduct rule appears violated."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0528. Synopsis Promise Check

ID: writing-synopsis-promise-check
Sub-discipline: Book marketing
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste a novel synopsis and manuscript excerpt, and Jev checks whether promised genre, protagonist, and stakes are supported before rules flag mismatches.

Why typed decisions: Binary promise checks are easier to act on than subjective generated marketing advice.

TAM: Global book marketing tools: ~$600M
SAM: Author positioning software: ~$60M
SOM: Authors and small presses: ~$700K

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Synopsis Promise Check" 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 novel synopsis and manuscript excerpt, and Jev checks whether promised genre, protagonist, and stakes are supported before rules flag mismatches.
Discipline: Writing, Poetry & Narrative (Book marketing).
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: Binary promise checks are easier to act on than subjective generated marketing advice.

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": <Synopsis and manuscript excerpt>, "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)
{
  "genre_supported": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the excerpt support the genre signaled by the synopsis?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The excerpt contains recognizable signals of the stated genre.",
      "false": "The excerpt does not support the stated genre."
    }
  },
  "protagonist_match": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the synopsis accurately describe the protagonist's role in the excerpt?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The excerpt supports the synopsis's protagonist description.",
      "false": "The description conflicts with the excerpt."
    }
  },
  "stakes_supported": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Are the synopsis's central stakes evident in the supplied excerpt?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The excerpt supports the stated central stakes.",
      "false": "The stated stakes are not supported by the excerpt."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0529. Branch Logic Sentinel

ID: writing-branch-logic-sentinel
Sub-discipline: Interactive fiction
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste branching narrative data and design constraints, and Jev checks reachability, choice consequence, and ending conditions that code combines into build warnings.

Why typed decisions: Typed condition results map directly to validation rules and avoid untestable prose feedback.

TAM: Global interactive narrative tools: ~$400M
SAM: Branching story validation: ~$40M
SOM: Narrative game teams: ~$500K

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Branch Logic Sentinel" 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 branching narrative data and design constraints, and Jev checks reachability, choice consequence, and ending conditions that code combines into build warnings.
Discipline: Writing, Poetry & Narrative (Interactive fiction).
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: Typed condition results map directly to validation rules and avoid untestable prose feedback.

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": <Branch graph JSON and design constraints>, "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)
{
  "all_nodes_reachable": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Can every required story node be reached from the start node?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Every required node is reachable.",
      "false": "At least one required node is unreachable."
    }
  },
  "choices_change_state": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Do choices alter a tracked state or route?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Choices produce a state or route difference.",
      "false": "A choice has no discernible tracked effect."
    }
  },
  "endings_terminate": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does each ending terminate or intentionally loop as specified?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Ending behavior matches the supplied specification.",
      "false": "An ending has an unspecified continuation or loop."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0530. Stage Direction Audit

ID: writing-stage-direction-audit
Sub-discipline: Playwriting
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste a play scene and production constraints, and Jev checks staging, cast, and prop conditions that rules combine into a rehearsal-readiness flag.

Why typed decisions: Concrete checks surface production constraints without adding creative text to the script.

TAM: Global theatre production software: ~$500M
SAM: Script production planning: ~$50M
SOM: Small theatre companies: ~$500K

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Stage Direction Audit" 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 play scene and production constraints, and Jev checks staging, cast, and prop conditions that rules combine into a rehearsal-readiness flag.
Discipline: Writing, Poetry & Narrative (Playwriting).
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: Concrete checks surface production constraints without adding creative text to the script.

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": <Play scene and production constraints>, "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)
{
  "cast_available": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Can the scene be performed using only the listed available cast?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "All roles can be covered by the available cast.",
      "false": "The scene requires an unavailable performer."
    }
  },
  "props_available": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Can the scene use only props listed as available?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "All required props are available.",
      "false": "At least one required prop is unavailable."
    }
  },
  "staging_feasible": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the scene fit the supplied staging limits?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Actions fit the stated stage and staging limits.",
      "false": "An action conflicts with a stated staging limit."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0531. Memoir Fact Boundary

ID: writing-memoir-fact-boundary
Sub-discipline: Memoir writing
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste a memoir passage and fact-check notes, and Jev checks attribution, certainty, and source conditions that code combines into verification tasks.

Why typed decisions: Separate factual-risk flags can guide review without pretending to establish what happened.

TAM: Global nonfiction writing tools: ~$800M
SAM: Memoir verification tools: ~$40M
SOM: Memoirists and editors: ~$400K

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Memoir Fact Boundary" 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 memoir passage and fact-check notes, and Jev checks attribution, certainty, and source conditions that code combines into verification tasks.
Discipline: Writing, Poetry & Narrative (Memoir writing).
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: Separate factual-risk flags can guide review without pretending to establish what happened.

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": <Memoir passage and fact-check 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)
{
  "source_attached": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does each externally verifiable claim have a supplied source?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Claims have corresponding supplied sources.",
      "false": "At least one claim lacks a supplied source."
    }
  },
  "memory_marked": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Are uncertain recollections marked as uncertain in the passage?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Uncertain recollections are qualified.",
      "false": "An uncertain recollection is stated as certain."
    }
  },
  "attribution_clear": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Are quoted or paraphrased statements attributed as required by the notes?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Attribution matches the supplied requirements.",
      "false": "A statement lacks required attribution."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0532. Poem Form Sentinel

ID: writing-poem-form-sentinel
Sub-discipline: Formal poetry
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste a poem and selected form rules, and Jev checks meter, rhyme, and stanza conditions that a rule set combines into a form-compliance result.

Why typed decisions: Discrete checks let poets see which formal constraints hold without receiving generated verse.

TAM: Global poetry tools: ~$300M
SAM: Formal verse utilities: ~$25M
SOM: Poets teaching or writing forms: ~$300K

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Poem Form Sentinel" 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 poem and selected form rules, and Jev checks meter, rhyme, and stanza conditions that a rule set combines into a form-compliance result.
Discipline: Writing, Poetry & Narrative (Formal poetry).
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: Discrete checks let poets see which formal constraints hold without receiving generated verse.

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": <Poem text and selected form specification>, "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)
{
  "stanza_pattern_match": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the stanza structure match the selected form specification?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Stanza structure matches the supplied pattern.",
      "false": "Stanza structure departs from the supplied pattern."
    }
  },
  "rhyme_pattern_match": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the rhyme pattern match the selected form specification?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Rhyme pattern matches the supplied scheme.",
      "false": "Rhyme pattern departs from the supplied scheme."
    }
  },
  "meter_pattern_match": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the poem meet the supplied meter requirement?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Meter meets the stated requirement.",
      "false": "Meter does not meet the stated requirement."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0533. Research Scene Verifier

ID: writing-research-scene-verifier
Sub-discipline: Historical fiction
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste a scene and research notes, and Jev checks period, location, and material-culture claims that code combines into a verification queue.

Why typed decisions: Condition-level flags keep research review focused and avoid unsupported historical explanations.

TAM: Global publishing research tools: ~$200M
SAM: Historical fiction fact-checking: ~$20M
SOM: Historical fiction editors: ~$250K

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Research Scene Verifier" 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 scene and research notes, and Jev checks period, location, and material-culture claims that code combines into a verification queue.
Discipline: Writing, Poetry & Narrative (Historical fiction).
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: Condition-level flags keep research review focused and avoid unsupported historical explanations.

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": <Scene excerpt and research 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)
{
  "period_consistent": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the scene avoid contradicting the supplied period facts?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "No supplied period fact is contradicted.",
      "false": "At least one supplied period fact is contradicted."
    }
  },
  "location_consistent": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the scene fit the supplied location facts?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Details fit the supplied location facts.",
      "false": "A detail conflicts with the supplied location facts."
    }
  },
  "object_date_consistent": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Are mentioned objects consistent with the supplied dates?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Objects fit the supplied date range.",
      "false": "An object appears inconsistent with the supplied date range."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0534. Content Note Mapper

ID: writing-content-note-mapper
Sub-discipline: Publishing operations
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste a manuscript excerpt and publisher content-note policy, and Jev checks each listed trigger that rules combine into a note-review checklist.

Why typed decisions: A consistent trigger checklist is more useful than generated warnings that may be incomplete or inconsistent.

TAM: Global publishing workflow software: ~$700M
SAM: Content review systems: ~$70M
SOM: Publishers and literary platforms: ~$600K

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Content Note Mapper" 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 manuscript excerpt and publisher content-note policy, and Jev checks each listed trigger that rules combine into a note-review checklist.
Discipline: Writing, Poetry & Narrative (Publishing operations).
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: A consistent trigger checklist is more useful than generated warnings that may be incomplete or inconsistent.

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": <Manuscript excerpt and note policy>, "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)
{
  "violence_trigger": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the excerpt meet the policy's violence-note trigger?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The policy's violence trigger appears present.",
      "false": "The policy's violence trigger does not appear present."
    }
  },
  "self_harm_trigger": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the excerpt meet the policy's self-harm-note trigger?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The policy's self-harm trigger appears present.",
      "false": "The policy's self-harm trigger does not appear present."
    }
  },
  "sexual_content_trigger": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the excerpt meet the policy's sexual-content-note trigger?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The policy's sexual-content trigger appears present.",
      "false": "The policy's sexual-content trigger does not appear present."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0535. Opening Page Hook

ID: writing-opening-page-hook
Sub-discipline: Novel craft
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste a novel's opening pages and its intended premise, and Jev checks hook, orientation, and premise-signal conditions that rules combine into a submission-readiness gate.

Why typed decisions: Independent signals offer a repeatable screening aid without manufacturing a replacement opening.

TAM: Global fiction development tools: ~$900M
SAM: Opening-page assessment: ~$45M
SOM: Agents and writing groups: ~$500K

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Opening Page Hook" 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 novel's opening pages and its intended premise, and Jev checks hook, orientation, and premise-signal conditions that rules combine into a submission-readiness gate.
Discipline: Writing, Poetry & Narrative (Novel craft).
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: Independent signals offer a repeatable screening aid without manufacturing a replacement opening.

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": <Opening pages and intended premise>, "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)
{
  "central_tension_present": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is a source of tension established in the opening pages?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "A discernible tension is established.",
      "false": "No discernible tension is established."
    }
  },
  "reader_orientation_present": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Can a reader identify the immediate situation and viewpoint?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The immediate situation and viewpoint are discernible.",
      "false": "The situation or viewpoint is not discernible."
    }
  },
  "premise_signal_present": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Do the pages signal an element of the stated premise?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "At least one stated premise element is signaled.",
      "false": "No stated premise element is signaled."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0536. Series Bible Guard

ID: writing-series-bible-guard
Sub-discipline: TV writing
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste a series bible and episode outline, and Jev checks character, setting, and format conditions that code combines into a bible-compliance report.

Why typed decisions: Typed checks make recurring series constraints searchable and consistently enforceable.

TAM: Global TV development software: ~$800M
SAM: Series bible tools: ~$80M
SOM: TV writing rooms: ~$900K

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Series Bible Guard" 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 series bible and episode outline, and Jev checks character, setting, and format conditions that code combines into a bible-compliance report.
Discipline: Writing, Poetry & Narrative (TV writing).
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: Typed checks make recurring series constraints searchable and consistently enforceable.

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": <Series bible and episode outline>, "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)
{
  "character_arc_compatible": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the episode fit established character status and arc constraints?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "No stated character constraint is contradicted.",
      "false": "At least one character constraint is contradicted."
    }
  },
  "setting_rules_compatible": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the episode obey the series' setting rules?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "No stated setting rule is contradicted.",
      "false": "At least one setting rule is contradicted."
    }
  },
  "format_compatible": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the outline fit the stated episode format requirements?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The outline meets the stated format requirements.",
      "false": "The outline conflicts with a stated format requirement."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0537. Translation Constraint Check

ID: writing-translation-constraint-check
Sub-discipline: Literary translation
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste a source passage, translated passage, and translation brief, and Jev checks meaning, register, and required-term conditions that code combines into an editor's review queue.

Why typed decisions: Independent preservation checks reveal where human comparison is needed without generating replacement translations.

TAM: Global translation technology: ~$1.5B
SAM: Literary translation QA: ~$75M
SOM: Translation editors and presses: ~$500K

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Translation Constraint Check" 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 source passage, translated passage, and translation brief, and Jev checks meaning, register, and required-term conditions that code combines into an editor's review queue.
Discipline: Writing, Poetry & Narrative (Literary translation).
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: Independent preservation checks reveal where human comparison is needed without generating replacement translations.

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": <Source, translation, and translation brief>, "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)
{
  "core_meaning_preserved": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the translation preserve the source's central meaning?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The central meaning is preserved.",
      "false": "The central meaning appears altered or omitted."
    }
  },
  "register_preserved": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the translation follow the brief's register requirement?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Register fits the stated requirement.",
      "false": "Register conflicts with the stated requirement."
    }
  },
  "required_terms_used": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Are the brief's required terms used where applicable?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Applicable required terms are present.",
      "false": "An applicable required term is missing or replaced."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0538. Narrator Reliability Probe

ID: writing-narrator-reliability-probe
Sub-discipline: Narrative voice
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste a narrated passage and the story's known facts, and Jev checks knowledge, contradiction, and self-awareness conditions that rules combine into a reliability review flag.

Why typed decisions: Explicit evidence checks help editors investigate narrator reliability without imposing an interpretation.

TAM: Global fiction editing tools: ~$500M
SAM: Narrative analysis software: ~$35M
SOM: Editors and advanced writers: ~$350K

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Narrator Reliability Probe" 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 narrated passage and the story's known facts, and Jev checks knowledge, contradiction, and self-awareness conditions that rules combine into a reliability review flag.
Discipline: Writing, Poetry & Narrative (Narrative voice).
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 evidence checks help editors investigate narrator reliability without imposing an interpretation.

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": <Narrated passage and known story facts>, "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)
{
  "knowledge_limit_observed": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the narrator stay within their stated knowledge limits?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The narration fits the stated knowledge limits.",
      "false": "The narrator reports information outside those limits."
    }
  },
  "fact_conflict_present": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the narration conflict with a supplied established fact?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "A conflict with an established fact appears.",
      "false": "No conflict with supplied facts appears."
    }
  },
  "self_awareness_signaled": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the passage signal awareness of the narrator's own possible bias?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The passage signals possible bias or limited perspective.",
      "false": "No such self-awareness is signaled."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0539. Scene Cut Selector

ID: writing-scene-cut-selector
Sub-discipline: Editing and revision
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste two versions of a scene and revision goals, and Jev checks whether each version preserves essential beats, removes flagged material, and meets length constraints before rules select a candidate.

Why typed decisions: Independent goal checks make side-by-side revision decisions consistent and measurable.

TAM: Global editing software: ~$1.2B
SAM: Revision comparison tools: ~$60M
SOM: Freelance writers and editors: ~$600K

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Scene Cut Selector" 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 two versions of a scene and revision goals, and Jev checks whether each version preserves essential beats, removes flagged material, and meets length constraints before rules select a candidate.
Discipline: Writing, Poetry & Narrative (Editing and revision).
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: Independent goal checks make side-by-side revision decisions consistent and measurable.

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": <Two scene drafts and revision goals>, "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)
{
  "essential_beats_preserved": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the version preserve all beats marked essential in the goals?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "All marked essential beats remain.",
      "false": "At least one marked essential beat is missing."
    }
  },
  "flagged_material_removed": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the version remove material explicitly marked for removal?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "All marked material is removed.",
      "false": "At least one marked item remains."
    }
  },
  "length_target_met": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the version meet the stated length target?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The version is within the target range.",
      "false": "The version falls outside the target range."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0540. Grant Narrative Fit

ID: writing-grant-narrative-fit
Sub-discipline: Arts funding
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste a project narrative and grant criteria, and Jev checks eligibility, required components, and word-limit conditions that code combines into a submission checklist.

Why typed decisions: Clear compliance decisions reduce avoidable application errors without generating grant prose.

TAM: Global arts administration tools: ~$400M
SAM: Grant application workflow: ~$40M
SOM: Arts organizations and writers: ~$400K

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Grant Narrative Fit" 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 project narrative and grant criteria, and Jev checks eligibility, required components, and word-limit conditions that code combines into a submission checklist.
Discipline: Writing, Poetry & Narrative (Arts funding).
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: Clear compliance decisions reduce avoidable application errors without generating grant prose.

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": <Project narrative and grant criteria>, "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)
{
  "eligibility_evident": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the narrative establish the eligibility conditions listed in the criteria?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The listed eligibility conditions are addressed.",
      "false": "At least one listed eligibility condition is unaddressed."
    }
  },
  "required_components_present": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Are all required narrative components present?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "All required components appear present.",
      "false": "At least one required component appears missing."
    }
  },
  "word_limit_met": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is the narrative within the stated word limit?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The narrative meets the word limit.",
      "false": "The narrative exceeds the word limit."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0541. Opening Page Sorter

ID: writing-opening-page-sorter
Sub-discipline: Novel development
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste several opening pages and Jev scores and ranks them for hook, clarity, and voice using weights you set.

Why typed decisions: Comparable scores make it easy to shortlist openings without treating generated feedback as a verdict.

TAM: $2B global writing software market
SAM: $400M fiction-development tools
SOM: $2M initial indie-writer segment

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Opening Page Sorter" 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 several opening pages and Jev scores and ranks them for hook, clarity, and voice using weights you set.
Discipline: Writing, Poetry & Narrative (Novel development).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: Comparable scores make it easy to shortlist openings without treating generated feedback as a verdict.

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": <Opening-page excerpts and project brief>, "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)
{
  "hook": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How strongly does this opening create a reason to keep reading?",
    "criteria": [
      "No clear pull",
      "A faint point of interest",
      "A compelling question or tension",
      "An immediate, distinctive pull"
    ]
  },
  "clarity": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How readily can a reader understand the scene and its stakes?",
    "criteria": [
      "Frequently confusing",
      "Understandable with notable gaps",
      "Clear with minor uncertainty",
      "Immediately clear and grounded"
    ]
  },
  "voice": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How distinctive and consistent is the prose voice?",
    "criteria": [
      "Generic or inconsistent",
      "Some signs of a voice",
      "Distinct and mostly consistent",
      "Highly distinctive and assured"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0542. Poem Sequence Map

ID: writing-poem-sequence-map
Sub-discipline: Poetry collections
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste poem titles and texts, then Jev ranks possible sequences by tonal progression, thematic cohesion, and variety with your chosen weights.

Why typed decisions: A weighted ranking helps poets compare arrangements while leaving the final artistic order in their hands.

TAM: $500M poetry publishing and tools market
SAM: $80M collection-planning segment
SOM: $500K poetry-workshop and indie segment

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Poem Sequence Map" 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 poem titles and texts, then Jev ranks possible sequences by tonal progression, thematic cohesion, and variety with your chosen weights.
Discipline: Writing, Poetry & Narrative (Poetry collections).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: A weighted ranking helps poets compare arrangements while leaving the final artistic order in their hands.

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": <Poem texts, titles, and collection theme>, "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)
{
  "tonal_progression": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How well does this sequence create a satisfying tonal journey?",
    "criteria": [
      "Flat or jarring",
      "Some movement, unevenly paced",
      "Clear and mostly effective arc",
      "Nuanced, purposeful tonal journey"
    ]
  },
  "thematic_cohesion": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How strongly do the poems belong in the same collection?",
    "criteria": [
      "Little shared territory",
      "Loose or inconsistent connection",
      "Clear shared concerns",
      "Rich, resonant collection-wide cohesion"
    ]
  },
  "variety": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How well does the sequence balance different forms, subjects, and energies?",
    "criteria": [
      "Repetitive throughout",
      "Some contrast, mostly similar",
      "Good variety with a few clusters",
      "Distinctive variety with purposeful echoes"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0543. Scene Cut Compass

ID: writing-scene-cut-compass
Sub-discipline: Screenwriting
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste a screenplay scene and its surrounding scene list, then Jev scores candidate cut points for momentum, continuity, and emotional landing.

Why typed decisions: Consistent score comparisons help writers spot low-impact scenes without outsourcing editorial judgment.

TAM: $1B screenwriting software market
SAM: $150M screenplay revision tools
SOM: $1M independent screenwriter segment

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Scene Cut Compass" 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 screenplay scene and its surrounding scene list, then Jev scores candidate cut points for momentum, continuity, and emotional landing.
Discipline: Writing, Poetry & Narrative (Screenwriting).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: Consistent score comparisons help writers spot low-impact scenes without outsourcing editorial 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": <Scene text, neighboring scenes, and story goal>, "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)
{
  "momentum": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How much does this scene advance the story at its proposed length?",
    "criteria": [
      "Mostly stalls",
      "Adds limited forward motion",
      "Advances the story clearly",
      "Creates strong, efficient momentum"
    ]
  },
  "continuity": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How well does the scene connect to what comes before and after?",
    "criteria": [
      "Disrupts continuity",
      "Connection is weak or awkward",
      "Connects clearly with minor bumps",
      "Feels necessary and seamless"
    ]
  },
  "emotional_landing": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How satisfying is the scene's ending as a transition or beat?",
    "criteria": [
      "No meaningful landing",
      "A weak or unclear landing",
      "A clear, serviceable landing",
      "A resonant landing that propels the next beat"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0544. Dialogue Voice Ledger

ID: writing-dialogue-voice-ledger-1
Sub-discipline: Character dialogue
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste dialogue samples for several characters and Jev scores each line for voice distinction, character fit, and subtext using your weights.

Why typed decisions: Typed comparisons reveal likely voice collisions without generating replacement dialogue.

TAM: $1B screenwriting and story tools
SAM: $120M dialogue revision segment
SOM: $750K screenwriting teams and schools

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Dialogue Voice Ledger" 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 dialogue samples for several characters and Jev scores each line for voice distinction, character fit, and subtext using your weights.
Discipline: Writing, Poetry & Narrative (Character dialogue).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: Typed comparisons reveal likely voice collisions without generating replacement dialogue.

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": <Dialogue excerpts and character profiles>, "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)
{
  "voice_distinction": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How distinguishable is this character's dialogue from the others?",
    "criteria": [
      "Interchangeable with others",
      "Occasionally distinct",
      "Usually recognizable",
      "Consistently unmistakable"
    ]
  },
  "character_fit": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How well does the line fit the character's established traits and knowledge?",
    "criteria": [
      "Clearly out of character",
      "Some mismatch or uncertainty",
      "Mostly fits established characterization",
      "Precisely fits character and context"
    ]
  },
  "subtext": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How effectively does the line imply meaning beyond its literal words?",
    "criteria": [
      "Entirely literal or unclear",
      "Hints at subtext weakly",
      "Subtext is legible and useful",
      "Rich subtext with controlled restraint"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0545. Questline Priority Grid

ID: writing-questline-priority-grid
Sub-discipline: Narrative design
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste quest summaries and design goals, then Jev ranks quests by player agency, story relevance, and implementation clarity using adjustable weights.

Why typed decisions: Comparable scores help teams prioritize narrative work without asking a model to invent quests.

TAM: $2B narrative game development tools
SAM: $300M quest-planning software segment
SOM: $2M indie game studio segment

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Questline Priority Grid" 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 quest summaries and design goals, then Jev ranks quests by player agency, story relevance, and implementation clarity using adjustable weights.
Discipline: Writing, Poetry & Narrative (Narrative design).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: Comparable scores help teams prioritize narrative work without asking a model to invent quests.

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": <Quest summaries, player role, and design goals>, "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)
{
  "player_agency": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How much meaningful choice does the quest give the player?",
    "criteria": [
      "No meaningful choice",
      "Choice is mostly cosmetic",
      "Several consequential options",
      "Agency meaningfully shapes outcomes"
    ]
  },
  "story_relevance": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How important is the quest to the larger narrative?",
    "criteria": [
      "Detached from the main experience",
      "Adds minor context",
      "Advances a substantial story thread",
      "Essential to the central narrative"
    ]
  },
  "implementation_clarity": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How clearly can a team identify the quest's required beats and outcomes?",
    "criteria": [
      "Ambiguous or incomplete",
      "Major details remain unclear",
      "Mostly actionable with gaps",
      "Specific, testable, and actionable"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0546. Synopsis Signal Sorter

ID: writing-synopsis-signal-sorter-1
Sub-discipline: Book proposals
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste several book synopses and a target readership, then Jev ranks them for premise clarity, audience fit, and distinctiveness with chosen weights.

Why typed decisions: A scorecard makes synopsis comparisons repeatable without replacing the writer's pitch language.

TAM: $2B publishing and author services market
SAM: $250M proposal and submission tools
SOM: $1M agented and indie author segment

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Synopsis Signal Sorter" 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 several book synopses and a target readership, then Jev ranks them for premise clarity, audience fit, and distinctiveness with chosen weights.
Discipline: Writing, Poetry & Narrative (Book proposals).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: A scorecard makes synopsis comparisons repeatable without replacing the writer's pitch language.

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": <Synopsis drafts and target readership>, "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)
{
  "premise_clarity": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How clearly does the synopsis communicate the book's central premise?",
    "criteria": [
      "Premise is hard to identify",
      "Premise emerges but remains vague",
      "Premise is clear and specific",
      "Premise is immediate and sharply defined"
    ]
  },
  "audience_fit": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How well does this synopsis fit the stated readership?",
    "criteria": [
      "Poor fit",
      "Some relevant elements, major mismatch",
      "Strong overall fit",
      "Precisely suited to the readership"
    ]
  },
  "distinctiveness": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How distinctive is the premise among comparable books?",
    "criteria": [
      "Highly familiar",
      "A few familiar differentiators",
      "Several notable distinctions",
      "Memorable and clearly differentiated"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0547. Ending Impact Bench

ID: writing-ending-impact-bench
Sub-discipline: Story revision
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste alternate endings with a story summary, then Jev scores each for setup payoff, emotional resonance, and thematic closure using your weights.

Why typed decisions: Ranked dimensions clarify tradeoffs between endings without pretending there is one objectively correct conclusion.

TAM: $2B writing and publishing tools
SAM: $200M story revision market
SOM: $800K writers' group and workshop segment

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Ending Impact Bench" 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 alternate endings with a story summary, then Jev scores each for setup payoff, emotional resonance, and thematic closure using your weights.
Discipline: Writing, Poetry & Narrative (Story revision).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: Ranked dimensions clarify tradeoffs between endings without pretending there is one objectively correct conclusion.

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": <Ending drafts and preceding story summary>, "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)
{
  "setup_payoff": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How well does the ending pay off earlier story elements?",
    "criteria": [
      "Contradicts or ignores setup",
      "Pays off little of the setup",
      "Pays off key elements",
      "Makes earlier details feel purposeful and earned"
    ]
  },
  "emotional_resonance": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How strongly is the ending likely to resonate emotionally?",
    "criteria": [
      "Little emotional effect",
      "Some feeling, weakly supported",
      "Earned and affecting",
      "Powerful, specific, and lasting"
    ]
  },
  "thematic_closure": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How well does the ending complete or productively complicate the story's themes?",
    "criteria": [
      "Themes are abandoned",
      "Themes receive a shallow answer",
      "Themes are meaningfully addressed",
      "Themes gain a resonant, nuanced conclusion"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0548. Adaptation Fit Board

ID: writing-adaptation-fit-board
Sub-discipline: Book-to-screen adaptation
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste source-story passages and adaptation candidates, then Jev ranks candidates for visual potential, dramatic economy, and fidelity to the source's core.

Why typed decisions: Weighted scores expose adaptation tradeoffs while keeping creative transformation decisions with the team.

TAM: $1B screen adaptation and development market
SAM: $150M adaptation evaluation tools
SOM: $1M independent production companies

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Adaptation Fit Board" 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 source-story passages and adaptation candidates, then Jev ranks candidates for visual potential, dramatic economy, and fidelity to the source's core.
Discipline: Writing, Poetry & Narrative (Book-to-screen adaptation).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: Weighted scores expose adaptation tradeoffs while keeping creative transformation decisions with the team.

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": <Source passages, adaptation candidates, and adaptation brief>, "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)
{
  "visual_potential": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How readily could this material become compelling screen action?",
    "criteria": [
      "Mostly internal or difficult to stage",
      "Some stageable moments",
      "Clear visual and playable moments",
      "Distinctive screen-ready action"
    ]
  },
  "dramatic_economy": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How efficiently does the candidate deliver conflict and character change?",
    "criteria": [
      "Little dramatic movement",
      "Movement is slow or diffuse",
      "Clear conflict and change",
      "Highly efficient, concentrated drama"
    ]
  },
  "core_fidelity": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How well does the candidate preserve the source's central meaning?",
    "criteria": [
      "Loses the central meaning",
      "Preserves surface elements only",
      "Preserves the central meaning",
      "Preserves meaning while finding a strong adaptation form"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0549. Workshop Submission Sort

ID: writing-workshop-submission-sort
Sub-discipline: Writing workshops
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste workshop submissions and the session's learning goals, then Jev ranks pieces for discussion potential, craft focus, and fit using facilitator-set weights.

Why typed decisions: A transparent scorecard helps facilitators shape a balanced session without generating critique.

TAM: $1B creative education market
SAM: $120M writing workshop software
SOM: $600K writing programs and retreat segment

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Workshop Submission Sort" 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 workshop submissions and the session's learning goals, then Jev ranks pieces for discussion potential, craft focus, and fit using facilitator-set weights.
Discipline: Writing, Poetry & Narrative (Writing workshops).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: A transparent scorecard helps facilitators shape a balanced session without generating critique.

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": <Submission texts and workshop learning goals>, "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)
{
  "discussion_potential": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How much meaningful discussion could this piece support?",
    "criteria": [
      "Offers little discussion material",
      "One narrow point for discussion",
      "Several useful discussion paths",
      "Rich, varied discussion potential"
    ]
  },
  "craft_focus": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How clearly does the piece surface craft choices relevant to the session?",
    "criteria": [
      "Choices are difficult to identify",
      "A few choices are visible",
      "Several clear craft choices",
      "Distinct choices closely match the session focus"
    ]
  },
  "session_fit": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How well does the piece fit the stated learning goals?",
    "criteria": [
      "Poor fit",
      "Limited connection",
      "Good overall fit",
      "Directly advances the session goals"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0550. Character Arc Tuner

ID: writing-character-arc-tuner
Sub-discipline: Character development
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste character profiles and arc outlines, then Jev ranks arcs for motivation, change, and relationship to the plot using your weights.

Why typed decisions: Comparable scores help writers diagnose uneven arcs without prescribing new plot or character text.

TAM: $2B writing and storytelling tools
SAM: $250M character development software
SOM: $1M fiction and game-writing teams

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Character Arc Tuner" 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 character profiles and arc outlines, then Jev ranks arcs for motivation, change, and relationship to the plot using your weights.
Discipline: Writing, Poetry & Narrative (Character development).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: Comparable scores help writers diagnose uneven arcs without prescribing new plot or character text.

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": <Character profiles, arc outlines, and plot summary>, "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)
{
  "motivation": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How clearly does the arc's driving motivation emerge?",
    "criteria": [
      "No clear motivation",
      "Motivation is inconsistent",
      "Motivation is clear and plausible",
      "Motivation is specific and compelling"
    ]
  },
  "change": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How convincingly does the character change across the arc?",
    "criteria": [
      "No discernible change",
      "Change is abrupt or unsupported",
      "Change is gradual and supported",
      "Change is nuanced, earned, and consequential"
    ]
  },
  "plot_integration": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How closely does the arc connect to the main plot?",
    "criteria": [
      "Detached from the plot",
      "Occasionally intersects the plot",
      "Meaningfully advances or complicates the plot",
      "Indispensable to the plot's turning points"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0551. Logline Clarity Meter

ID: writing-logline-clarity-meter
Sub-discipline: Film pitching
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste alternate loglines and a film premise, then Jev ranks them for protagonist clarity, conflict, and hook strength with weights you control.

Why typed decisions: Typed scores compare pitch essentials directly without rewriting a creator's logline.

TAM: $1B film development market
SAM: $100M pitching and submission tools
SOM: $500K screenwriter and film-school segment

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Logline Clarity Meter" 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 alternate loglines and a film premise, then Jev ranks them for protagonist clarity, conflict, and hook strength with weights you control.
Discipline: Writing, Poetry & Narrative (Film pitching).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: Typed scores compare pitch essentials directly without rewriting a creator's logline.

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": <Logline candidates and film premise>, "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)
{
  "protagonist_clarity": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How clearly does the logline identify its protagonist?",
    "criteria": [
      "Protagonist is missing or unclear",
      "Protagonist is only partly defined",
      "Protagonist is clear",
      "Protagonist is vivid and immediately legible"
    ]
  },
  "conflict": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How clearly does the logline express the central conflict?",
    "criteria": [
      "No discernible conflict",
      "Conflict is vague",
      "Conflict is clear and consequential",
      "Conflict is precise, urgent, and specific"
    ]
  },
  "hook_strength": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How compelling and distinctive is the logline's premise?",
    "criteria": [
      "No evident hook",
      "Familiar or weak hook",
      "Compelling hook",
      "Distinctive hook with strong appeal"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0552. Branching Choice Audit

ID: writing-branching-choice-audit
Sub-discipline: Interactive fiction
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste branching dialogue or choice nodes, then Jev ranks options for meaningful agency, character consistency, and downstream consequence with adjustable weights.

Why typed decisions: Scored comparisons flag choices that feel cosmetic while preserving authors' control over branching design.

TAM: $2B narrative game tools market
SAM: $250M interactive narrative design
SOM: $1.5M indie narrative studio segment

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Branching Choice Audit" 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 branching dialogue or choice nodes, then Jev ranks options for meaningful agency, character consistency, and downstream consequence with adjustable weights.
Discipline: Writing, Poetry & Narrative (Interactive fiction).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: Scored comparisons flag choices that feel cosmetic while preserving authors' control over branching design.

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": <Choice nodes, branch outcomes, and character context>, "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)
{
  "meaningful_agency": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How meaningfully can the player influence events through this choice?",
    "criteria": [
      "No effective agency",
      "Choice changes presentation only",
      "Choice changes a meaningful detail",
      "Choice substantially shapes the experience"
    ]
  },
  "character_consistency": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How well do the options fit the player's established character and situation?",
    "criteria": [
      "Options break context",
      "One or more options feel implausible",
      "Options fit the context",
      "Options deepen character while fitting the context"
    ]
  },
  "downstream_consequence": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How clearly and proportionately do outcomes follow from the choice?",
    "criteria": [
      "No apparent consequence",
      "Consequence is confusing or arbitrary",
      "Outcome is clear and proportionate",
      "Outcome is clear, consequential, and thematically apt"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0553. Memoir Scene Selector

ID: writing-memoir-scene-selector
Sub-discipline: Memoir writing
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste memoir scene candidates and a chapter purpose, then Jev ranks them for emotional specificity, narrative relevance, and reflective depth using your weights.

Why typed decisions: A score-based shortlist helps memoirists choose scenes without asking software to interpret or rewrite lived experience.

TAM: $1B memoir and nonfiction publishing tools
SAM: $100M memoir coaching and planning
SOM: $750K memoir workshops and indie writers

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Memoir Scene Selector" 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 memoir scene candidates and a chapter purpose, then Jev ranks them for emotional specificity, narrative relevance, and reflective depth using your weights.
Discipline: Writing, Poetry & Narrative (Memoir writing).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: A score-based shortlist helps memoirists choose scenes without asking software to interpret or rewrite lived experience.

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": <Memoir scenes and chapter purpose>, "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)
{
  "emotional_specificity": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How specifically does the scene convey its emotional experience?",
    "criteria": [
      "Emotion is absent or generic",
      "Emotion is stated with few details",
      "Emotion is grounded in specific details",
      "Emotion is vivid, nuanced, and embodied"
    ]
  },
  "narrative_relevance": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How much does the scene contribute to the chapter's purpose?",
    "criteria": [
      "Unrelated to the chapter",
      "Adds limited context",
      "Contributes clearly to the chapter",
      "Essential to the chapter's central movement"
    ]
  },
  "reflective_depth": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How effectively does the scene connect lived experience to reflection?",
    "criteria": [
      "No reflection or connection",
      "Reflection is generic or detached",
      "Reflection is relevant and considered",
      "Reflection adds nuanced meaning without flattening the scene"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0554. Setting Detail Curator

ID: writing-setting-detail-curator
Sub-discipline: Worldbuilding
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste setting details and a scene summary, then Jev ranks details for atmosphere, story relevance, and internal consistency with adjustable weights.

Why typed decisions: Ranking candidate details helps writers retain evocative material that serves the scene rather than merely adding lore.

TAM: $2B creative writing and game tools
SAM: $200M worldbuilding software
SOM: $1M fantasy and science-fiction creator segment

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Setting Detail Curator" 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 setting details and a scene summary, then Jev ranks details for atmosphere, story relevance, and internal consistency with adjustable weights.
Discipline: Writing, Poetry & Narrative (Worldbuilding).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: Ranking candidate details helps writers retain evocative material that serves the scene rather than merely adding lore.

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": <Setting notes, scene summary, and world rules>, "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)
{
  "atmosphere": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How strongly does this detail contribute to the intended atmosphere?",
    "criteria": [
      "No atmospheric contribution",
      "Slightly supports the mood",
      "Clearly reinforces the mood",
      "Powerfully establishes a distinctive atmosphere"
    ]
  },
  "story_relevance": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How much does this detail matter to the scene or story?",
    "criteria": [
      "Decorative and unrelated",
      "Adds minor context",
      "Supports action or character",
      "Changes how the scene or story is understood"
    ]
  },
  "internal_consistency": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How well does this detail align with the stated world rules?",
    "criteria": [
      "Contradicts established rules",
      "Creates significant uncertainty",
      "Fits the rules with minor ambiguity",
      "Fits cleanly and reinforces the world's logic"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0555. Verse Revision Radar

ID: writing-verse-revision-radar
Sub-discipline: Poetry craft
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste alternate poem drafts and a revision goal, then Jev ranks them for image coherence, sonic texture, and line-level precision using your weights.

Why typed decisions: Dimension scores let poets compare revisions without reducing a poem to a single generated critique.

TAM: $500M poetry and creative-writing market
SAM: $60M poetry revision tools
SOM: $400K poetry educators and indie poets

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Verse Revision Radar" 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 alternate poem drafts and a revision goal, then Jev ranks them for image coherence, sonic texture, and line-level precision using your weights.
Discipline: Writing, Poetry & Narrative (Poetry craft).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: Dimension scores let poets compare revisions without reducing a poem to a single generated critique.

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": <Poem drafts and revision goal>, "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)
{
  "image_coherence": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How coherently do the poem's images work together?",
    "criteria": [
      "Images feel disconnected",
      "Some images connect, others distract",
      "Images form a clear pattern",
      "Images create a layered, resonant pattern"
    ]
  },
  "sonic_texture": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How effectively does sound support the poem's movement and meaning?",
    "criteria": [
      "Sound feels accidental or distracting",
      "Occasional effective sound choices",
      "Sound generally supports the poem",
      "Sound is controlled, expressive, and integral"
    ]
  },
  "line_precision": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How purposeful and precise are the lines?",
    "criteria": [
      "Many lines feel vague or unnecessary",
      "Several lines could be more exact",
      "Lines are mostly purposeful",
      "Each line feels precise and necessary"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0556. Chapter Transition Finder

ID: writing-chapter-transition-finder
Sub-discipline: Novel structure
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste chapter endings and following openings, then Jev ranks pairings for continuity, forward pull, and tonal transition using weights you set.

Why typed decisions: Pairwise scores help writers compare chapter transitions without automatically changing their prose.

TAM: $2B fiction-writing software market
SAM: $200M novel structure tools
SOM: $900K indie novelists and writing groups

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Chapter Transition Finder" 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 chapter endings and following openings, then Jev ranks pairings for continuity, forward pull, and tonal transition using weights you set.
Discipline: Writing, Poetry & Narrative (Novel structure).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: Pairwise scores help writers compare chapter transitions without automatically changing their prose.

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": <Chapter-ending and opening passages>, "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)
{
  "continuity": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How coherently does the next chapter follow the previous one?",
    "criteria": [
      "Connection is confusing",
      "Connection is loose or abrupt",
      "Connection is clear",
      "Connection feels inevitable yet engaging"
    ]
  },
  "forward_pull": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How strongly does the pairing encourage the reader to continue?",
    "criteria": [
      "Little reason to continue",
      "Mild curiosity",
      "Clear forward pull",
      "Strong unresolved tension or anticipation"
    ]
  },
  "tonal_transition": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How effectively does the pairing manage a change or continuation in tone?",
    "criteria": [
      "Tone clashes unintentionally",
      "Shift is awkward or flat",
      "Tone is handled effectively",
      "Shift or continuity creates deliberate impact"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0557. Audition Scene Assessor

ID: writing-audition-scene-assessor
Sub-discipline: Theatre writing
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste audition scenes and casting needs, then Jev ranks them for playable conflict, role balance, and performance opportunity using adjustable weights.

Why typed decisions: Structured comparisons help theatre teams select scenes suited to performers without generating new material.

TAM: $1B theatre production and education market
SAM: $100M script and audition tools
SOM: $500K theatre schools and companies

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Audition Scene Assessor" 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 audition scenes and casting needs, then Jev ranks them for playable conflict, role balance, and performance opportunity using adjustable weights.
Discipline: Writing, Poetry & Narrative (Theatre writing).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: Structured comparisons help theatre teams select scenes suited to performers without generating new material.

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": <Audition scenes, casting needs, and production context>, "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)
{
  "playable_conflict": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How clearly can performers play the conflict in this scene?",
    "criteria": [
      "No discernible playable conflict",
      "Conflict is mostly implied or static",
      "Conflict is clear and playable",
      "Conflict is active, layered, and playable"
    ]
  },
  "role_balance": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How well are meaningful moments distributed among the roles?",
    "criteria": [
      "One role dominates entirely",
      "Balance is noticeably uneven",
      "Roles have useful, fairly balanced material",
      "Each role has distinct, substantial material"
    ]
  },
  "performance_opportunity": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How much room does the scene give actors to demonstrate range?",
    "criteria": [
      "Little room for expressive choices",
      "One limited performance opportunity",
      "Several useful choices",
      "Rich, varied opportunities for performance"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0558. Narrative Brief Evaluator

ID: writing-narrative-brief-evaluator
Sub-discipline: Narrative production
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste narrative briefs for a project, then Jev ranks them for audience alignment, scope clarity, and emotional direction with producer-controlled weights.

Why typed decisions: Comparable typed scores help teams choose an actionable brief before committing to production work.

TAM: $2B narrative production software
SAM: $250M creative brief and planning tools
SOM: $1.2M game and media production teams

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Narrative Brief Evaluator" 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 narrative briefs for a project, then Jev ranks them for audience alignment, scope clarity, and emotional direction with producer-controlled weights.
Discipline: Writing, Poetry & Narrative (Narrative production).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: Comparable typed scores help teams choose an actionable brief before committing to production work.

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": <Narrative briefs, project goals, and audience profile>, "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)
{
  "audience_alignment": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How well does the brief address the intended audience?",
    "criteria": [
      "Audience is not meaningfully considered",
      "Audience fit is vague",
      "Brief is suited to the audience",
      "Brief is sharply tailored to audience needs"
    ]
  },
  "scope_clarity": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How clearly does the brief define what the narrative must cover?",
    "criteria": [
      "Scope is unclear",
      "Major boundaries are missing",
      "Scope is mostly defined",
      "Scope and boundaries are precise and usable"
    ]
  },
  "emotional_direction": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How clearly does the brief establish the intended emotional experience?",
    "criteria": [
      "No emotional direction",
      "Mood is broad or inconsistent",
      "Emotional direction is clear",
      "Emotional journey is specific and actionable"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0559. Flash Fiction Shortlist

ID: writing-flash-fiction-shortlist
Sub-discipline: Flash fiction
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste flash-fiction drafts and a publication theme, then Jev ranks them for compression, premise impact, and ending resonance using your weights.

Why typed decisions: A weighted shortlist rewards different craft strengths without asking a model to supply the story.

TAM: $500M short-form fiction and publishing market
SAM: $70M flash-fiction submission tools
SOM: $400K literary journals and writing groups

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Flash Fiction Shortlist" 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 flash-fiction drafts and a publication theme, then Jev ranks them for compression, premise impact, and ending resonance using your weights.
Discipline: Writing, Poetry & Narrative (Flash fiction).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: A weighted shortlist rewards different craft strengths without asking a model to supply the story.

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": <Flash-fiction drafts and publication theme>, "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)
{
  "compression": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How efficiently does the draft use its limited space?",
    "criteria": [
      "Much of the text feels expendable",
      "Some compression, with notable slack",
      "Mostly economical and focused",
      "Every element contributes efficiently"
    ]
  },
  "premise_impact": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How strongly does the premise shape the reading experience?",
    "criteria": [
      "Premise is unclear or slight",
      "Premise has limited impact",
      "Premise is clear and engaging",
      "Premise is striking and sustains the whole piece"
    ]
  },
  "ending_resonance": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How strongly does the ending resonate beyond the final line?",
    "criteria": [
      "Ending feels absent or arbitrary",
      "Ending resolves without much resonance",
      "Ending is satisfying and memorable",
      "Ending reframes or deepens the piece"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0560. Series Bible Consistency Scan

ID: writing-series-bible-consistency-scan
Sub-discipline: Serialized fiction
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste episode summaries and series-bible rules, then Jev ranks storylines for continuity, escalation, and character progression using your weights.

Why typed decisions: Dimension-by-dimension scores help serialized teams compare arcs and catch weak progression without generating episodes.

TAM: $2B serialized storytelling market
SAM: $180M series-planning and writers' room tools
SOM: $1M podcast, webfiction, and TV teams

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Series Bible Consistency Scan" 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 episode summaries and series-bible rules, then Jev ranks storylines for continuity, escalation, and character progression using your weights.
Discipline: Writing, Poetry & Narrative (Serialized fiction).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: Dimension-by-dimension scores help serialized teams compare arcs and catch weak progression without generating episodes.

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": <Episode summaries, series bible, and current arc>, "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)
{
  "continuity": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How well does this storyline align with established series facts?",
    "criteria": [
      "Contradicts key facts",
      "Contains notable continuity uncertainty",
      "Mostly aligns with established facts",
      "Consistent and reinforces series logic"
    ]
  },
  "escalation": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How effectively does the storyline build stakes across episodes?",
    "criteria": [
      "Stakes do not develop",
      "Stakes rise inconsistently",
      "Stakes build clearly",
      "Escalation is compelling and well-paced"
    ]
  },
  "character_progression": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How meaningfully does the storyline develop its characters?",
    "criteria": [
      "Characters remain static or regress unintentionally",
      "Change is slight or uneven",
      "Characters develop in clear ways",
      "Progression is earned and affects the series"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0561. Motif Thread Finder

ID: writing-motif-thread-finder
Sub-discipline: Novel revision
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: Paste a chapter and Jev selects which extracted phrase best echoes an earlier motif, or none, so the app can link the original text.

Why typed decisions: Choosing among real phrases preserves the writer’s wording and avoids inventing a motif that is not on the page.

TAM: $2.5B global novel publishing tools
SAM: $420M writing and revision software
SOM: $4M initial indie-author segment

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Motif Thread Finder" 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 chapter and Jev selects which extracted phrase best echoes an earlier motif, or none, so the app can link the original text.
Discipline: Writing, Poetry & Narrative (Novel revision).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: Choosing among real phrases preserves the writer’s wording and avoids inventing a motif that is not on the page.

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": <Chapter text, prior motif phrases, and extracted candidate spans>, "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)
{
  "motif_match": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which candidate phrase most clearly continues the prior motif?",
    "criteria": {
      "candidate_1": "A candidate that meaningfully echoes a prior motif",
      "candidate_2": "A candidate that meaningfully echoes a prior motif",
      "candidate_3": "A candidate that meaningfully echoes a prior motif",
      "none": "No candidate has a meaningful motif connection"
    }
  },
  "echo_strength": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How strongly does the selected phrase echo the motif?",
    "criteria": [
      "No discernible echo",
      "Faint or ambiguous echo",
      "Clear echo",
      "Strong, distinctive echo"
    ]
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0562. Scene Turn Marker

ID: writing-scene-turn-marker
Sub-discipline: Screenwriting
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: Paste a screenplay scene and Jev selects an extracted line or action beat that signals the scene’s turning point, or none.

Why typed decisions: A screenplay editor can highlight the exact beat rather than substitute generated dialogue for the writer’s scene.

TAM: $1.1B global screen production software
SAM: $180M screenwriting and script tools
SOM: $2M independent screenwriter segment

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Scene Turn Marker" 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 screenplay scene and Jev selects an extracted line or action beat that signals the scene’s turning point, or none.
Discipline: Writing, Poetry & Narrative (Screenwriting).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: A screenplay editor can highlight the exact beat rather than substitute generated dialogue for the writer’s scene.

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": <Scene text, extracted dialogue and action spans>, "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)
{
  "turning_point": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which candidate most clearly changes the scene’s direction?",
    "criteria": {
      "candidate_1": "A beat that shifts the scene’s goal, power, or stakes",
      "candidate_2": "A beat that shifts the scene’s goal, power, or stakes",
      "candidate_3": "A beat that shifts the scene’s goal, power, or stakes",
      "none": "No candidate clearly turns the scene"
    }
  },
  "turn_clarity": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How clearly does the selected beat mark a turn?",
    "criteria": [
      "Not a discernible turn",
      "Possible but unclear turn",
      "Clear turn",
      "Defining scene turn"
    ]
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0563. Poem Line Anchor

ID: writing-poem-line-anchor
Sub-discipline: Poetry editing
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: Paste a poem and Jev selects the extracted line that best anchors its central image, or none, for an editor to tag.

Why typed decisions: A precise selection respects the poet’s diction while avoiding an AI-written replacement line.

TAM: $1.7B global poetry and literary publishing
SAM: $95M poetry writing and editing tools
SOM: $1M poetry workshop segment

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Poem Line Anchor" 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 poem and Jev selects the extracted line that best anchors its central image, or none, for an editor to tag.
Discipline: Writing, Poetry & Narrative (Poetry editing).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: A precise selection respects the poet’s diction while avoiding an AI-written replacement line.

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": <Poem text and extracted line candidates>, "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)
{
  "image_anchor": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which candidate line best anchors the poem’s central image?",
    "criteria": {
      "candidate_1": "A line that concentrates or clarifies the central image",
      "candidate_2": "A line that concentrates or clarifies the central image",
      "candidate_3": "A line that concentrates or clarifies the central image",
      "none": "No candidate anchors the central image"
    }
  },
  "image_focus": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How strongly does the selected line focus the central image?",
    "criteria": [
      "Does not focus it",
      "Weakly or indirectly",
      "Clearly",
      "Vividly and decisively"
    ]
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0564. Dialogue Voice Sorter

ID: writing-dialogue-voice-sorter
Sub-discipline: Fiction dialogue
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: Paste a scene and Jev assigns each extracted dialogue line to one of the supplied character voices or none.

Why typed decisions: Selecting a speaker label for existing dialogue is safer than rewriting lines and changing a character’s voice.

TAM: $3B global fiction writing software
SAM: $350M dialogue and manuscript tools
SOM: $3M fiction workshop and indie-author segment

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Dialogue Voice Sorter" 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 scene and Jev assigns each extracted dialogue line to one of the supplied character voices or none.
Discipline: Writing, Poetry & Narrative (Fiction dialogue).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: Selecting a speaker label for existing dialogue is safer than rewriting lines and changing a character’s voice.

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": <Scene text, character voice notes, and extracted dialogue lines>, "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)
{
  "speaker_match": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which character voice best fits this dialogue line?",
    "criteria": {
      "character_a": "The line’s diction, knowledge, and attitude fit this voice",
      "character_b": "The line’s diction, knowledge, and attitude fit this voice",
      "character_c": "The line’s diction, knowledge, and attitude fit this voice",
      "none": "The speaker cannot be determined from the supplied context"
    }
  },
  "speaker_confidence": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How distinctive is the evidence for this speaker?",
    "criteria": [
      "No reliable evidence",
      "Weak evidence",
      "Clear evidence",
      "Highly distinctive evidence"
    ]
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0565. Synopsis Source Picker

ID: writing-synopsis-source-picker
Sub-discipline: Publishing submissions
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: Paste a manuscript excerpt and a synopsis draft, and Jev selects the source span that supports each synopsis claim, or none.

Why typed decisions: Evidence selection makes claim-checking traceable to the manuscript instead of generating a possibly inaccurate summary.

TAM: $2.2B global publishing services
SAM: $160M author submission and editorial tools
SOM: $2M literary agency workflow segment

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Synopsis Source Picker" 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 manuscript excerpt and a synopsis draft, and Jev selects the source span that supports each synopsis claim, or none.
Discipline: Writing, Poetry & Narrative (Publishing submissions).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: Evidence selection makes claim-checking traceable to the manuscript instead of generating a possibly inaccurate summary.

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": <Synopsis claims, manuscript text, and extracted evidence spans>, "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)
{
  "supporting_span": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which candidate span best supports this synopsis claim?",
    "criteria": {
      "candidate_1": "Directly supports the claim without changing its meaning",
      "candidate_2": "Directly supports the claim without changing its meaning",
      "candidate_3": "Directly supports the claim without changing its meaning",
      "none": "No candidate supports the claim"
    }
  },
  "support_level": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How directly does the selected span support the claim?",
    "criteria": [
      "Does not support it",
      "Only indirectly",
      "Direct support",
      "Explicit and unambiguous support"
    ]
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0566. Continuity Detail Scout

ID: writing-continuity-detail-scout
Sub-discipline: Series editing
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: Paste several chapters and Jev selects the extracted passage that establishes a queried character, setting, or prop detail, or none.

Why typed decisions: Editors need the exact source passage to verify continuity, not a generated assertion about canon.

TAM: $1.4B global book editing market
SAM: $220M continuity and manuscript management tools
SOM: $2M series-author segment

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Continuity Detail Scout" 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 several chapters and Jev selects the extracted passage that establishes a queried character, setting, or prop detail, or none.
Discipline: Writing, Poetry & Narrative (Series editing).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: Editors need the exact source passage to verify continuity, not a generated assertion about canon.

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": <Chapter excerpts, continuity query, and extracted candidate spans>, "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)
{
  "canon_evidence": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which span best establishes the queried detail?",
    "criteria": {
      "candidate_1": "Explicitly establishes the detail",
      "candidate_2": "Explicitly establishes the detail",
      "candidate_3": "Explicitly establishes the detail",
      "none": "No candidate establishes the detail"
    }
  },
  "evidence_certainty": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How definite is the selected passage as canon evidence?",
    "criteria": [
      "Not evidence",
      "Suggestive only",
      "Clear evidence",
      "Explicit canon statement"
    ]
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0567. Hook Line Selector

ID: writing-hook-line-selector
Sub-discipline: Book marketing
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: Paste a novel excerpt and Jev selects an existing sentence that works as a spoiler-safe promotional hook, or none.

Why typed decisions: Marketing teams can reuse an authentic line and avoid generated copy that misrepresents the book.

TAM: $3B global book marketing services
SAM: $240M author promotion tools
SOM: $2M independent publisher segment

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Hook Line Selector" 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 novel excerpt and Jev selects an existing sentence that works as a spoiler-safe promotional hook, or none.
Discipline: Writing, Poetry & Narrative (Book marketing).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: Marketing teams can reuse an authentic line and avoid generated copy that misrepresents the book.

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": <Novel excerpt, spoiler constraints, and extracted sentence candidates>, "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)
{
  "hook_candidate": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which candidate is the strongest spoiler-safe hook?",
    "criteria": {
      "candidate_1": "Intriguing, clear, and safe to reveal",
      "candidate_2": "Intriguing, clear, and safe to reveal",
      "candidate_3": "Intriguing, clear, and safe to reveal",
      "none": "No candidate is both compelling and spoiler-safe"
    }
  },
  "spoiler_risk": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Would using the selected line reveal a major plot development?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The line reveals a major plot development",
      "false": "The line does not reveal a major plot development"
    }
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0568. Branch Beat Locator

ID: writing-branch-beat-locator
Sub-discipline: Narrative design
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: Paste interactive fiction text and Jev selects the existing passage that best communicates a branch’s consequence, or none.

Why typed decisions: Branch reviews need to point to authored text, not introduce unapproved narrative content.

TAM: $1.8B narrative game development tools
SAM: $260M interactive narrative authoring software
SOM: $3M indie narrative studio segment

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Branch Beat Locator" 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 interactive fiction text and Jev selects the existing passage that best communicates a branch’s consequence, or none.
Discipline: Writing, Poetry & Narrative (Narrative design).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: Branch reviews need to point to authored text, not introduce unapproved narrative content.

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": <Branch text, consequence description, and extracted passage candidates>, "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)
{
  "consequence_span": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which passage best communicates this branch’s consequence?",
    "criteria": {
      "candidate_1": "Clearly shows the consequence of the choice",
      "candidate_2": "Clearly shows the consequence of the choice",
      "candidate_3": "Clearly shows the consequence of the choice",
      "none": "No candidate communicates the consequence"
    }
  },
  "choice_clarity": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How clearly can a player understand the consequence from this passage?",
    "criteria": [
      "Not understandable",
      "Partly implied",
      "Clear",
      "Unmistakable"
    ]
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0569. Quest Text Reuse

ID: writing-quest-text-reuse
Sub-discipline: Game writing
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: Paste quest documents and Jev selects an existing objective or description span that matches a tagged quest beat, or none.

Why typed decisions: Reusing approved source text prevents unintended lore changes and keeps localization references stable.

TAM: $2.5B global game writing tools
SAM: $300M quest and narrative content tools
SOM: $3M small game studio segment

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Quest Text Reuse" 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 quest documents and Jev selects an existing objective or description span that matches a tagged quest beat, or none.
Discipline: Writing, Poetry & Narrative (Game writing).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: Reusing approved source text prevents unintended lore changes and keeps localization references stable.

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": <Quest documents, beat tags, and extracted text spans>, "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)
{
  "quest_span": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which candidate span best matches this quest beat tag?",
    "criteria": {
      "candidate_1": "Matches the beat and its narrative function",
      "candidate_2": "Matches the beat and its narrative function",
      "candidate_3": "Matches the beat and its narrative function",
      "none": "No candidate matches the beat"
    }
  },
  "lore_conflict": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the selected span conflict with the supplied lore notes?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The span contradicts at least one lore note",
      "false": "The span does not contradict the supplied lore notes"
    }
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0570. Reading Group Excerpt

ID: writing-reading-group-excerpt
Sub-discipline: Literary events
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: Paste a story and Jev selects an existing passage suited to a chosen reading-group theme, or none.

Why typed decisions: Organizers can share a faithful excerpt instead of receiving generated text that may not appear in the work.

TAM: $900M global literary events market
SAM: $80M event programming and book club tools
SOM: $800K local literary organization segment

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Reading Group Excerpt" 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 story and Jev selects an existing passage suited to a chosen reading-group theme, or none.
Discipline: Writing, Poetry & Narrative (Literary events).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: Organizers can share a faithful excerpt instead of receiving generated text that may not appear in the work.

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": <Story text, event theme, and extracted passage candidates>, "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)
{
  "theme_excerpt": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which candidate best represents the reading-group theme?",
    "criteria": {
      "candidate_1": "Clearly relates to the theme and stands on its own",
      "candidate_2": "Clearly relates to the theme and stands on its own",
      "candidate_3": "Clearly relates to the theme and stands on its own",
      "none": "No candidate is a suitable excerpt"
    }
  },
  "context_needed": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does this passage require substantial surrounding context to understand?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Substantial context is needed",
      "false": "The passage is understandable on its own"
    }
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0571. Character Entrance Index

ID: writing-character-entrance-index
Sub-discipline: Manuscript editing
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: Paste a manuscript and Jev selects the first extracted passage that clearly introduces a named character, or none.

Why typed decisions: An index of actual introduction passages is more verifiable than a generated character biography.

TAM: $1.4B global book editing market
SAM: $220M manuscript organization software
SOM: $2M editorial services segment

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Character Entrance Index" 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 manuscript and Jev selects the first extracted passage that clearly introduces a named character, or none.
Discipline: Writing, Poetry & Narrative (Manuscript editing).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: An index of actual introduction passages is more verifiable than a generated character biography.

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": <Manuscript text, character names, and extracted candidate spans>, "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)
{
  "intro_passage": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which candidate first clearly introduces this character?",
    "criteria": {
      "candidate_1": "Names or unmistakably identifies the character and gives introductory context",
      "candidate_2": "Names or unmistakably identifies the character and gives introductory context",
      "candidate_3": "Names or unmistakably identifies the character and gives introductory context",
      "none": "No candidate is a clear introduction"
    }
  },
  "intro_quality": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How clearly does the selected passage establish the character’s entrance?",
    "criteria": [
      "Not an introduction",
      "Ambiguous introduction",
      "Clear introduction",
      "Explicit first introduction"
    ]
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0572. Theme Tag Curator

ID: writing-theme-tag-curator
Sub-discipline: Literary archives
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: Paste a short story and Jev selects an extracted sentence that supports one of a curator’s theme tags, or none.

Why typed decisions: Archive tags gain reviewable textual evidence without adding generated interpretations to the record.

TAM: $1.2B digital library and archive software
SAM: $140M literary cataloging tools
SOM: $1.5M small archive and journal segment

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Theme Tag Curator" 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 short story and Jev selects an extracted sentence that supports one of a curator’s theme tags, or none.
Discipline: Writing, Poetry & Narrative (Literary archives).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: Archive tags gain reviewable textual evidence without adding generated interpretations to the record.

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": <Story text, theme tags, and extracted sentence candidates>, "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)
{
  "theme_evidence": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which candidate best supports this theme tag?",
    "criteria": {
      "candidate_1": "Provides direct textual evidence for the theme",
      "candidate_2": "Provides direct textual evidence for the theme",
      "candidate_3": "Provides direct textual evidence for the theme",
      "none": "No candidate provides adequate evidence"
    }
  },
  "tag_fit": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How strongly does the selected sentence support the tag?",
    "criteria": [
      "No support",
      "Weak implication",
      "Clear support",
      "Strong and unmistakable support"
    ]
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0573. Adaptation Rights Scout

ID: writing-adaptation-rights-scout
Sub-discipline: Literary rights
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: Paste a manuscript and a rights checklist, and Jev selects passages relevant to a specified adaptation or usage question, or none.

Why typed decisions: Rights professionals need cited source passages for human review, not generated legal conclusions.

TAM: $1.5B global literary rights services
SAM: $130M rights research and workflow tools
SOM: $1M independent agency segment

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Adaptation Rights Scout" 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 manuscript and a rights checklist, and Jev selects passages relevant to a specified adaptation or usage question, or none.
Discipline: Writing, Poetry & Narrative (Literary rights).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: Rights professionals need cited source passages for human review, not generated legal conclusions.

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": <Manuscript excerpt, rights question, and extracted candidate spans>, "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)
{
  "rights_reference": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which candidate is most relevant to the specified rights review?",
    "criteria": {
      "candidate_1": "Directly concerns the described character, setting, or material",
      "candidate_2": "Directly concerns the described character, setting, or material",
      "candidate_3": "Directly concerns the described character, setting, or material",
      "none": "No candidate is relevant"
    }
  },
  "review_relevance": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How relevant is the selected passage to the review question?",
    "criteria": [
      "Irrelevant",
      "Tangential",
      "Relevant",
      "Directly material"
    ]
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0574. Caption Quote Picker

ID: writing-caption-quote-picker
Sub-discipline: Author publicity
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: Paste a book excerpt and Jev selects an existing short sentence suitable for a social caption, or none.

Why typed decisions: Selecting a quotable line keeps publicity copy attributable to the published work and avoids fabricated quotations.

TAM: $3B global book marketing services
SAM: $240M author publicity and social tools
SOM: $2M author and small press segment

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Caption Quote Picker" 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 book excerpt and Jev selects an existing short sentence suitable for a social caption, or none.
Discipline: Writing, Poetry & Narrative (Author publicity).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: Selecting a quotable line keeps publicity copy attributable to the published work and avoids fabricated quotations.

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": <Book excerpt, caption constraints, and extracted sentence candidates>, "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)
{
  "caption_quote": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which candidate is most suitable as a standalone caption quote?",
    "criteria": {
      "candidate_1": "Concise, compelling, and understandable in isolation",
      "candidate_2": "Concise, compelling, and understandable in isolation",
      "candidate_3": "Concise, compelling, and understandable in isolation",
      "none": "No candidate works as a standalone quote"
    }
  },
  "quote_context": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Would this quote mislead readers without more context?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The quote risks misleading readers out of context",
      "false": "The quote remains fair and understandable alone"
    }
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0575. Poem Form Mapper

ID: writing-poem-form-mapper
Sub-discipline: Poetry workshops
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: Paste a poem and Jev selects the extracted lines that best exemplify a workshop’s chosen craft feature, or none.

Why typed decisions: A workshop can point to the poet’s actual lines rather than receiving a generated example that distracts from the poem.

TAM: $1.7B global poetry and literary publishing
SAM: $95M poetry teaching and workshop tools
SOM: $1M poetry program segment

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Poem Form Mapper" 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 poem and Jev selects the extracted lines that best exemplify a workshop’s chosen craft feature, or none.
Discipline: Writing, Poetry & Narrative (Poetry workshops).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: A workshop can point to the poet’s actual lines rather than receiving a generated example that distracts from the poem.

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": <Poem text, craft feature, and extracted line candidates>, "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)
{
  "craft_example": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which candidate best demonstrates the selected craft feature?",
    "criteria": {
      "candidate_1": "Clearly demonstrates the feature in the poem",
      "candidate_2": "Clearly demonstrates the feature in the poem",
      "candidate_3": "Clearly demonstrates the feature in the poem",
      "none": "No candidate demonstrates the feature"
    }
  },
  "craft_strength": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How strongly does the selected line demonstrate the feature?",
    "criteria": [
      "Not demonstrated",
      "Subtle or uncertain",
      "Clear example",
      "Especially strong example"
    ]
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0576. Trailer Beat Selector

ID: writing-trailer-beat-selector
Sub-discipline: Book-to-screen development
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: Paste a screenplay and Jev selects an existing visual action span that could anchor a trailer beat, or none.

Why typed decisions: Producers can locate a source-authentic moment without adding invented scenes to a pitch.

TAM: $1.1B global screen production software
SAM: $180M script development and pitch tools
SOM: $1.5M indie production segment

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Trailer Beat Selector" 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 screenplay and Jev selects an existing visual action span that could anchor a trailer beat, or none.
Discipline: Writing, Poetry & Narrative (Book-to-screen development).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: Producers can locate a source-authentic moment without adding invented scenes to a pitch.

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": <Screenplay pages, trailer beat goal, and extracted action spans>, "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)
{
  "visual_beat": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which candidate best serves the specified trailer beat?",
    "criteria": {
      "candidate_1": "Visually legible and relevant to the beat",
      "candidate_2": "Visually legible and relevant to the beat",
      "candidate_3": "Visually legible and relevant to the beat",
      "none": "No candidate serves the beat"
    }
  },
  "spoiler_check": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the selected action reveal a major story surprise?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "It reveals a major story surprise",
      "false": "It does not reveal a major story surprise"
    }
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0577. Lore Glossary Linker

ID: writing-lore-glossary-linker
Sub-discipline: Worldbuilding
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: Paste worldbuilding notes and a chapter, and Jev links each glossary entry to the best matching extracted passage, or none.

Why typed decisions: Exact passage links let authors verify how invented terms appear in the manuscript without generated lore explanations.

TAM: $1.8B narrative and game development tools
SAM: $230M worldbuilding and lore management software
SOM: $2M fiction and tabletop creator segment

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Lore Glossary Linker" 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 worldbuilding notes and a chapter, and Jev links each glossary entry to the best matching extracted passage, or none.
Discipline: Writing, Poetry & Narrative (Worldbuilding).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: Exact passage links let authors verify how invented terms appear in the manuscript without generated lore explanations.

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": <Glossary entries, chapter text, and extracted candidate spans>, "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)
{
  "glossary_reference": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which candidate uses or explains this glossary entry?",
    "criteria": {
      "candidate_1": "Directly uses or explains the entry",
      "candidate_2": "Directly uses or explains the entry",
      "candidate_3": "Directly uses or explains the entry",
      "none": "No candidate relates to the entry"
    }
  },
  "meaning_consistency": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the selected passage use the entry consistently with its glossary definition?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The passage appears to contradict the definition",
      "false": "The passage is consistent with the definition"
    }
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0578. Sensitivity Passage Finder

ID: writing-sensitivity-passage-finder
Sub-discipline: Editorial review
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: Paste a manuscript section and a reviewer’s topic checklist, and Jev selects potentially relevant existing passages, or none.

Why typed decisions: Reviewers need passages for contextual human assessment, not automated rewrites or definitive judgments.

TAM: $1.4B global book editing market
SAM: $180M editorial review and manuscript tools
SOM: $1.5M independent editorial services segment

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Sensitivity Passage Finder" 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 manuscript section and a reviewer’s topic checklist, and Jev selects potentially relevant existing passages, or none.
Discipline: Writing, Poetry & Narrative (Editorial review).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: Reviewers need passages for contextual human assessment, not automated rewrites or definitive judgments.

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": <Manuscript section, review topic, and extracted candidate spans>, "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)
{
  "review_passage": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which candidate is most relevant for human review of this topic?",
    "criteria": {
      "candidate_1": "Directly relates to the specified topic",
      "candidate_2": "Directly relates to the specified topic",
      "candidate_3": "Directly relates to the specified topic",
      "none": "No candidate is relevant"
    }
  },
  "context_sensitivity": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How much contextual attention does the selected passage warrant?",
    "criteria": [
      "Little or none",
      "Some context review",
      "Careful review",
      "Substantial contextual review"
    ]
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0579. Chapter Recap Evidence

ID: writing-chapter-recap-evidence
Sub-discipline: Serial fiction
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: Paste a chapter and an existing recap, and Jev selects the source spans that support each recap detail, or none.

Why typed decisions: Evidence-linked recaps are easier to fact-check than generated summaries, especially across serialized installments.

TAM: $1.3B global digital fiction market
SAM: $150M serial fiction creator tools
SOM: $2M web-serial publisher segment

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Chapter Recap Evidence" 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 chapter and an existing recap, and Jev selects the source spans that support each recap detail, or none.
Discipline: Writing, Poetry & Narrative (Serial fiction).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: Evidence-linked recaps are easier to fact-check than generated summaries, especially across serialized installments.

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": <Chapter text, recap details, and extracted candidate spans>, "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)
{
  "recap_support": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which candidate best supports this recap detail?",
    "criteria": {
      "candidate_1": "Directly supports the detail",
      "candidate_2": "Directly supports the detail",
      "candidate_3": "Directly supports the detail",
      "none": "No candidate supports the detail"
    }
  },
  "recap_accuracy": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How accurately does the selected span support the recap detail?",
    "criteria": [
      "Contradicts or does not support it",
      "Partially supports it",
      "Accurately supports it",
      "Explicitly confirms it"
    ]
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0580. Table Read Cutlist

ID: writing-table-read-cutlist
Sub-discipline: Script development
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: Paste a screenplay scene and Jev selects existing lines that repeat a supplied beat or information point, or none, for a human editor’s cutlist.

Why typed decisions: Editors can review exact lines for possible trimming without accepting machine-written replacements.

TAM: $1.1B global screen production software
SAM: $180M script editing and rehearsal tools
SOM: $1M independent production segment

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Table Read Cutlist" 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 screenplay scene and Jev selects existing lines that repeat a supplied beat or information point, or none, for a human editor’s cutlist.
Discipline: Writing, Poetry & Narrative (Script development).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: Editors can review exact lines for possible trimming without accepting machine-written replacements.

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": <Scene text, beat summary, and extracted dialogue candidates>, "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)
{
  "repeated_line": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which candidate most clearly repeats an already-established beat or fact?",
    "criteria": {
      "candidate_1": "Repeats the supplied beat or fact without adding much",
      "candidate_2": "Repeats the supplied beat or fact without adding much",
      "candidate_3": "Repeats the supplied beat or fact without adding much",
      "none": "No candidate is meaningfully repetitive"
    }
  },
  "redundancy_level": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How redundant is the selected line in context?",
    "criteria": [
      "Adds necessary new information",
      "Some overlap but still useful",
      "Mostly repeats existing information",
      "Fully redundant in context"
    ]
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0581. Continuity Evidence Desk

ID: writing-continuity-evidence-desk
Sub-discipline: Screenplay continuity
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Writers paste a screenplay excerpt and continuity notes, and Jev decides whether each character, prop, and timeline claim is supported by the notes or should be sent for human review.

Why typed decisions: Typed support checks and review flags catch continuity risks without inventing replacement prose.

TAM: $1.2B
SAM: $180M
SOM: $9M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Continuity Evidence Desk" 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
Writers paste a screenplay excerpt and continuity notes, and Jev decides whether each character, prop, and timeline claim is supported by the notes or should be sent for human review.
Discipline: Writing, Poetry & Narrative (Screenplay continuity).
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 support checks and review flags catch continuity risks without inventing replacement prose.

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": <Script excerpt and continuity 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)
{
  "claim_supported": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is each continuity claim supported by the supplied notes?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The notes directly support the claim.",
      "false": "The notes conflict with, or do not establish, the claim."
    }
  },
  "issue_type": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "What best describes the most consequential issue?",
    "criteria": {
      "timeline": "Event order or elapsed time conflicts.",
      "character": "A character's presence, knowledge, or state conflicts.",
      "prop": "A prop's location or condition conflicts.",
      "none": "No material conflict is evident."
    }
  },
  "impact": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Grade the impact if the claim is wrong.",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Cosmetic detail only",
      "2: Minor scene confusion",
      "3: Plot or character comprehension affected",
      "4: Major story logic broken"
    ]
  }
}

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

---

## 0582. Citation Lineage Check

ID: writing-citation-lineage-check
Sub-discipline: Literary nonfiction
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Authors paste a passage alongside source excerpts and citations, and Jev decides whether each factual claim is evidenced, correctly attributed, or needs human verification.

Why typed decisions: A typed evidence verdict is auditable and safer than generated prose presented as fact-checking.

TAM: $2.4B
SAM: $320M
SOM: $16M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Citation Lineage Check" 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
Authors paste a passage alongside source excerpts and citations, and Jev decides whether each factual claim is evidenced, correctly attributed, or needs human verification.
Discipline: Writing, Poetry & Narrative (Literary nonfiction).
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: A typed evidence verdict is auditable and safer than generated prose presented as fact-checking.

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": <Passage, citations, and source excerpts>, "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)
{
  "claim_evidenced": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the cited source substantiate the associated factual claim?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The source directly supports the claim as written.",
      "false": "Support is absent, partial, or contradictory."
    }
  },
  "citation_fit": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Classify the citation's relationship to the claim.",
    "criteria": {
      "direct": "Directly supports the claim.",
      "partial": "Supports only part or a narrower version.",
      "mismatch": "Does not support or contradicts it.",
      "unclear": "Source context is insufficient."
    }
  },
  "risk": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Grade the consequence of publishing an unsupported claim.",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Low-stakes detail",
      "2: Noticeable factual error",
      "3: Material reputational or reader-trust risk",
      "4: High-impact legal, safety, or public-interest risk"
    ]
  }
}

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

---

## 0583. Poem Form Auditor

ID: writing-poem-form-auditor
Sub-discipline: Poetry craft
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Poets paste a poem and its declared form rules, and Jev decides whether each line-level constraint is met or routed for human review.

Why typed decisions: Typed constraint checks make formal compliance inspectable while leaving aesthetic judgment to poets.

TAM: $450M
SAM: $70M
SOM: $3.5M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Poem Form Auditor" 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
Poets paste a poem and its declared form rules, and Jev decides whether each line-level constraint is met or routed for human review.
Discipline: Writing, Poetry & Narrative (Poetry craft).
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 constraint checks make formal compliance inspectable while leaving aesthetic judgment to poets.

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": <Poem text and declared form rules>, "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)
{
  "constraint_met": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the submitted line meet the specified formal constraint?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The line satisfies the stated constraint.",
      "false": "It violates the constraint or evidence is ambiguous."
    }
  },
  "constraint_kind": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which kind of constraint is being checked?",
    "criteria": {
      "syllable": "Syllable count or meter.",
      "rhyme": "End rhyme or rhyme scheme.",
      "line_count": "Line or stanza count.",
      "repetition": "Refrain, repetition, or fixed-word rule."
    }
  },
  "deviation": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Grade the severity of the deviation.",
    "criteria": [
      "1: No meaningful deviation",
      "2: Small local variation",
      "3: Multiple or noticeable breaks",
      "4: Core form is not satisfied"
    ]
  }
}

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

---

## 0584. Rights Clause Sorter

ID: writing-rights-clause-sorter
Sub-discipline: Publishing contracts
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Authors paste a rights clause and their deal checklist, and Jev decides whether each requested right is present, excluded, or ambiguous enough for legal review.

Why typed decisions: Typed clause classifications expose specific review needs without pretending to provide legal advice.

TAM: $900M
SAM: $120M
SOM: $6M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Rights Clause Sorter" 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
Authors paste a rights clause and their deal checklist, and Jev decides whether each requested right is present, excluded, or ambiguous enough for legal review.
Discipline: Writing, Poetry & Narrative (Publishing contracts).
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 clause classifications expose specific review needs without pretending to provide legal advice.

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": <Contract clause and rights checklist>, "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)
{
  "right_present": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the clause clearly grant only the right identified in the checklist?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The clause clearly matches the checklist item.",
      "false": "It omits, broadens, conflicts with, or ambiguously defines it."
    }
  },
  "clause_status": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Classify the clause against the checklist.",
    "criteria": {
      "aligned": "Clearly aligned.",
      "broader": "Grants broader rights than requested.",
      "narrower": "Grants fewer rights than expected.",
      "ambiguous": "Meaning requires professional review."
    }
  },
  "review_priority": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Grade the priority for human review.",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Low consequence and clear wording",
      "2: Limited scope concern",
      "3: Significant rights or term concern",
      "4: Major financial, exclusivity, or ownership exposure"
    ]
  }
}

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

---

## 0585. Dialogue Voice Ledger

ID: writing-dialogue-voice-ledger-2
Sub-discipline: Character dialogue
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Screenwriters paste dialogue samples tagged by character and a voice bible, and Jev decides whether each attributed line matches that character's documented speech traits.

Why typed decisions: Typed match confidence can flag outliers for a writer without generating imitation dialogue.

TAM: $700M
SAM: $105M
SOM: $5M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Dialogue Voice Ledger" 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
Screenwriters paste dialogue samples tagged by character and a voice bible, and Jev decides whether each attributed line matches that character's documented speech traits.
Discipline: Writing, Poetry & Narrative (Character dialogue).
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 match confidence can flag outliers for a writer without generating imitation dialogue.

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": <Tagged dialogue and character voice bible>, "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)
{
  "voice_supported": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is this line consistent with the supplied voice evidence for its speaker?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The line fits documented diction, rhythm, or speech habits.",
      "false": "It conflicts with, or lacks evidence for, the documented voice."
    }
  },
  "mismatch": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Classify the strongest voice mismatch.",
    "criteria": {
      "diction": "Word choice differs from documented usage.",
      "rhythm": "Sentence rhythm or length differs.",
      "knowledge": "Line uses knowledge the character lacks.",
      "none": "No clear mismatch."
    }
  },
  "salience": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Grade how noticeable the mismatch is to an audience.",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Unlikely to be noticed",
      "2: Mild voice drift",
      "3: Distinct character break",
      "4: Undermines a key scene or characterization"
    ]
  }
}

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

---

## 0586. Adaptation Anchor Audit

ID: writing-adaptation-anchor-audit
Sub-discipline: Book-to-screen adaptation
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Adaptation teams paste source passages, screenplay scenes, and an approved change log, and Jev decides whether each retained or altered story fact is traceable to its evidence.

Why typed decisions: Typed lineage decisions help teams review fidelity and authorized changes without asking software to rewrite scenes.

TAM: $1.1B
SAM: $160M
SOM: $8M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Adaptation Anchor Audit" 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
Adaptation teams paste source passages, screenplay scenes, and an approved change log, and Jev decides whether each retained or altered story fact is traceable to its evidence.
Discipline: Writing, Poetry & Narrative (Book-to-screen adaptation).
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 lineage decisions help teams review fidelity and authorized changes without asking software to rewrite scenes.

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": <Source passages, script scenes, and change log>, "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)
{
  "change_authorized": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is the screenplay's change from the source documented as approved?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The change log clearly authorizes the change.",
      "false": "No matching approval exists or the records conflict."
    }
  },
  "anchor_type": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Classify the source-to-screen relationship.",
    "criteria": {
      "retained": "Material detail is preserved.",
      "compressed": "Several source details are condensed.",
      "altered": "A documented change modifies the source detail.",
      "unsupported": "No clear source or approval supports it."
    }
  },
  "fidelity_impact": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Grade the story impact of an unsupported change.",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Incidental detail",
      "2: Local scene effect",
      "3: Character arc or plot effect",
      "4: Central premise or ending affected"
    ]
  }
}

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

---

## 0587. World Rule Sentinel

ID: writing-world-rule-sentinel
Sub-discipline: Narrative design
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Narrative designers paste world rules and a quest or scene draft, and Jev decides whether each supernatural or technological event follows the established rules.

Why typed decisions: Typed rule-consistency flags surface unsupported mechanics before they become plot holes.

TAM: $850M
SAM: $130M
SOM: $6.5M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "World Rule Sentinel" 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
Narrative designers paste world rules and a quest or scene draft, and Jev decides whether each supernatural or technological event follows the established rules.
Discipline: Writing, Poetry & Narrative (Narrative design).
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 rule-consistency flags surface unsupported mechanics before they become plot holes.

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": <World rulebook and scene or quest draft>, "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)
{
  "rule_supported": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is each unusual event supported by an established world rule?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "A supplied rule permits the event.",
      "false": "No rule permits it, or the rules conflict."
    }
  },
  "rule_domain": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which rule domain is implicated?",
    "criteria": {
      "magic": "Magic, abilities, or supernatural limits.",
      "technology": "Devices, systems, or technical limits.",
      "society": "Institutions, customs, or social constraints.",
      "none": "No specific rule issue found."
    }
  },
  "plot_risk": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Grade the effect of the possible rule break.",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Flavor detail",
      "2: Minor immersion break",
      "3: Changes available choices or outcomes",
      "4: Invalidates a central conflict or resolution"
    ]
  }
}

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

---

## 0588. Branch Logic Triage

ID: writing-branch-logic-triage
Sub-discipline: Interactive fiction
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Narrative designers paste a branching-flow JSON file and route requirements, and Jev decides whether each required choice, condition, and ending is reachable and correctly gated.

Why typed decisions: Typed structural verdicts help teams prioritize broken paths instead of receiving speculative narrative feedback.

TAM: $600M
SAM: $95M
SOM: $4.8M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Branch Logic Triage" 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
Narrative designers paste a branching-flow JSON file and route requirements, and Jev decides whether each required choice, condition, and ending is reachable and correctly gated.
Discipline: Writing, Poetry & Narrative (Interactive fiction).
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 structural verdicts help teams prioritize broken paths instead of receiving speculative narrative feedback.

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": <Branch graph JSON and route requirements>, "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)
{
  "route_valid": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does this route satisfy its stated conditions and reach its intended node?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The graph and conditions support the route.",
      "false": "The route is blocked, misrouted, or under-specified."
    }
  },
  "failure_kind": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Classify the most likely route defect.",
    "criteria": {
      "unreachable": "Target node cannot be reached.",
      "gate": "Condition is missing or incorrectly applied.",
      "dead_end": "Route stops without an intended resolution.",
      "valid": "No structural defect found."
    }
  },
  "player_impact": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Grade the impact on the player path.",
    "criteria": [
      "1: No player-visible effect",
      "2: Minor option confusion",
      "3: Important content becomes inaccessible",
      "4: Core ending or progression breaks"
    ]
  }
}

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

---

## 0589. Sensitivity Evidence Queue

ID: writing-sensitivity-evidence-queue
Sub-discipline: Sensitivity reading
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Editors paste a scene, character notes, and supplied consultation guidance, and Jev decides whether flagged portrayals are supported by that evidence or require a specialist review.

Why typed decisions: Typed evidence triage helps direct sensitive questions to humans rather than issuing unsupported cultural judgments.

TAM: $500M
SAM: $80M
SOM: $4M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Sensitivity Evidence Queue" 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
Editors paste a scene, character notes, and supplied consultation guidance, and Jev decides whether flagged portrayals are supported by that evidence or require a specialist review.
Discipline: Writing, Poetry & Narrative (Sensitivity reading).
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 triage helps direct sensitive questions to humans rather than issuing unsupported cultural judgments.

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": <Scene, character notes, and consultation guidance>, "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)
{
  "guidance_supported": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the supplied guidance substantiate the flagged concern in this passage?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The guidance directly supports the concern.",
      "false": "It does not support it or evidence is insufficient."
    }
  },
  "concern_area": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Classify the concern indicated by the supplied materials.",
    "criteria": {
      "stereotype": "Possible reliance on a documented stereotype.",
      "agency": "Character agency or perspective concern.",
      "specificity": "Cultural or lived-detail accuracy concern.",
      "unclear": "Evidence does not establish a category."
    }
  },
  "review_need": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Grade the need for specialist human review.",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Evidence shows no material concern",
      "2: Minor question for editorial discussion",
      "3: Specific consultation recommended",
      "4: High-impact concern requiring specialist review"
    ]
  }
}

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

---

## 0590. Submission Rule Checker

ID: writing-submission-rule-checker
Sub-discipline: Literary submissions
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Writers paste a manuscript excerpt and a publication's submission guidelines, and Jev decides whether each formatting and eligibility requirement is evidenced as satisfied.

Why typed decisions: Typed pass-or-review decisions reduce avoidable submissions errors without rewriting a manuscript.

TAM: $650M
SAM: $90M
SOM: $4.5M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Submission Rule Checker" 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
Writers paste a manuscript excerpt and a publication's submission guidelines, and Jev decides whether each formatting and eligibility requirement is evidenced as satisfied.
Discipline: Writing, Poetry & Narrative (Literary submissions).
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 pass-or-review decisions reduce avoidable submissions errors without rewriting a manuscript.

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": <Manuscript excerpt and submission guidelines>, "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)
{
  "requirement_met": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the supplied manuscript evidence satisfy this guideline?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The manuscript clearly meets the stated requirement.",
      "false": "It violates the requirement or evidence is missing."
    }
  },
  "requirement_type": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Classify the guideline being checked.",
    "criteria": {
      "format": "Layout, file, or typography requirement.",
      "length": "Word, page, or line limit.",
      "eligibility": "Author, genre, or prior-publication rule.",
      "materials": "Required synopsis, cover note, or attachments."
    }
  },
  "rejection_risk": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Grade the likely consequence if the requirement is unmet.",
    "criteria": [
      "1: No meaningful submission risk",
      "2: Minor administrative friction",
      "3: Likely delay or desk rejection",
      "4: Clear disqualification risk"
    ]
  }
}

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

---

## 0591. Fact Thread Verifier

ID: writing-fact-thread-verifier
Sub-discipline: Historical fiction
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Historical novelists paste scene claims alongside dated research notes, and Jev decides whether each detail is supported for the scene's time and place or needs expert review.

Why typed decisions: Typed evidence and uncertainty flags separate documented details from assumptions without fabricating historical facts.

TAM: $720M
SAM: $110M
SOM: $5.5M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Fact Thread Verifier" 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
Historical novelists paste scene claims alongside dated research notes, and Jev decides whether each detail is supported for the scene's time and place or needs expert review.
Discipline: Writing, Poetry & Narrative (Historical fiction).
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 and uncertainty flags separate documented details from assumptions without fabricating historical facts.

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": <Scene claims and dated research 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)
{
  "period_supported": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Do the notes support this detail for the stated time and place?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Evidence matches the scene's period and location.",
      "false": "Evidence is missing, mismatched, or contradictory."
    }
  },
  "evidence_status": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Classify the evidence for the detail.",
    "criteria": {
      "direct": "Direct period-specific evidence supplied.",
      "inferred": "Reasonable inference from supplied evidence.",
      "anachronism": "Evidence indicates a period mismatch.",
      "unknown": "Evidence cannot establish the detail."
    }
  },
  "reader_impact": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Grade the impact of a wrong detail.",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Background texture",
      "2: Noticeable but peripheral",
      "3: Affects a character or plot point",
      "4: Defines a central historical event or outcome"
    ]
  }
}

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

---

## 0592. Mystery Clue Fairness

ID: writing-mystery-clue-fairness
Sub-discipline: Mystery writing
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Mystery writers paste clue placement, reveal passages, and a solution outline, and Jev decides whether each reveal is supported by clues the reader could encounter beforehand.

Why typed decisions: Typed clue-to-reveal checks flag fairness gaps while preserving the author's control over suspense and prose.

TAM: $540M
SAM: $85M
SOM: $4.2M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Mystery Clue Fairness" 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
Mystery writers paste clue placement, reveal passages, and a solution outline, and Jev decides whether each reveal is supported by clues the reader could encounter beforehand.
Discipline: Writing, Poetry & Narrative (Mystery writing).
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 clue-to-reveal checks flag fairness gaps while preserving the author's control over suspense and prose.

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": <Clue passages, reveal passages, and solution outline>, "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)
{
  "reveal_prefigured": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is this reveal supported by evidence planted before the reveal?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Earlier supplied passages establish the necessary clue.",
      "false": "The clue is absent, contradictory, or only appears afterward."
    }
  },
  "clue_role": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Classify the supplied clue's role in the solution.",
    "criteria": {
      "decisive": "Directly supports the solution.",
      "corroborating": "Supports but does not establish it alone.",
      "misleading": "Deliberately points elsewhere.",
      "absent": "No relevant earlier clue is supplied."
    }
  },
  "fairness_risk": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Grade the risk that readers will find the reveal unfair.",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Reveal is clearly supported",
      "2: A small inference gap",
      "3: Major clue is obscure or weak",
      "4: Solution depends on information withheld from readers"
    ]
  }
}

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

---

## 0593. Grant Evidence Sorter

ID: writing-grant-evidence-sorter
Sub-discipline: Creative writing grants
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Writers paste an application draft, eligibility rules, and supporting documents, and Jev decides whether each eligibility or achievement claim is evidenced or should be reviewed by a person.

Why typed decisions: Typed claim checks and escalation help applicants avoid unsupported assertions and missed requirements.

TAM: $400M
SAM: $65M
SOM: $3.2M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Grant Evidence Sorter" 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
Writers paste an application draft, eligibility rules, and supporting documents, and Jev decides whether each eligibility or achievement claim is evidenced or should be reviewed by a person.
Discipline: Writing, Poetry & Narrative (Creative writing grants).
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 claim checks and escalation help applicants avoid unsupported assertions and missed requirements.

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": <Application draft, grant rules, and documents>, "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)
{
  "claim_documented": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is this application claim supported by the supplied documents?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Documents directly substantiate the claim.",
      "false": "Documents are absent, incomplete, or contradictory."
    }
  },
  "claim_category": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Classify the claim being checked.",
    "criteria": {
      "eligibility": "Eligibility or residency requirement.",
      "credit": "Publication, award, or professional credit.",
      "budget": "Cost, income, or project-funding claim.",
      "schedule": "Timeline or deliverable commitment."
    }
  },
  "submission_risk": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Grade the consequence of an unsupported claim.",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Low-stakes clarification",
      "2: Minor scoring concern",
      "3: Could affect eligibility or award assessment",
      "4: Material misrepresentation or disqualification risk"
    ]
  }
}

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

---

## 0594. Translation Brief Auditor

ID: writing-translation-brief-auditor
Sub-discipline: Literary translation
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Translators paste a source passage, translation draft, and translation brief, and Jev decides whether marked meaning, register, and cultural-reference choices are supported by the supplied evidence.

Why typed decisions: Typed correspondence checks make review targets explicit without replacing a translator's craft choices.

TAM: $1.0B
SAM: $145M
SOM: $7M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Translation Brief Auditor" 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
Translators paste a source passage, translation draft, and translation brief, and Jev decides whether marked meaning, register, and cultural-reference choices are supported by the supplied evidence.
Discipline: Writing, Poetry & Narrative (Literary translation).
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 correspondence checks make review targets explicit without replacing a translator's craft choices.

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": <Source passage, translation draft, and brief>, "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)
{
  "choice_supported": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is the marked translation choice supported by source context and the brief?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Context and brief support the choice.",
      "false": "The choice conflicts with, or lacks support from, the supplied evidence."
    }
  },
  "choice_dimension": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Classify the translation choice under review.",
    "criteria": {
      "meaning": "Denotation or implied meaning.",
      "register": "Formality, tone, or social voice.",
      "reference": "Cultural, historical, or idiomatic reference.",
      "structure": "Syntax, emphasis, or textual structure."
    }
  },
  "semantic_risk": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Grade the risk of an unsupported choice.",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Negligible difference",
      "2: Small nuance shift",
      "3: Meaning or characterization changes",
      "4: Central ambiguity, fact, or plot meaning is reversed"
    ]
  }
}

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

---

## 0595. Byline Credit Verifier

ID: writing-byline-credit-verifier
Sub-discipline: Collaborative authorship
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Writing teams paste contribution statements, project records, and a credit policy, and Jev decides whether each proposed byline credit is supported by documented contributions.

Why typed decisions: Typed evidence checks make credit disputes easier to route fairly instead of producing subjective recommendations.

TAM: $350M
SAM: $55M
SOM: $2.7M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Byline Credit Verifier" 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
Writing teams paste contribution statements, project records, and a credit policy, and Jev decides whether each proposed byline credit is supported by documented contributions.
Discipline: Writing, Poetry & Narrative (Collaborative authorship).
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 checks make credit disputes easier to route fairly instead of producing subjective recommendations.

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": <Contribution statements, project records, and credit policy>, "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)
{
  "credit_evidenced": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the evidence support this person's proposed credit under the policy?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Records support the contribution and policy threshold.",
      "false": "Evidence is insufficient or conflicts with the policy."
    }
  },
  "credit_basis": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Classify the documented contribution basis.",
    "criteria": {
      "writing": "Drafting or substantive revision.",
      "story": "Story, character, or structural development.",
      "research": "Material research or factual development.",
      "unclear": "Contribution evidence is not specific enough."
    }
  },
  "dispute_priority": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Grade the need for human resolution.",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Clear evidence and policy fit",
      "2: Minor documentation gap",
      "3: Material disagreement or unclear policy",
      "4: High-stakes credit or ownership dispute"
    ]
  }
}

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

---

## 0596. Prompt Pack Compliance

ID: writing-prompt-pack-compliance
Sub-discipline: Writing workshops
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Workshop organizers paste prompt packs and their accessibility and content requirements, and Jev decides whether each prompt meets the stated constraints or needs facilitator review.

Why typed decisions: Typed requirement checks give organizers consistent review signals without generating workshop content.

TAM: $280M
SAM: $42M
SOM: $2.1M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Prompt Pack Compliance" 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
Workshop organizers paste prompt packs and their accessibility and content requirements, and Jev decides whether each prompt meets the stated constraints or needs facilitator review.
Discipline: Writing, Poetry & Narrative (Writing workshops).
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 requirement checks give organizers consistent review signals without generating workshop content.

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": <Prompt pack and workshop requirements>, "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)
{
  "prompt_compliant": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does this prompt satisfy the stated workshop requirements?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The prompt meets the supplied constraints.",
      "false": "It violates a constraint or the evidence is ambiguous."
    }
  },
  "requirement_area": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Classify the requirement under review.",
    "criteria": {
      "accessibility": "Format or access needs.",
      "safety": "Content boundaries or participant care.",
      "duration": "Time, length, or activity scope.",
      "materials": "Required source, props, or preparation."
    }
  },
  "facilitator_attention": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Grade the need for facilitator attention.",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Ready as specified",
      "2: Small adjustment needed",
      "3: Review recommended before use",
      "4: Significant participant or access concern"
    ]
  }
}

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

---

## 0597. Serial Recap Proofdesk

ID: writing-serial-recap-proofdesk
Sub-discipline: Serial fiction
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Serial writers paste prior installments, a new chapter, and recap claims, and Jev decides whether each recap statement matches the established story record.

Why typed decisions: Typed canon checks prevent recaps from quietly adding or altering facts while leaving recap writing to the author.

TAM: $480M
SAM: $72M
SOM: $3.6M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Serial Recap Proofdesk" 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
Serial writers paste prior installments, a new chapter, and recap claims, and Jev decides whether each recap statement matches the established story record.
Discipline: Writing, Poetry & Narrative (Serial fiction).
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 canon checks prevent recaps from quietly adding or altering facts while leaving recap writing to the author.

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": <Prior installments, new chapter, and recap claims>, "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)
{
  "recap_accurate": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is this recap claim supported by the supplied installments?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The story record directly supports the claim.",
      "false": "The claim conflicts with or is absent from the record."
    }
  },
  "canon_issue": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Classify the recap claim's status.",
    "criteria": {
      "accurate": "Supported as stated.",
      "overstated": "Adds certainty or detail beyond the record.",
      "contradicted": "Conflicts with an established event.",
      "unresolved": "The supplied installments leave it open."
    }
  },
  "continuity_weight": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Grade the consequence of an inaccurate recap.",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Minor recap detail",
      "2: Small reader expectation shift",
      "3: Changes a character or plot understanding",
      "4: Spoils or reverses a central unresolved fact"
    ]
  }
}

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

---

## 0598. Character Arc Checkpoint

ID: writing-character-arc-checkpoint
Sub-discipline: Novel development
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Novelists paste a character arc outline, scene summaries, and key turning-point claims, and Jev decides whether each claimed change is evidenced by the supplied scenes.

Why typed decisions: Typed arc-evidence checks reveal unsupported development beats without prescribing how a character should change.

TAM: $620M
SAM: $94M
SOM: $4.7M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Character Arc Checkpoint" 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
Novelists paste a character arc outline, scene summaries, and key turning-point claims, and Jev decides whether each claimed change is evidenced by the supplied scenes.
Discipline: Writing, Poetry & Narrative (Novel development).
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 arc-evidence checks reveal unsupported development beats without prescribing how a character should change.

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": <Arc outline, scene summaries, and turning-point claims>, "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)
{
  "change_evidenced": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Do supplied scenes evidence the claimed character change?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Scenes show a clear before-to-after shift or choice.",
      "false": "The change is asserted but not established, or evidence conflicts."
    }
  },
  "arc_element": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Classify the arc element under review.",
    "criteria": {
      "belief": "A changed belief or worldview.",
      "behavior": "A changed action or habit.",
      "relationship": "A changed relationship dynamic.",
      "goal": "A changed goal or priority."
    }
  },
  "arc_gap": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Grade the size of the evidence gap.",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Change is clearly dramatized",
      "2: A small transition is implied",
      "3: Major turn lacks a supporting beat",
      "4: Arc outcome contradicts the supplied scenes"
    ]
  }
}

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

---

## 0599. Scene Promise Tracker

ID: writing-scene-promise-tracker
Sub-discipline: Screenwriting development
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Screenwriters paste a pilot, pitch deck, and episode outline, and Jev decides whether each advertised genre, premise, and character promise is evidenced in the planned story.

Why typed decisions: Typed promise checks help development teams identify expectation gaps without generating marketing copy or story fixes.

TAM: $780M
SAM: $115M
SOM: $5.8M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Scene Promise Tracker" 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
Screenwriters paste a pilot, pitch deck, and episode outline, and Jev decides whether each advertised genre, premise, and character promise is evidenced in the planned story.
Discipline: Writing, Poetry & Narrative (Screenwriting development).
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 promise checks help development teams identify expectation gaps without generating marketing copy or story fixes.

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": <Pilot, pitch deck, and episode outline>, "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)
{
  "promise_delivered": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the supplied story material support this advertised promise?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The pilot or outline provides clear evidence of the promise.",
      "false": "The promise is missing, contradicted, or only vaguely implied."
    }
  },
  "promise_kind": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Classify the promise being checked.",
    "criteria": {
      "genre": "Genre experience or tone.",
      "premise": "Core situation or engine.",
      "character": "Lead character appeal or arc.",
      "format": "Episode structure or recurring pattern."
    }
  },
  "audience_mismatch": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Grade the risk of audience expectation mismatch.",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Promise clearly delivered",
      "2: Small difference in emphasis",
      "3: A major promise is underdeveloped",
      "4: Core pitch and story materially conflict"
    ]
  }
}

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

---

## 0600. Content Notice Evidence

ID: writing-content-notice-evidence
Sub-discipline: Editorial operations
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Editors paste a manuscript excerpt, a proposed content notice, and the publication's notice policy, and Jev decides whether each notice category is evidenced under that policy or needs human review.

Why typed decisions: Typed evidence-based flags make notices more consistent while reserving nuanced policy calls for editors.

TAM: $310M
SAM: $48M
SOM: $2.4M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Content Notice Evidence" 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
Editors paste a manuscript excerpt, a proposed content notice, and the publication's notice policy, and Jev decides whether each notice category is evidenced under that policy or needs human review.
Discipline: Writing, Poetry & Narrative (Editorial operations).
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-based flags make notices more consistent while reserving nuanced policy calls for editors.

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": <Manuscript excerpt, proposed notice, and policy>, "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)
{
  "notice_supported": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the excerpt support this notice category under the supplied policy?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The passage meets the policy's stated criterion.",
      "false": "The criterion is not evidenced or interpretation is uncertain."
    }
  },
  "notice_category": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Classify the policy category being evaluated.",
    "criteria": {
      "violence": "Physical harm or violent threat.",
      "substance": "Substance use or related content.",
      "trauma": "Traumatic event or aftermath.",
      "other": "Another category defined by the policy."
    }
  },
  "editorial_priority": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Grade the need for editorial review.",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Clear policy match or clear non-match",
      "2: Minor wording or scope question",
      "3: Context-sensitive interpretation needed",
      "4: High-impact ambiguity requiring human decision"
    ]
  }
}

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

---

# Discipline: Filmmaking & Animation

Audience: filmmakers, animators, motion designers, storyboard artists
Market anchor: the animation industry (~$400B incl. film/TV) with >500K working animators

## 0601. Scene Coverage Router

ID: film-animation-scene-coverage-router
Sub-discipline: Film production
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: Paste a scene breakdown and Jev routes each scene to a coverage plan while judging its coverage risk and complexity.

Why typed decisions: A fixed coverage category and graded risk can drive shot-list templates directly, unlike free-form advice.

TAM: Global film production software: ~$5B
SAM: Independent and studio preproduction: ~$900M
SOM: Early reachable teams: ~$2M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Scene Coverage Router" 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 scene breakdown and Jev routes each scene to a coverage plan while judging its coverage risk and complexity.
Discipline: Filmmaking & Animation (Film production).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: A fixed coverage category and graded risk can drive shot-list templates directly, unlike free-form advice.

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": <Scene breakdown, production format, and coverage constraints>, "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)
{
  "coverage_type": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which coverage plan best fits this scene?",
    "criteria": {
      "master_led": "A master shot can carry most of the scene",
      "dialogue_coverage": "Prioritize alternating dialogue coverage",
      " 움직": "Prioritize movement and changing geography",
      "insert_heavy": "Prioritize props, details, and inserts"
    }
  },
  "coverage_risk": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How likely is the scene to be under-covered with the selected plan?",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Few coverage risks",
      "2: Minor gaps possible",
      "3: Several likely gaps",
      "4: Major coverage risk"
    ]
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0602. Storyboard Revision Desk

ID: film-animation-storyboard-revision-desk
Sub-discipline: Storyboarding
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: Paste a storyboard panel note and Jev routes it to a revision category while judging whether it changes story clarity.

Why typed decisions: Specific revision buckets and a clear yes/no clarity impact make notes actionable in a board-tracking workflow.

TAM: Global animation and film preproduction: ~$2B
SAM: Storyboard and animatic teams: ~$350M
SOM: Early reachable studios: ~$1M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Storyboard Revision Desk" 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 storyboard panel note and Jev routes it to a revision category while judging whether it changes story clarity.
Discipline: Filmmaking & Animation (Storyboarding).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: Specific revision buckets and a clear yes/no clarity impact make notes actionable in a board-tracking workflow.

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": <Panel notes, scene context, and revision round>, "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)
{
  "revision_type": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which revision category best describes this panel note?",
    "criteria": {
      "staging": "Character or object placement",
      "camera": "Framing, angle, or camera movement",
      "continuity": "Visual continuity or screen direction",
      "story_readability": "Action or story comprehension"
    }
  },
  "clarity_impact": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Would this revision materially improve story clarity?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "It makes an action, intention, or relationship easier to understand",
      "false": "It is mainly stylistic or does not improve comprehension"
    }
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0603. Animation Note Sorter

ID: film-animation-animation-note-sorter
Sub-discipline: Character animation
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: Paste review notes for an animated shot and Jev routes each note to an animation discipline while scoring its urgency.

Why typed decisions: Typed discipline labels and urgency levels map directly to review queues without needing generated interpretations.

TAM: Global animation production tools: ~$3B
SAM: Character animation review workflows: ~$500M
SOM: Early reachable teams: ~$1.5M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Animation Note Sorter" 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 review notes for an animated shot and Jev routes each note to an animation discipline while scoring its urgency.
Discipline: Filmmaking & Animation (Character animation).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: Typed discipline labels and urgency levels map directly to review queues without needing generated interpretations.

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": <Shot notes, sequence context, and review deadline>, "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)
{
  "animation_discipline": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which discipline should own this note?",
    "criteria": {
      "acting": "Performance, intention, or emotion",
      "body_mechanics": "Weight, balance, or physical movement",
      "timing": "Pacing, spacing, or rhythm",
      "polish": "Arcs, intersections, or fine cleanup"
    }
  },
  "urgency": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How urgently should this note be addressed?",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Optional polish",
      "2: Address in normal pass",
      "3: Important before review",
      "4: Blocking issue for approval"
    ]
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0604. Shot Continuity Gate

ID: film-animation-shot-continuity-gate
Sub-discipline: Editorial continuity
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: Paste adjacent shot descriptions and Jev routes the suspected issue to a continuity category while judging whether a visible mismatch exists.

Why typed decisions: A named continuity issue and yes/no mismatch decision can trigger targeted checks instead of vague explanations.

TAM: Global post-production software: ~$6B
SAM: Editorial continuity workflows: ~$600M
SOM: Early reachable editors: ~$1.2M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Shot Continuity 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 adjacent shot descriptions and Jev routes the suspected issue to a continuity category while judging whether a visible mismatch exists.
Discipline: Filmmaking & Animation (Editorial continuity).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: A named continuity issue and yes/no mismatch decision can trigger targeted checks instead of vague explanations.

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": <Adjacent shot descriptions and continuity 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)
{
  "continuity_type": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "What kind of continuity issue is most likely?",
    "criteria": {
      "screen_direction": "Movement or eyeline direction",
      "prop_state": "Prop position or state",
      "wardrobe_appearance": "Costume, hair, or makeup change",
      "time_space": "Time, location, or geography mismatch"
    }
  },
  "visible_mismatch": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is a viewer likely to notice a continuity mismatch?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The difference is visible or disrupts comprehension",
      "false": "The difference is subtle or not meaningfully noticeable"
    }
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0605. Location Scout Triage

ID: film-animation-location-scout-triage
Sub-discipline: Location scouting
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: Paste location notes and Jev routes each candidate to a production-fit category while scoring its likely filming risk.

Why typed decisions: Structured fit and risk decisions make candidates sortable against a real production brief.

TAM: Global location and production services: ~$4B
SAM: Film and commercial scouting: ~$700M
SOM: Early reachable production teams: ~$1.5M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Location Scout Triage" 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 location notes and Jev routes each candidate to a production-fit category while scoring its likely filming risk.
Discipline: Filmmaking & Animation (Location scouting).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: Structured fit and risk decisions make candidates sortable against a real production brief.

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": <Location notes, scene needs, and production constraints>, "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)
{
  "location_fit": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which production need is this location best suited to?",
    "criteria": {
      "interior_controlled": "Controlled interior scenes",
      "exterior_urban": "Urban exterior scenes",
      "landscape": "Natural or wide landscape scenes",
      "specialty": "Distinctive or technically unusual scenes"
    }
  },
  "filming_risk": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How difficult is this location likely to be to film in?",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Low logistical risk",
      "2: Manageable constraints",
      "3: Significant coordination needed",
      "4: Major access or technical risk"
    ]
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0606. Sound Cue Router

ID: film-animation-sound-cue-router
Sub-discipline: Post-production sound
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: Paste a scene’s sound notes and Jev routes each cue to a sound department while judging whether it is essential to the scene.

Why typed decisions: Department routing plus an essentiality flag supports handoffs and priority lists with no generated prose.

TAM: Global audio post-production: ~$5B
SAM: Film and animation sound workflows: ~$800M
SOM: Early reachable post teams: ~$1.5M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Sound Cue Router" 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 scene’s sound notes and Jev routes each cue to a sound department while judging whether it is essential to the scene.
Discipline: Filmmaking & Animation (Post-production sound).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: Department routing plus an essentiality flag supports handoffs and priority lists with no generated prose.

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": <Scene sound notes and delivery format>, "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)
{
  "sound_department": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which sound workflow should handle this cue?",
    "criteria": {
      "dialogue": "Production dialogue or dialogue edit",
      "foley": "Performed footsteps and object sounds",
      "effects": "Designed or environmental sound effects",
      "music": "Score or source music"
    }
  },
  "essential_cue": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is this cue essential for the scene to read or feel as intended?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Removing it would materially weaken comprehension or impact",
      "false": "The scene works without it"
    }
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0607. Color Review Queue

ID: film-animation-color-review-queue
Sub-discipline: Color grading
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: Paste color review comments and Jev routes each comment to a grading issue category while scoring its visual severity.

Why typed decisions: Consistent issue tags and severity levels are easier to turn into grading tasks than generated commentary.

TAM: Global color and finishing software: ~$2B
SAM: Film and episodic grading: ~$500M
SOM: Early reachable colorists: ~$1M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Color Review Queue" 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 color review comments and Jev routes each comment to a grading issue category while scoring its visual severity.
Discipline: Filmmaking & Animation (Color grading).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: Consistent issue tags and severity levels are easier to turn into grading tasks than generated commentary.

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": <Color notes, shot identifier, and reference look>, "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)
{
  "grading_issue": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which grading issue does this comment concern?",
    "criteria": {
      "exposure": "Brightness, contrast, or highlight detail",
      "color_cast": "Tint, balance, or unwanted cast",
      "matching": "Shot-to-shot or setup matching",
      "look_style": "Creative look or palette"
    }
  },
  "visual_severity": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How severe is the visual issue in the current review context?",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Minor preference",
      "2: Noticeable but acceptable",
      "3: Distracting inconsistency",
      "4: Breaks the intended look"
    ]
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0608. VFX Shot Intake

ID: film-animation-vfx-shot-intake
Sub-discipline: Visual effects
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: Paste VFX shot descriptions and Jev routes each shot to a workstream while scoring its estimated execution complexity.

Why typed decisions: A consistent workstream and complexity grade help teams triage bids and assign specialists without prose estimates.

TAM: Global VFX production services and tools: ~$10B
SAM: Shot planning and intake software: ~$1B
SOM: Early reachable VFX teams: ~$2M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "VFX Shot Intake" 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 VFX shot descriptions and Jev routes each shot to a workstream while scoring its estimated execution complexity.
Discipline: Filmmaking & Animation (Visual effects).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: A consistent workstream and complexity grade help teams triage bids and assign specialists without prose estimates.

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": <Shot descriptions, plates context, and delivery specs>, "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)
{
  "vfx_workstream": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which VFX workstream best fits this shot?",
    "criteria": {
      "compositing": "Layer integration, cleanup, or screen replacement",
      "creature": "Digital character or creature work",
      "environment": "Set extension or environment creation",
      "simulation": "Particles, fluids, destruction, or cloth"
    }
  },
  "execution_complexity": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How complex is this shot likely to execute?",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Straightforward task",
      "2: Several standard steps",
      "3: Significant technical or artistic challenge",
      "4: High uncertainty or many dependencies"
    ]
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0609. Animatic Pacing Check

ID: film-animation-animatic-pacing-check
Sub-discipline: Animatics
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: Paste a sequence’s panel timing and scene notes and Jev routes it to a pacing pattern while judging whether the rhythm needs review.

Why typed decisions: Discrete pacing patterns and a review flag support fast sequence-level triage without subjective generated feedback.

TAM: Global animation preproduction: ~$2B
SAM: Animatic and editorial teams: ~$300M
SOM: Early reachable studios: ~$900K

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Animatic Pacing Check" 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 sequence’s panel timing and scene notes and Jev routes it to a pacing pattern while judging whether the rhythm needs review.
Discipline: Filmmaking & Animation (Animatics).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: Discrete pacing patterns and a review flag support fast sequence-level triage without subjective generated feedback.

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": <Panel timings, sequence notes, and target runtime>, "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)
{
  "pacing_pattern": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which pacing pattern best describes the sequence?",
    "criteria": {
      "rapid": "Short beats and frequent changes",
      "measured": "Steady, moderate progression",
      "sustained": "Long holds or extended action",
      "uneven": "Abrupt changes in beat duration"
    }
  },
  "review_needed": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the sequence’s pacing warrant an editorial review?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The rhythm may undermine clarity, tension, or intended emphasis",
      "false": "The rhythm appears suitable for its intended purpose"
    }
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0610. Motion Brief Sorter

ID: film-animation-motion-brief-sorter
Sub-discipline: Motion design
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: Paste a motion design brief and Jev routes it to a visual approach while scoring how tightly it constrains the design.

Why typed decisions: Approach labels and a constraint score quickly route briefs to the right template and review path.

TAM: Global motion design services and software: ~$8B
SAM: Commercial motion design workflows: ~$1B
SOM: Early reachable studios: ~$2M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Motion Brief Sorter" 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 motion design brief and Jev routes it to a visual approach while scoring how tightly it constrains the design.
Discipline: Filmmaking & Animation (Motion design).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: Approach labels and a constraint score quickly route briefs to the right template and review path.

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": <Motion brief, aspect ratio, and delivery platform>, "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)
{
  "visual_approach": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which visual approach best fits the brief?",
    "criteria": {
      "type_led": "Typography carries the visual message",
      "shape_system": "Abstract shapes and graphic transitions",
      "product_focus": "Product or object is the hero",
      "character_led": "Characters or illustrative figures lead"
    }
  },
  "constraint_level": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How constrained is the creative solution by the brief?",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Broad creative freedom",
      "2: A few clear guardrails",
      "3: Many specified requirements",
      "4: Strict system or exact-match requirements"
    ]
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0611. Casting Sides Sorter

ID: film-animation-casting-sides-sorter
Sub-discipline: Casting and performance
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: Paste character breakdowns and audition notes and Jev routes each submission to a role-fit category while scoring fit strength.

Why typed decisions: A bounded fit category and score support shortlist triage while leaving final casting judgment to people.

TAM: Global casting and production tools: ~$3B
SAM: Screen casting workflows: ~$500M
SOM: Early reachable casting teams: ~$1M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Casting Sides Sorter" 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 character breakdowns and audition notes and Jev routes each submission to a role-fit category while scoring fit strength.
Discipline: Filmmaking & Animation (Casting and performance).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: A bounded fit category and score support shortlist triage while leaving final casting judgment to people.

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": <Character breakdown, audition notes, and role requirements>, "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)
{
  "role_fit": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which role-fit category best describes this submission?",
    "criteria": {
      "strong_fit": "Clearly aligns with the role requirements",
      "partial_fit": "Some requirements align, others are uncertain",
      "alternate_role": "May suit a different role in the project",
      "insufficient_evidence": "Notes do not establish a useful fit"
    }
  },
  "fit_strength": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How strong is the evidence for this fit?",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Weak evidence",
      "2: Some relevant evidence",
      "3: Strong evidence",
      "4: Compelling evidence across key requirements"
    ]
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0612. Prop Continuity Desk

ID: film-animation-prop-continuity-desk
Sub-discipline: Art department
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: Paste prop notes from multiple scenes and Jev routes each item to a continuity status while judging whether it needs a tracking record.

Why typed decisions: Explicit continuity states and a tracking decision keep prop handoffs consistent and searchable.

TAM: Global film production management: ~$5B
SAM: Art department and continuity workflows: ~$500M
SOM: Early reachable productions: ~$1M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Prop Continuity Desk" 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 prop notes from multiple scenes and Jev routes each item to a continuity status while judging whether it needs a tracking record.
Discipline: Filmmaking & Animation (Art department).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: Explicit continuity states and a tracking decision keep prop handoffs consistent and searchable.

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": <Prop notes, scene order, and established prop states>, "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)
{
  "prop_status": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "What continuity status best fits this prop note?",
    "criteria": {
      "stable": "State remains consistent across scenes",
      "intentional_change": "A change is clearly motivated by the story",
      "possible_mismatch": "A state change may be accidental",
      "unclear": "The notes do not establish the prop state"
    }
  },
  "track_record": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Should this prop receive an explicit continuity tracking record?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Its state or story importance warrants tracking",
      "false": "It is incidental and unlikely to create continuity risk"
    }
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0613. Costume Arc Mapper

ID: film-animation-costume-arc-mapper
Sub-discipline: Costume design
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: Paste costume breakdowns across a character’s scenes and Jev routes each look to an arc stage while scoring continuity sensitivity.

Why typed decisions: Typed arc stages and sensitivity levels can populate a costume breakdown directly and flag risky transitions.

TAM: Global costume and production services: ~$3B
SAM: Screen costume departments: ~$400M
SOM: Early reachable productions: ~$800K

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Costume Arc Mapper" 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 costume breakdowns across a character’s scenes and Jev routes each look to an arc stage while scoring continuity sensitivity.
Discipline: Filmmaking & Animation (Costume design).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: Typed arc stages and sensitivity levels can populate a costume breakdown directly and flag risky transitions.

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": <Character scenes, costume descriptions, and chronology>, "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)
{
  "arc_stage": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which story stage best describes this costume look?",
    "criteria": {
      "established": "Baseline look with no major change",
      "transitioning": "Look shows a developing change",
      "transformed": "Look reflects a substantial character shift",
      "situational": "Look is driven mainly by a specific event or task"
    }
  },
  "continuity_sensitivity": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How sensitive is this look to continuity across adjacent scenes?",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Low sensitivity",
      "2: Minor details matter",
      "3: Close matching needed",
      "4: Exact state and detail tracking needed"
    ]
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0614. Lens Intent Router

ID: film-animation-lens-intent-router
Sub-discipline: Cinematography
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: Paste shot descriptions and Jev routes each shot to a lensing intent while judging whether the intent is clearly specified.

Why typed decisions: A fixed intent category and clarity flag can support lens planning without suggesting creative choices in prose.

TAM: Global camera and cinematography market: ~$7B
SAM: Narrative cinematography planning: ~$700M
SOM: Early reachable camera teams: ~$1.2M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Lens Intent Router" 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 shot descriptions and Jev routes each shot to a lensing intent while judging whether the intent is clearly specified.
Discipline: Filmmaking & Animation (Cinematography).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: A fixed intent category and clarity flag can support lens planning without suggesting creative choices in prose.

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": <Shot descriptions, camera package, and visual references>, "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)
{
  "lensing_intent": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which lensing intent is most evident in the shot description?",
    "criteria": {
      "intimate": "Emphasize proximity or emotional closeness",
      "spatial": "Emphasize depth, geography, or environment",
      "compressed": "Flatten distance or isolate layers",
      "neutral": "Prioritize a naturalistic, unobtrusive view"
    }
  },
  "intent_clear": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is the intended lensing effect clear enough to plan from?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The desired spatial or emotional effect is discernible",
      "false": "The description does not establish a lensing intent"
    }
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0615. Edit Handoff Router

ID: film-animation-edit-handoff-router
Sub-discipline: Film editing
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: Paste edit handoff notes and Jev routes each item to the next department while scoring how blocking it is to delivery.

Why typed decisions: Department routing and delivery impact create reliable task queues without relying on prose summaries.

TAM: Global post-production software: ~$6B
SAM: Editorial handoff and finishing: ~$800M
SOM: Early reachable post houses: ~$1.5M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Edit Handoff Router" 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 edit handoff notes and Jev routes each item to the next department while scoring how blocking it is to delivery.
Discipline: Filmmaking & Animation (Film editing).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: Department routing and delivery impact create reliable task queues without relying on prose summaries.

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": <Handoff notes, cut version, and delivery deadline>, "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)
{
  "next_department": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which department should receive this handoff item?",
    "criteria": {
      "picture": "Picture edit or editorial assistant",
      "sound": "Dialogue, effects, or mix team",
      "color": "Color grading or finishing",
      "online_delivery": "Conform, titles, or delivery operations"
    }
  },
  "delivery_impact": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How much could this item block delivery?",
    "criteria": [
      "1: No delivery impact",
      "2: Minor scheduling impact",
      "3: Could delay a milestone",
      "4: Directly blocks final delivery"
    ]
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0616. Lighting Cue Planner

ID: film-animation-lighting-cue-planner
Sub-discipline: Film lighting
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: Paste scene lighting notes and Jev routes each setup to a lighting approach while scoring its technical complexity.

Why typed decisions: Approach tags and complexity grades can guide equipment and crew planning more consistently than generated suggestions.

TAM: Global film lighting and grip market: ~$8B
SAM: Narrative and commercial lighting plans: ~$600M
SOM: Early reachable crews: ~$1M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Lighting Cue Planner" 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 scene lighting notes and Jev routes each setup to a lighting approach while scoring its technical complexity.
Discipline: Filmmaking & Animation (Film lighting).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: Approach tags and complexity grades can guide equipment and crew planning more consistently than generated suggestions.

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": <Scene lighting notes, location constraints, and available package>, "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)
{
  "lighting_approach": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which lighting approach best describes the setup?",
    "criteria": {
      "naturalistic": "Motivated by available or plausible sources",
      "sculpted": "Deliberately shaped key, fill, and contrast",
      "high_key": "Bright, even, low-contrast treatment",
      "low_key": "Dark, contrast-rich treatment"
    }
  },
  "technical_complexity": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How technically complex is this setup to achieve?",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Simple setup",
      "2: Standard crew coordination",
      "3: Multiple sources or constraints",
      "4: High rigging, control, or safety demands"
    ]
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0617. Dialogue Pickup Triage

ID: film-animation-dialogue-pickup-triage
Sub-discipline: Production sound
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: Paste dialogue and production sound reports and Jev routes each line to a pickup category while judging whether a replacement is likely needed.

Why typed decisions: A pickup category and explicit need decision turn sound reports into a practical ADR or repair queue.

TAM: Global production sound and audio post: ~$5B
SAM: Dialogue repair and ADR workflows: ~$500M
SOM: Early reachable audio teams: ~$900K

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Dialogue Pickup Triage" 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 dialogue and production sound reports and Jev routes each line to a pickup category while judging whether a replacement is likely needed.
Discipline: Filmmaking & Animation (Production sound).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: A pickup category and explicit need decision turn sound reports into a practical ADR or repair queue.

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": <Dialogue excerpts, sound reports, and scene context>, "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)
{
  "pickup_type": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which pickup category best fits this line?",
    "criteria": {
      "intelligibility": "Words are hard to understand",
      "noise_contamination": "Noise or interference compromises the take",
      "performance_match": "Delivery does not match the intended performance",
      "technical_gap": "Line is missing or technically unusable"
    }
  },
  "pickup_likely": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is a pickup or substantial repair likely necessary?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The recorded line is unlikely to work as delivered",
      "false": "The existing line is probably usable"
    }
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0618. Title Card Inspector

ID: film-animation-title-card-inspector
Sub-discipline: Titles and graphics
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: Paste title-card specs and review notes and Jev routes each item to a design issue while scoring its delivery risk.

Why typed decisions: Fixed issue tags and a risk grade support precise graphics fixes and delivery checks without generated copy.

TAM: Global motion graphics and title services: ~$4B
SAM: Screen title and graphics workflows: ~$500M
SOM: Early reachable teams: ~$1M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Title Card Inspector" 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 title-card specs and review notes and Jev routes each item to a design issue while scoring its delivery risk.
Discipline: Filmmaking & Animation (Titles and graphics).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: Fixed issue tags and a risk grade support precise graphics fixes and delivery checks without generated copy.

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": <Title specifications, review notes, and delivery requirements>, "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)
{
  "design_issue": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which title-card issue best fits this note?",
    "criteria": {
      "legibility": "Readability, size, or contrast",
      "brand_style": "Typography or visual identity mismatch",
      "safe_area": "Placement or platform-safe margins",
      "timing": "Duration, animation, or synchronization"
    }
  },
  "delivery_risk": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How likely is this issue to affect approval or delivery?",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Cosmetic preference",
      "2: Small review concern",
      "3: Likely approval issue",
      "4: Fails a stated delivery requirement"
    ]
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0619. Storyboard Asset Finder

ID: film-animation-storyboard-asset-finder
Sub-discipline: Visual development
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: Paste visual references and scene needs and Jev routes each reference to an art department while judging whether it is usable for the scene.

Why typed decisions: Asset categories and a usability flag provide searchable routing without generating reference descriptions.

TAM: Global visual development and preproduction: ~$3B
SAM: Film and animation reference workflows: ~$400M
SOM: Early reachable studios: ~$900K

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Storyboard Asset Finder" 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 visual references and scene needs and Jev routes each reference to an art department while judging whether it is usable for the scene.
Discipline: Filmmaking & Animation (Visual development).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: Asset categories and a usability flag provide searchable routing without generating reference descriptions.

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": <Reference descriptions, scene needs, and project style 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)
{
  "asset_department": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which visual development area should use this reference?",
    "criteria": {
      "character": "Character shape, costume, or expression",
      "environment": "Location, architecture, or landscape",
      "prop": "Handheld object or set dressing",
      "lighting_palette": "Light, color, or atmosphere"
    }
  },
  "usable_reference": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is this reference usable for the stated scene need?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "It provides a relevant, usable visual cue",
      "false": "It is too ambiguous or mismatched to guide the scene"
    }
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0620. Sequence Risk Board

ID: film-animation-sequence-risk-board
Sub-discipline: Production planning
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: Paste a sequence breakdown and Jev routes it to a production risk type while scoring the overall likelihood of disruption.

Why typed decisions: A fixed risk category and graded likelihood can populate a risk register and escalate the right owner immediately.

TAM: Global production management software: ~$5B
SAM: Film and animation risk planning: ~$600M
SOM: Early reachable productions: ~$1.2M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Sequence Risk Board" 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 sequence breakdown and Jev routes it to a production risk type while scoring the overall likelihood of disruption.
Discipline: Filmmaking & Animation (Production planning).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: A fixed risk category and graded likelihood can populate a risk register and escalate the right owner immediately.

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": <Sequence breakdown, schedule, and production constraints>, "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)
{
  "risk_type": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which risk type best describes the sequence’s main exposure?",
    "criteria": {
      "schedule": "Time, availability, or setup duration",
      "location": "Access, weather, or location limitations",
      "technical": "Camera, effects, or specialist requirements",
      "performance": "Stunts, animals, crowds, or complex action"
    }
  },
  "disruption_likelihood": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How likely is this risk to disrupt the planned shoot?",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Unlikely",
      "2: Possible but manageable",
      "3: Likely without mitigation",
      "4: Very likely or already emerging"
    ]
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0621. Continuity Glitch Sweep

ID: film-animation-continuity-glitch-sweep
Sub-discipline: Script supervision
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste adjacent scene descriptions and Jev flags whether wardrobe, props, screen direction, or time-of-day continuity may be broken.

Why typed decisions: Independent yes/no checks make continuity warnings easy to verify and combine without relying on a vague prose summary.

TAM: Global film/TV production software: $5B+
SAM: Script-supervision and continuity tools: $300M–$800M
SOM: Early-stage niche product: $1M–$5M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Continuity Glitch Sweep" 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 adjacent scene descriptions and Jev flags whether wardrobe, props, screen direction, or time-of-day continuity may be broken.
Discipline: Filmmaking & Animation (Script supervision).
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: Independent yes/no checks make continuity warnings easy to verify and combine without relying on a vague prose summary.

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": <Paired scene descriptions and continuity 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)
{
  "wardrobe_mismatch": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Do the scenes indicate a potentially inconsistent costume or costume state for a character who appears in both?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "A shared character's costume, condition, or accessories appear inconsistent without an explained change.",
      "false": "No meaningful costume inconsistency is indicated."
    }
  },
  "prop_mismatch": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does a shared prop appear to change location, condition, or possession without an explained action?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "A prop's state or holder conflicts between the descriptions.",
      "false": "Prop state and possession are consistent or explained."
    }
  },
  "screen_direction_conflict": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Do the descriptions suggest a screen-direction or spatial-layout conflict between the scenes?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The stated geography or movement direction appears contradictory.",
      "false": "No spatial or screen-direction conflict is indicated."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0622. Storyboard Readiness Gate

ID: film-animation-storyboard-readiness-gate
Sub-discipline: Storyboarding
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste a scene beat and a storyboard panel description, and Jev checks whether the panel communicates the beat, action, and staging clearly enough to review.

Why typed decisions: Separate binary checks expose specific readiness gaps instead of asking artists to interpret a generated critique.

TAM: Global animation and film preproduction: $3B+
SAM: Storyboard and previsualization software: $200M–$600M
SOM: Early-stage niche product: $1M–$4M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Storyboard Readiness 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 scene beat and a storyboard panel description, and Jev checks whether the panel communicates the beat, action, and staging clearly enough to review.
Discipline: Filmmaking & Animation (Storyboarding).
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: Separate binary checks expose specific readiness gaps instead of asking artists to interpret a generated critique.

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": <Scene beat plus panel description and intended staging>, "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)
{
  "beat_visible": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the panel description make the scene's intended dramatic beat visually legible?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The described image conveys the intended beat without requiring unstated context.",
      "false": "The beat is unclear or depends on information absent from the image."
    }
  },
  "action_readable": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is the principal character action understandable from the described panel?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The action and its subject are identifiable.",
      "false": "The action or who performs it is ambiguous."
    }
  },
  "staging_reviewable": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the description provide enough spatial staging to judge the composition?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Character placement, relevant objects, or spatial relationships are sufficiently specified.",
      "false": "Key spatial relationships are missing or confusing."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0623. Shot Match Monitor

ID: film-animation-shot-match-monitor
Sub-discipline: Cinematography
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste neighboring shot notes and Jev checks whether eyelines, camera axis, and framing scale are likely to match across the cut.

Why typed decisions: Independent checks let crews catch concrete matching risks before a costly reshoot without substituting generated advice for their judgment.

TAM: Global production and post-production tools: $5B+
SAM: Cinematography planning and shot-management software: $200M–$500M
SOM: Early-stage niche product: $1M–$3M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Shot Match Monitor" 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 neighboring shot notes and Jev checks whether eyelines, camera axis, and framing scale are likely to match across the cut.
Discipline: Filmmaking & Animation (Cinematography).
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: Independent checks let crews catch concrete matching risks before a costly reshoot without substituting generated advice for their 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": <Neighboring shot descriptions with lens, framing, and blocking 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)
{
  "eyeline_match_risk": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Do the notes indicate an eyeline mismatch across the cut?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The implied gaze directions conflict or fail to connect where a match is intended.",
      "false": "Eyelines appear compatible or no match is intended."
    }
  },
  "axis_crossing_risk": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Do the camera positions or movement notes suggest an unintended crossing of the established axis?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The cut may reverse screen direction without a motivated axis change.",
      "false": "The axis is maintained or the change is clearly motivated."
    }
  },
  "scale_jump_risk": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is there a likely distracting jump in framing scale between the shots?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The framing sizes appear too similar or abruptly different for the intended cut.",
      "false": "The scale progression appears intentional or suitably distinct."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0624. Animatic Pace Check

ID: film-animation-animatic-pace-check
Sub-discipline: Animatics
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste a beat list with panel durations and Jev flags pacing risks such as rushed story turns, lingering holds, or uneven timing.

Why typed decisions: Timed yes/no checks are directly actionable in an edit timeline and avoid false precision from a single overall pacing score.

TAM: Animation and film preproduction: $3B+
SAM: Animatic and editorial workflow tools: $150M–$400M
SOM: Early-stage niche product: $1M–$3M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Animatic Pace Check" 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 beat list with panel durations and Jev flags pacing risks such as rushed story turns, lingering holds, or uneven timing.
Discipline: Filmmaking & Animation (Animatics).
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: Timed yes/no checks are directly actionable in an edit timeline and avoid false precision from a single overall pacing score.

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": <Ordered beat descriptions with approximate durations>, "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)
{
  "beat_underheld": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does any key story beat appear too brief to register at its stated duration?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "A meaningful reveal, reaction, or action seems unlikely to read in the available time.",
      "false": "The key beats appear to have sufficient time to register."
    }
  },
  "hold_unmotivated": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does a panel or beat appear to hold longer than its described dramatic purpose supports?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The duration suggests an unexplained or potentially inert hold.",
      "false": "The hold appears motivated by the beat or no excessive hold is indicated."
    }
  },
  "timing_uneven": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the sequence suggest an abrupt timing change that may undermine the intended rhythm?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Adjacent durations or beat density create a likely unintended rhythm break.",
      "false": "The timing progression appears coherent or intentionally contrasted."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0625. Matte Plate Scout

ID: film-animation-matte-plate-scout
Sub-discipline: Visual effects
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste an environment brief and plate notes, and Jev checks whether the plate is suitable for the planned matte painting or environment extension.

Why typed decisions: Specific pass/fail suitability checks help artists shortlist plates while leaving aesthetic decisions to the team.

TAM: Global visual-effects production: $10B+
SAM: Matte-painting and environment workflow software: $300M–$900M
SOM: Early-stage niche product: $1M–$4M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Matte Plate Scout" 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 an environment brief and plate notes, and Jev checks whether the plate is suitable for the planned matte painting or environment extension.
Discipline: Filmmaking & Animation (Visual effects).
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: Specific pass/fail suitability checks help artists shortlist plates while leaving aesthetic decisions to the team.

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": <Environment brief plus plate metadata and capture 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)
{
  "perspective_compatible": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the plate perspective appear compatible with the planned environment extension?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The stated camera viewpoint and scene geometry appear workable together.",
      "false": "The perspective is materially incompatible or insufficiently specified."
    }
  },
  "lighting_compatible": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the plate lighting appear compatible with the intended environment and extension?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Direction, quality, or time-of-day cues appear consistent enough to integrate.",
      "false": "Lighting cues conflict substantially or cannot be assessed from the notes."
    }
  },
  "detail_usable": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the plate appear to contain usable detail in the areas that need extension or integration?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The relevant regions appear sufficiently described as clear and usable.",
      "false": "Relevant regions appear obstructed, degraded, or unspecified."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0626. Green Screen Triage

ID: film-animation-green-screen-triage
Sub-discipline: Compositing
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste chroma-screen plate notes and Jev flags likely keying problems involving spill, screen coverage, or subject separation.

Why typed decisions: Separate binary risk checks translate into practical plate triage rather than an unreliable all-purpose quality verdict.

TAM: Global post-production and VFX: $10B+
SAM: Compositing and keying workflow tools: $300M–$800M
SOM: Early-stage niche product: $1M–$4M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Green Screen Triage" 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 chroma-screen plate notes and Jev flags likely keying problems involving spill, screen coverage, or subject separation.
Discipline: Filmmaking & Animation (Compositing).
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: Separate binary risk checks translate into practical plate triage rather than an unreliable all-purpose quality verdict.

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": <Plate description with screen, subject, lighting, and edge 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)
{
  "screen_coverage_problem": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Do the notes indicate that the chroma screen fails to cover areas needed for the key?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Required background areas are missing, obstructed, or outside the described screen coverage.",
      "false": "The screen appears to cover the required background."
    }
  },
  "spill_risk": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Do the lighting or subject notes indicate a likely color-spill problem?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The subject is described as reflecting or being contaminated by screen color.",
      "false": "No meaningful spill risk is indicated."
    }
  },
  "edge_separation_problem": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the subject appear difficult to separate cleanly from the screen?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Edges, motion blur, transparency, or similar features are likely to complicate the key.",
      "false": "The notes indicate adequate subject separation."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0627. Motion Path Sanity

ID: film-animation-motion-path-sanity
Sub-discipline: Motion design
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste an animation brief and keyframe or path notes, and Jev checks for likely motion conflicts, awkward easing, or off-screen exits.

Why typed decisions: Independent motion-condition flags let designers fix specific timeline issues without prescribing a generated animation.

TAM: Global creative and motion-design software: $10B+
SAM: Motion-design workflow and review tools: $300M–$800M
SOM: Early-stage niche product: $1M–$4M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Motion Path Sanity" 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 an animation brief and keyframe or path notes, and Jev checks for likely motion conflicts, awkward easing, or off-screen exits.
Discipline: Filmmaking & Animation (Motion 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: Independent motion-condition flags let designers fix specific timeline issues without prescribing a generated animation.

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": <Animation brief plus keyframe, path, and timing 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)
{
  "path_conflict": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the described motion path conflict with the object's intended destination or layout?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The path appears to miss, obstruct, or contradict the intended destination.",
      "false": "The path appears consistent with the stated destination."
    }
  },
  "easing_mismatch": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the easing described seem mismatched to the intended physical or emotional motion?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The easing is likely to make the motion feel unintentionally abrupt, floaty, or mechanical.",
      "false": "The easing appears appropriate or no mismatch is evident."
    }
  },
  "frame_exit_risk": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the object appear likely to leave the frame unintentionally during the described move?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The path or framing notes imply an accidental crop or exit.",
      "false": "The object remains framed as intended or an exit is intentional."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0628. Lip Sync Spotter

ID: film-animation-lip-sync-spotter
Sub-discipline: Character animation
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste dialogue timing, phoneme cues, and mouth-shape notes, and Jev flags likely sync gaps or mismatched visemes for animator review.

Why typed decisions: Binary timing and correspondence checks can focus animator attention without generating dialogue or dictating performance.

TAM: Global animation production software: $3B+
SAM: Character animation and lip-sync tools: $200M–$600M
SOM: Early-stage niche product: $1M–$3M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Lip Sync Spotter" 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 dialogue timing, phoneme cues, and mouth-shape notes, and Jev flags likely sync gaps or mismatched visemes for animator review.
Discipline: Filmmaking & Animation (Character animation).
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: Binary timing and correspondence checks can focus animator attention without generating dialogue or dictating performance.

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": <Dialogue transcript with timecodes and mouth-shape cues>, "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)
{
  "sync_gap": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Do the notes suggest that visible mouth movement begins or ends out of sync with the dialogue?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Timing cues indicate a likely onset, ending, or sustained sync mismatch.",
      "false": "No sync mismatch is indicated."
    }
  },
  "viseme_mismatch": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does any stated mouth shape appear inconsistent with its corresponding phoneme cue?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "A described shape conflicts with the sound cue it is assigned to.",
      "false": "The stated shapes appear compatible with their cues."
    }
  },
  "held_pose_risk": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the timing suggest an unintended held mouth pose during active speech?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Active dialogue spans a gap with no suitable mouth-shape change indicated.",
      "false": "Mouth-shape changes appear adequate or a hold is intentional."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0629. Rig Deformation Watch

ID: film-animation-rig-deformation-watch
Sub-discipline: Character rigging
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste a rig test description with poses and deformation notes, and Jev flags likely joint, volume, or silhouette failures.

Why typed decisions: Independent yes/no checks produce a focused bug list that riggers can reproduce and verify directly.

TAM: Global animation production software: $3B+
SAM: Character rigging and pipeline tools: $200M–$500M
SOM: Early-stage niche product: $1M–$3M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Rig Deformation Watch" 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 rig test description with poses and deformation notes, and Jev flags likely joint, volume, or silhouette failures.
Discipline: Filmmaking & Animation (Character rigging).
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: Independent yes/no checks produce a focused bug list that riggers can reproduce and verify directly.

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": <Rig test poses plus joint and deformation observations>, "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)
{
  "joint_deformation_issue": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Do the notes indicate an implausible deformation around a tested joint?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "A bend, twist, or joint transition appears broken or unnatural.",
      "false": "No joint deformation issue is indicated."
    }
  },
  "volume_loss_risk": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the pose appear to cause unintended loss or gain of character volume?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The described deformation collapses or expands volume unexpectedly.",
      "false": "Volume appears stable or a change is intentional."
    }
  },
  "silhouette_collision": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the pose create a likely silhouette collision that obscures important anatomy or action?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Body parts or props overlap in a way that harms readability.",
      "false": "The silhouette remains readable or overlap is intentional."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0630. Asset Reuse Finder

ID: film-animation-asset-reuse-finder
Sub-discipline: Animation production
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste a new scene requirement and a catalog of existing asset descriptions, and Jev flags assets that are likely reusable with or without modification.

Why typed decisions: Explicit condition checks make suggested reuse auditable and help teams avoid treating semantic similarity as a guaranteed fit.

TAM: Global animation and game production tools: $10B+
SAM: Animation asset and production management: $300M–$800M
SOM: Early-stage niche product: $1M–$4M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Asset Reuse Finder" 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 new scene requirement and a catalog of existing asset descriptions, and Jev flags assets that are likely reusable with or without modification.
Discipline: Filmmaking & Animation (Animation production).
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 condition checks make suggested reuse auditable and help teams avoid treating semantic similarity as a guaranteed fit.

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": <Scene requirement and structured asset catalog entries>, "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)
{
  "functionally_reusable": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does this asset serve the same practical role required by the scene?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The asset's function matches the requirement closely enough to consider reuse.",
      "false": "Its function differs or cannot be established."
    }
  },
  "visual_style_compatible": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the asset appear compatible with the scene's visual style?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Its described design, detail, and style fit the scene.",
      "false": "A visible style mismatch is indicated."
    }
  },
  "modification_reasonable": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the asset appear reusable with a limited, plausible modification?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The needed changes appear bounded and do not require rebuilding its essential form.",
      "false": "The changes appear extensive or the asset is already a direct fit."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0631. Color Script Drift

ID: film-animation-color-script-drift
Sub-discipline: Color scripting
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste a sequence's color-script notes and scene beats, and Jev checks whether palette shifts support the intended emotional progression or create accidental drift.

Why typed decisions: Independent checks distinguish purposeful contrast from continuity mistakes without trying to invent an artistic palette.

TAM: Global animation and film production: $5B+
SAM: Color scripting and visual development tools: $100M–$300M
SOM: Early-stage niche product: $1M–$2M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Color Script Drift" 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 sequence's color-script notes and scene beats, and Jev checks whether palette shifts support the intended emotional progression or create accidental drift.
Discipline: Filmmaking & Animation (Color scripting).
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: Independent checks distinguish purposeful contrast from continuity mistakes without trying to invent an artistic palette.

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": <Ordered scene beats with palette and mood 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)
{
  "emotional_color_conflict": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does a scene's palette appear to conflict with its stated emotional intention?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The described color treatment seems to undermine the stated mood without an explained purpose.",
      "false": "The palette supports the mood or the contrast is motivated."
    }
  },
  "unmotivated_palette_jump": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is there a palette change between adjacent scenes that appears unmotivated?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "A substantial color shift lacks a narrative, location, or time-based reason.",
      "false": "The shift is supported or no substantial shift occurs."
    }
  },
  "sequence_progression_break": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does a scene appear to break the stated color progression for the sequence?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The palette contradicts the described progression without a clear intentional pivot.",
      "false": "The palette follows or purposefully develops the progression."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0632. Sound Cue Coverage

ID: film-animation-sound-cue-coverage
Sub-discipline: Film editing
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste scene action and a sound-cue list, and Jev flags story actions, transitions, or visual beats that may lack a planned sound cue.

Why typed decisions: Coverage checks make omissions visible while editors retain control over the creative use of silence.

TAM: Global film and post-production tools: $5B+
SAM: Editorial sound-planning and review tools: $150M–$400M
SOM: Early-stage niche product: $1M–$3M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Sound Cue Coverage" 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 scene action and a sound-cue list, and Jev flags story actions, transitions, or visual beats that may lack a planned sound cue.
Discipline: Filmmaking & Animation (Film editing).
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: Coverage checks make omissions visible while editors retain control over the creative use of silence.

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": <Scene action and time-ordered sound-cue 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)
{
  "key_action_uncued": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does a key on-screen action appear to lack a planned sound cue?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "An action likely to require a cue has no corresponding sound note.",
      "false": "Key actions are covered or intentionally silent."
    }
  },
  "transition_uncued": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does a scene transition appear to lack an indicated audio bridge or deliberate silence?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The transition has no described audio treatment or intentional silence.",
      "false": "A bridge, sound change, or deliberate silence is indicated."
    }
  },
  "cue_visual_conflict": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does any planned sound cue appear to conflict with the described visual action?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Cue timing or meaning seems inconsistent with the action.",
      "false": "No conflict is indicated."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0633. Subtitle Frame Guard

ID: film-animation-subtitle-frame-guard
Sub-discipline: Localization and finishing
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste subtitle cues with timecodes and shot descriptions, and Jev flags cues likely to obscure faces, key action, or rapid visual changes.

Why typed decisions: Simple overlap checks are easier to review and apply than generated subtitle-placement recommendations.

TAM: Global localization and post-production: $5B+
SAM: Subtitle and finishing workflow tools: $200M–$500M
SOM: Early-stage niche product: $1M–$3M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Subtitle Frame Guard" 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 subtitle cues with timecodes and shot descriptions, and Jev flags cues likely to obscure faces, key action, or rapid visual changes.
Discipline: Filmmaking & Animation (Localization and finishing).
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: Simple overlap checks are easier to review and apply than generated subtitle-placement recommendations.

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": <Subtitle cue text, timecodes, and corresponding shot 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)
{
  "face_obstruction_risk": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is a subtitle likely to obscure a face or other visually important subject?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The indicated placement overlaps a face or focal subject during a relevant moment.",
      "false": "No important-subject obstruction is indicated."
    }
  },
  "action_obstruction_risk": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is a subtitle likely to obscure important on-screen action or a critical visual detail?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The cue overlaps the described action or detail needed to understand the shot.",
      "false": "No important visual obstruction is indicated."
    }
  },
  "reading_window_risk": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the cue appear too brief or visually dense for comfortable reading?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Timing or text density suggests insufficient reading time.",
      "false": "Timing and density appear reasonable."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0634. Prop Scale Sentinel

ID: film-animation-prop-scale-sentinel
Sub-discipline: Production design
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste prop dimensions, character references, and shot notes, and Jev checks whether a prop's scale and handling appear consistent across planned shots.

Why typed decisions: Targeted binary checks catch practical visual mismatches before fabrication or animation polish.

TAM: Global film and animation production: $5B+
SAM: Production design and asset planning tools: $100M–$300M
SOM: Early-stage niche product: $1M–$2M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Prop Scale Sentinel" 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 prop dimensions, character references, and shot notes, and Jev checks whether a prop's scale and handling appear consistent across planned shots.
Discipline: Filmmaking & Animation (Production 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: Targeted binary checks catch practical visual mismatches before fabrication or animation polish.

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": <Prop measurements plus character, shot, and handling 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)
{
  "scale_inconsistent": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the prop appear to change scale relative to the same character or environment across shots?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Descriptions imply an unexplained relative-size change.",
      "false": "Relative scale appears consistent or the change is explained."
    }
  },
  "handling_implausible": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the described handling seem implausible for the prop's stated size or weight?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The action conflicts with the prop's implied physical properties.",
      "false": "Handling appears plausible or physical properties are unspecified."
    }
  },
  "shot_visibility_risk": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is the prop likely to be obscured in a shot where it must be visually readable?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Blocking, framing, or lighting notes hide a prop needed for the scene.",
      "false": "The prop appears readable or its visibility is not essential."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0635. Camera Move Feasibility

ID: film-animation-camera-move-feasibility
Sub-discipline: Previsualization
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste a proposed camera move, set dimensions, and blocking notes, and Jev flags collisions, impossible paths, or visibility losses.

Why typed decisions: Independent feasibility checks help crews identify physical risks while leaving shot design decisions in human hands.

TAM: Global film production and virtual production: $5B+
SAM: Previsualization and camera-planning software: $200M–$600M
SOM: Early-stage niche product: $1M–$3M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Camera Move Feasibility" 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 proposed camera move, set dimensions, and blocking notes, and Jev flags collisions, impossible paths, or visibility losses.
Discipline: Filmmaking & Animation (Previsualization).
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: Independent feasibility checks help crews identify physical risks while leaving shot design decisions in human hands.

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": <Camera path, set dimensions, lens notes, and blocking>, "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)
{
  "path_collision_risk": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the proposed camera path appear to intersect a set element or performer?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The route conflicts with described geometry or blocking.",
      "false": "No route collision is indicated."
    }
  },
  "move_space_insufficient": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the move require more physical camera space than the set appears to provide?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The path or rig needs exceed the described available space.",
      "false": "The space appears sufficient or the requirement is not exceeded."
    }
  },
  "subject_visibility_lost": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the move appear to lose a subject or essential detail that should remain visible?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The path, framing, or occlusion notes hide required visual information.",
      "false": "Required subjects and details remain visible or the loss is intentional."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0636. Effects Shot Handoff

ID: film-animation-effects-shot-handoff
Sub-discipline: VFX production coordination
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste a shot brief and handoff package checklist, and Jev flags missing references, unclear responsibilities, or mismatched deliverable expectations.

Why typed decisions: A handful of explicit checks makes handoffs dependable without generating a replacement brief that may introduce errors.

TAM: Global VFX and post-production: $10B+
SAM: VFX production tracking and handoff tools: $300M–$900M
SOM: Early-stage niche product: $1M–$4M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Effects Shot Handoff" 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 shot brief and handoff package checklist, and Jev flags missing references, unclear responsibilities, or mismatched deliverable expectations.
Discipline: Filmmaking & Animation (VFX production coordination).
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: A handful of explicit checks makes handoffs dependable without generating a replacement brief that may introduce errors.

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": <Shot brief plus structured handoff fields and checklist>, "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)
{
  "reference_missing": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is a reference needed to understand or reproduce the requested effect missing from the handoff?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The brief depends on an absent visual, motion, or technical reference.",
      "false": "Required references are present or not needed."
    }
  },
  "responsibility_unclear": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is ownership of an essential task or element unclear between teams?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The notes leave a required task without a clear responsible party.",
      "false": "Responsibilities are clear or no shared task is indicated."
    }
  },
  "deliverable_mismatch": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Do the requested result and specified deliverable format appear inconsistent?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The format, layers, versions, or technical output do not support the stated request.",
      "false": "Deliverable expectations appear compatible."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0637. Frame Composition Audit

ID: film-animation-frame-composition-audit
Sub-discipline: Visual composition
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste a frame description and composition intent, and Jev checks whether the focal point, negative space, and visual hierarchy support the intended read.

Why typed decisions: Independent composition checks reveal specific readability risks without claiming to replace an artist's eye.

TAM: Global creative software and design tools: $10B+
SAM: Film, animation, and motion-design composition tools: $200M–$600M
SOM: Early-stage niche product: $1M–$3M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Frame Composition Audit" 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 frame description and composition intent, and Jev checks whether the focal point, negative space, and visual hierarchy support the intended read.
Discipline: Filmmaking & Animation (Visual composition).
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: Independent composition checks reveal specific readability risks without claiming to replace an artist's eye.

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": <Frame description with intended focal point and composition goals>, "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)
{
  "focal_point_unclear": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is the intended focal point likely to be unclear or compete with other elements?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Multiple elements compete or the intended subject lacks visual emphasis.",
      "false": "The focal point appears clear or competition is intentional."
    }
  },
  "negative_space_conflict": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the described negative space conflict with the composition's intended balance or direction?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Space distribution appears to undermine the intended visual flow or balance.",
      "false": "Negative space supports the stated intent or no conflict is indicated."
    }
  },
  "hierarchy_conflict": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the visual hierarchy appear to emphasize a secondary element over the intended subject?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Contrast, placement, or scale gives an unintended element greater prominence.",
      "false": "The intended subject appears to lead the hierarchy."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0638. Transition Rhythm Inspector

ID: film-animation-transition-rhythm-inspector
Sub-discipline: Editorial design
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste an edit sequence with transition types and beat notes, and Jev flags transitions that may disrupt clarity, continuity, or intended rhythm.

Why typed decisions: Discrete checks let editors keep creative freedom while quickly spotting transitions that may confuse an audience.

TAM: Global editing and post-production software: $5B+
SAM: Editorial review and transition workflow tools: $150M–$400M
SOM: Early-stage niche product: $1M–$3M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Transition Rhythm Inspector" 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 an edit sequence with transition types and beat notes, and Jev flags transitions that may disrupt clarity, continuity, or intended rhythm.
Discipline: Filmmaking & Animation (Editorial 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: Discrete checks let editors keep creative freedom while quickly spotting transitions that may confuse an audience.

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": <Ordered shot notes with transition types and intended rhythm>, "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)
{
  "transition_clarity_risk": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is a transition likely to make the relationship between the two shots unclear?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The cut or effect obscures whether time, place, or action has changed.",
      "false": "The transition's relationship appears clear or ambiguity is intentional."
    }
  },
  "continuity_break_risk": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the transition create a likely continuity break in action, direction, or screen geography?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Adjacent shot details conflict without an indicated purpose.",
      "false": "Continuity appears consistent or the break is motivated."
    }
  },
  "rhythm_disruption_risk": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the transition appear to disrupt the intended pace of the sequence?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Its duration or style conflicts with the stated rhythm or beat.",
      "false": "It supports the intended rhythm or no disruption is indicated."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0639. Crowd Shot Density

ID: film-animation-crowd-shot-density
Sub-discipline: Crowd animation
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste a crowd-shot brief with screen area, character counts, and movement notes, and Jev flags likely density, repetition, or collision problems.

Why typed decisions: Separate checks give crowd artists concrete review targets instead of an opaque judgment about whether a crowd looks convincing.

TAM: Global animation production: $3B+
SAM: Crowd simulation and animation workflow tools: $150M–$400M
SOM: Early-stage niche product: $1M–$3M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Crowd Shot Density" 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 crowd-shot brief with screen area, character counts, and movement notes, and Jev flags likely density, repetition, or collision problems.
Discipline: Filmmaking & Animation (Crowd animation).
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: Separate checks give crowd artists concrete review targets instead of an opaque judgment about whether a crowd looks convincing.

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": <Crowd shot description with counts, layout, and movement rules>, "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)
{
  "density_mismatch": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the described crowd density conflict with the shot's intended location or mood?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The number or spacing of figures seems inconsistent with the scene brief.",
      "false": "Density supports the setting and mood."
    }
  },
  "repetition_visible": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Are character or motion repetitions likely to be conspicuous in the shot?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Repeated designs, poses, or timing are likely to form visible patterns.",
      "false": "Variation appears sufficient or repetition is not visible."
    }
  },
  "crowd_collision_risk": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Do the movement notes suggest likely collisions or conflicting paths among crowd members?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Paths overlap in a way that appears physically or visually problematic.",
      "false": "Movement appears coordinated or collisions are intentional."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0640. Exposure Continuity Check

ID: film-animation-exposure-continuity-check
Sub-discipline: Color grading
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste neighboring shot notes with exposure and lighting references, and Jev flags likely brightness or contrast mismatches across intended cuts.

Why typed decisions: Shot-pair checks provide actionable continuity warnings without generating a grade or imposing a single aesthetic target.

TAM: Global post-production and color tools: $5B+
SAM: Color grading and shot-matching software: $200M–$600M
SOM: Early-stage niche product: $1M–$3M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Exposure Continuity Check" 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 neighboring shot notes with exposure and lighting references, and Jev flags likely brightness or contrast mismatches across intended cuts.
Discipline: Filmmaking & Animation (Color grading).
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: Shot-pair checks provide actionable continuity warnings without generating a grade or imposing a single aesthetic target.

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": <Adjacent shot exposure notes and intended lighting references>, "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)
{
  "brightness_jump": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is there an unexplained brightness jump between shots intended to cut together?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Exposure notes imply a distracting level change without a motivated shift.",
      "false": "Brightness is consistent or the change is intentional."
    }
  },
  "contrast_mismatch": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does contrast appear inconsistent across shots that should share the same lighting context?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Black, highlight, or contrast characteristics conflict without explanation.",
      "false": "Contrast appears compatible or the difference is motivated."
    }
  },
  "reference_conflict": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does either shot appear to depart from its stated exposure reference in a continuity-relevant way?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The notes indicate a meaningful mismatch with the shared reference.",
      "false": "The reference is met or the departure is intentional."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0641. Storyboard Panel Sorter

ID: film-animation-storyboard-panel-sorter
Sub-discipline: Storyboarding
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste panel descriptions and rank them by visual clarity, story importance, and staging potential using adjustable weights.

Why typed decisions: Comparable scores make it easy to prioritize panels consistently without relying on generated critique.

TAM: TAM: $2B+ storyboarding software and services
SAM: SAM: $300M digital storyboard tools
SOM: SOM: $3M early adopter segment

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Storyboard Panel Sorter" 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 panel descriptions and rank them by visual clarity, story importance, and staging potential using adjustable weights.
Discipline: Filmmaking & Animation (Storyboarding).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: Comparable scores make it easy to prioritize panels consistently without relying on generated critique.

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": <Project genre, scene context, panel descriptions, and weight settings>, "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)
{
  "visual_clarity": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How clearly can a viewer understand the action and composition from this panel description?",
    "criteria": [
      "Unclear or contradictory",
      "Mostly ambiguous",
      "Understandable with minor ambiguity",
      "Immediately clear"
    ]
  },
  "story_importance": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How essential is this panel to communicating the scene's story?",
    "criteria": [
      "Dispensable",
      "Adds little",
      "Supports an important beat",
      "Essential story beat"
    ]
  },
  "staging_potential": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How much useful staging information does this panel offer for production?",
    "criteria": [
      "No actionable staging",
      "Very limited",
      "Useful staging cues",
      "Rich, production-ready staging"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0642. Take Select Desk

ID: film-animation-take-select-desk
Sub-discipline: Live-action editing
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste take notes and rank performances by emotional fit, continuity, and editability with weights editors control.

Why typed decisions: A stable scorecard surfaces the strongest takes while leaving the final editorial choice to the filmmaker.

TAM: TAM: $5B+ post-production software and services
SAM: SAM: $500M production review tools
SOM: SOM: $5M indie editing teams

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Take Select Desk" 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 take notes and rank performances by emotional fit, continuity, and editability with weights editors control.
Discipline: Filmmaking & Animation (Live-action editing).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: A stable scorecard surfaces the strongest takes while leaving the final editorial choice to the filmmaker.

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": <Scene intention, continuity notes, take summaries, and weights>, "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)
{
  "emotional_fit": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How well does this take match the intended emotion of the scene?",
    "criteria": [
      "Misses the intention",
      "Weak match",
      "Good match",
      "Exceptionally aligned"
    ]
  },
  "continuity_fit": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How well does this take preserve continuity with adjacent shots?",
    "criteria": [
      "Major mismatch",
      "Noticeable mismatch",
      "Minor issues",
      "Seamless continuity"
    ]
  },
  "editability": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How easy would this take be to use in an edit?",
    "criteria": [
      "No usable material",
      "Very constrained",
      "Usable with care",
      "Multiple clean edit points"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0643. Animatic Beat Ranker

ID: film-animation-animatic-beat-ranker
Sub-discipline: Animatics
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste candidate animatic beat descriptions and rank them by pacing, clarity, and emotional impact using adjustable weights.

Why typed decisions: Dimension scores help teams compare beats before committing to expensive animation work.

TAM: TAM: $2B+ animation production tools
SAM: SAM: $250M previsualization and animatic tools
SOM: SOM: $3M animation studios

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Animatic Beat Ranker" 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 candidate animatic beat descriptions and rank them by pacing, clarity, and emotional impact using adjustable weights.
Discipline: Filmmaking & Animation (Animatics).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: Dimension scores help teams compare beats before committing to expensive animation work.

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": <Sequence goal, target duration, beat descriptions, and weights>, "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)
{
  "pacing_fit": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How well does this beat support the sequence's intended pacing?",
    "criteria": [
      "Disrupts the pace",
      "Poor fit",
      "Mostly fits",
      "Precisely supports the pace"
    ]
  },
  "beat_clarity": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How clearly does this beat communicate its narrative action?",
    "criteria": [
      "Incomprehensible",
      "Confusing",
      "Clear with minor gaps",
      "Instantly legible"
    ]
  },
  "emotional_impact": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How strongly could this beat affect the audience emotionally?",
    "criteria": [
      "No noticeable effect",
      "Faint effect",
      "Meaningful effect",
      "Strong, memorable effect"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0644. Shot Coverage Planner

ID: film-animation-shot-coverage-planner
Sub-discipline: Cinematography
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste proposed shots and rank them by story coverage, visual variety, and production practicality with user-set weights.

Why typed decisions: Comparable scores reveal coverage gaps and tradeoffs without prescribing a single creative solution.

TAM: TAM: $5B+ filmmaking production tools
SAM: SAM: $400M shot planning and preproduction software
SOM: SOM: $4M independent productions

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Shot Coverage Planner" 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 proposed shots and rank them by story coverage, visual variety, and production practicality with user-set weights.
Discipline: Filmmaking & Animation (Cinematography).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: Comparable scores reveal coverage gaps and tradeoffs without prescribing a single creative solution.

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": <Scene requirements, shot candidates, constraints, and weights>, "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)
{
  "coverage_value": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How much essential scene information does this shot cover?",
    "criteria": [
      "Covers nothing needed",
      "Covers a minor detail",
      "Covers a useful beat",
      "Covers a critical beat"
    ]
  },
  "visual_variety": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How much visual variety does this shot add to the proposed sequence?",
    "criteria": [
      "Repetitive",
      "Slightly varied",
      "Distinct enough",
      "Strongly diversifies the sequence"
    ]
  },
  "production_practicality": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How feasible is this shot under the stated production constraints?",
    "criteria": [
      "Not feasible",
      "Major obstacles",
      "Feasible with adjustments",
      "Straightforward to execute"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0645. Palette Matchboard

ID: film-animation-palette-matchboard
Sub-discipline: Color design
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste scene mood notes and candidate palette descriptions, then rank palettes by mood fit, readability, and visual distinction.

Why typed decisions: Weighted ratings let artists balance emotional intent against practical contrast and palette variety.

TAM: TAM: $1B+ color and design software
SAM: SAM: $150M visual development tools
SOM: SOM: $2M animation and film art teams

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Palette Matchboard" 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 scene mood notes and candidate palette descriptions, then rank palettes by mood fit, readability, and visual distinction.
Discipline: Filmmaking & Animation (Color design).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: Weighted ratings let artists balance emotional intent against practical contrast and palette variety.

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": <Scene mood, display context, palette candidates, and weights>, "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)
{
  "mood_fit": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How well does this palette support the stated scene mood?",
    "criteria": [
      "Contradicts the mood",
      "Weakly supports it",
      "Mostly supports it",
      "Precisely expresses it"
    ]
  },
  "readability": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How well does the palette preserve separation between important elements?",
    "criteria": [
      "Elements blend together",
      "Frequent confusion",
      "Mostly readable",
      "Clear separation throughout"
    ]
  },
  "visual_distinction": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How distinct is this palette from the other candidates?",
    "criteria": [
      "Nearly identical",
      "Slightly different",
      "Clearly distinct",
      "Strikingly distinctive"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0646. Location Scout Sorter

ID: film-animation-location-scout-sorter
Sub-discipline: Location scouting
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste location notes and rank candidate locations by scene fit, logistical ease, and visual potential using adjustable weights.

Why typed decisions: Consistent scores help production teams compare subjective visual appeal with concrete constraints.

TAM: TAM: $3B+ production planning services
SAM: SAM: $200M location and scouting tools
SOM: SOM: $2M production offices

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Location Scout Sorter" 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 location notes and rank candidate locations by scene fit, logistical ease, and visual potential using adjustable weights.
Discipline: Filmmaking & Animation (Location scouting).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: Consistent scores help production teams compare subjective visual appeal with concrete constraints.

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": <Scene needs, schedule constraints, location notes, and weights>, "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)
{
  "scene_fit": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How well does this location match the scene's dramatic and visual needs?",
    "criteria": [
      "Poor match",
      "Limited match",
      "Good match",
      "Ideal match"
    ]
  },
  "logistical_ease": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How manageable is this location under the stated production logistics?",
    "criteria": [
      "Severe barriers",
      "Significant complications",
      "Manageable with planning",
      "Straightforward access and use"
    ]
  },
  "visual_potential": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How much useful composition and lighting potential does it offer?",
    "criteria": [
      "Very little",
      "Limited",
      "Strong options",
      "Exceptional variety"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0647. VFX Plate Triage

ID: film-animation-vfx-plate-triage
Sub-discipline: Visual effects
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste plate notes and rank shots by integration difficulty, visual importance, and cleanup risk with weights set by the VFX lead.

Why typed decisions: Structured scores help teams allocate review and cleanup effort before shots reach the compositing queue.

TAM: TAM: $10B+ VFX production and software
SAM: SAM: $1B VFX shot management tools
SOM: SOM: $5M boutique VFX teams

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "VFX Plate Triage" 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 plate notes and rank shots by integration difficulty, visual importance, and cleanup risk with weights set by the VFX lead.
Discipline: Filmmaking & Animation (Visual effects).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: Structured scores help teams allocate review and cleanup effort before shots reach the compositing queue.

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": <Shot plate notes, delivery specs, priority weights, and constraints>, "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)
{
  "integration_ease": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How easily could the described plate integrate with the intended effects?",
    "criteria": [
      "Highly incompatible",
      "Difficult integration",
      "Integrable with adjustments",
      "Well suited to integration"
    ]
  },
  "visual_importance": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How important is this shot to the sequence's visual storytelling?",
    "criteria": [
      "Peripheral",
      "Minor",
      "Important",
      "Sequence-defining"
    ]
  },
  "cleanup_risk": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How likely is the plate to require substantial cleanup?",
    "criteria": [
      "Very high risk",
      "High risk",
      "Some risk",
      "Low risk"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0648. Motion Transition Picker

ID: film-animation-motion-transition-picker
Sub-discipline: Motion design
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste transition concepts and rank them by brand fit, legibility, and timing suitability using custom weights.

Why typed decisions: A comparable scorecard helps motion designers choose transitions that serve the content rather than merely look flashy.

TAM: TAM: $4B+ motion design software and services
SAM: SAM: $500M motion graphics tools
SOM: SOM: $3M freelance motion designers

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Motion Transition Picker" 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 transition concepts and rank them by brand fit, legibility, and timing suitability using custom weights.
Discipline: Filmmaking & Animation (Motion design).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: A comparable scorecard helps motion designers choose transitions that serve the content rather than merely look flashy.

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": <Brand traits, transition concepts, duration, and weights>, "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)
{
  "brand_fit": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How well does this transition match the stated brand character?",
    "criteria": [
      "Conflicts with the brand",
      "Weak fit",
      "Good fit",
      "Strongly embodies the brand"
    ]
  },
  "legibility": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How well will viewers understand the change between scenes?",
    "criteria": [
      "Obscures the change",
      "Often confusing",
      "Generally clear",
      "Clear and effortless"
    ]
  },
  "timing_fit": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How well does the transition suit the available duration?",
    "criteria": [
      "Impossible in the duration",
      "Feels rushed or slow",
      "Mostly fits",
      "Naturally fits the timing"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0649. Character Silhouette Ranker

ID: film-animation-character-silhouette-ranker
Sub-discipline: Character design
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste character concept descriptions and rank them by silhouette readability, role fit, and animation potential with artist-controlled weights.

Why typed decisions: Scores make early design tradeoffs visible before teams invest in detailed models or turnarounds.

TAM: TAM: $5B+ character and animation design markets
SAM: SAM: $300M character development tools
SOM: SOM: $3M animation studios

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Character Silhouette Ranker" 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 character concept descriptions and rank them by silhouette readability, role fit, and animation potential with artist-controlled weights.
Discipline: Filmmaking & Animation (Character design).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: Scores make early design tradeoffs visible before teams invest in detailed models or turnarounds.

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": <Character role, viewing scale, concept descriptions, and weights>, "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)
{
  "silhouette_readability": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How recognizable is this character's silhouette at the intended viewing scale?",
    "criteria": [
      "Indistinguishable",
      "Weakly readable",
      "Recognizable",
      "Instantly distinctive"
    ]
  },
  "role_fit": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How well does the design communicate the character's role?",
    "criteria": [
      "Misleading",
      "Weakly suggests role",
      "Communicates role",
      "Strongly embodies role"
    ]
  },
  "animation_potential": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How much useful expressive movement does this design support?",
    "criteria": [
      "Severely limiting",
      "Limited",
      "Good range",
      "Rich expressive range"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0650. Render Queue Prioritizer

ID: film-animation-render-queue-prioritizer
Sub-discipline: Animation production
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste shot summaries and render constraints, then rank shots by review urgency, delivery value, and expected iteration burden using weights.

Why typed decisions: Dimension-based rankings help production teams schedule attention without pretending render priority is purely objective.

TAM: TAM: $8B+ animation production infrastructure
SAM: SAM: $600M render and review management
SOM: SOM: $4M mid-size animation teams

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Render Queue Prioritizer" 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 shot summaries and render constraints, then rank shots by review urgency, delivery value, and expected iteration burden using weights.
Discipline: Filmmaking & Animation (Animation production).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: Dimension-based rankings help production teams schedule attention without pretending render priority is purely objective.

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": <Shot summaries, deadlines, render constraints, and weights>, "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)
{
  "review_urgency": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How urgently does this shot need review to keep production moving?",
    "criteria": [
      "No near-term need",
      "Low urgency",
      "Time-sensitive",
      "Blocking immediate work"
    ]
  },
  "delivery_value": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How important is this shot to the next delivery milestone?",
    "criteria": [
      "Not included",
      "Minor inclusion",
      "Important inclusion",
      "Critical milestone shot"
    ]
  },
  "iteration_burden": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How much further revision effort is this shot likely to need?",
    "criteria": [
      "Very little",
      "Some",
      "Substantial",
      "Extensive or uncertain"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0651. Reel Clip Curator

ID: film-animation-reel-clip-curator
Sub-discipline: Showreel editing
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste clip descriptions and target reel criteria, then rank clips by craft showcase, relevance, and portfolio variety with adjustable weights.

Why typed decisions: Consistent scores help artists curate a focused reel while retaining control over what best represents their work.

TAM: TAM: $2B+ creative portfolio and recruitment tools
SAM: SAM: $200M filmmaker and animator portfolio services
SOM: SOM: $2M independent artists

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Reel Clip Curator" 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 clip descriptions and target reel criteria, then rank clips by craft showcase, relevance, and portfolio variety with adjustable weights.
Discipline: Filmmaking & Animation (Showreel editing).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: Consistent scores help artists curate a focused reel while retaining control over what best represents their work.

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": <Target role, reel duration, clip descriptions, and weights>, "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)
{
  "craft_showcase": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How strongly does this clip demonstrate the target craft?",
    "criteria": [
      "Does not demonstrate it",
      "Weak demonstration",
      "Clear demonstration",
      "Exceptional demonstration"
    ]
  },
  "role_relevance": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How relevant is this clip to the intended role or client?",
    "criteria": [
      "Irrelevant",
      "Loosely relevant",
      "Relevant",
      "Directly on target"
    ]
  },
  "portfolio_variety": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How much does this clip add variety to the candidate reel?",
    "criteria": [
      "Repeats existing material",
      "Adds little variety",
      "Adds a useful contrast",
      "Adds a distinctive new strength"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0652. Prop Design Sorter

ID: film-animation-prop-design-sorter
Sub-discipline: Prop design
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste prop concepts and rank them by story utility, period fit, and visual readability using weights set by the art team.

Why typed decisions: Comparable ratings separate narrative usefulness from aesthetic preference during early prop selection.

TAM: TAM: $3B+ production design and asset creation
SAM: SAM: $250M prop and set design workflows
SOM: SOM: $2M art departments

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Prop Design Sorter" 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 prop concepts and rank them by story utility, period fit, and visual readability using weights set by the art team.
Discipline: Filmmaking & Animation (Prop design).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: Comparable ratings separate narrative usefulness from aesthetic preference during early prop selection.

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": <Prop function, story period, concept descriptions, and weights>, "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)
{
  "story_utility": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How well does this prop serve the stated action or story beat?",
    "criteria": [
      "Serves no clear purpose",
      "Marginal use",
      "Useful to the beat",
      "Essential to the beat"
    ]
  },
  "period_fit": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How well does this concept fit the stated production period or world?",
    "criteria": [
      "Contradicts it",
      "Several mismatches",
      "Mostly fits",
      "Fully convincing fit"
    ]
  },
  "visual_readability": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How clearly can viewers recognize the prop in its intended use?",
    "criteria": [
      "Unrecognizable",
      "Often unclear",
      "Generally clear",
      "Immediately recognizable"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0653. Lens Choice Board

ID: film-animation-lens-choice-board
Sub-discipline: Cinematography
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste shot intentions and lens options, then rank each option by perspective fit, subject emphasis, and practical suitability with adjustable weights.

Why typed decisions: Typed scores make lens tradeoffs comparable without replacing the cinematographer's visual judgment.

TAM: TAM: $5B+ camera and production equipment markets
SAM: SAM: $300M cinematography planning tools
SOM: SOM: $2M camera departments

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Lens Choice Board" 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 shot intentions and lens options, then rank each option by perspective fit, subject emphasis, and practical suitability with adjustable weights.
Discipline: Filmmaking & Animation (Cinematography).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: Typed scores make lens tradeoffs comparable without replacing the cinematographer's visual 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": <Shot intention, camera constraints, lens candidates, and weights>, "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)
{
  "perspective_fit": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How well does this lens perspective support the intended feeling of the shot?",
    "criteria": [
      "Undermines the intention",
      "Weak fit",
      "Good fit",
      "Precisely supports it"
    ]
  },
  "subject_emphasis": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How effectively does it direct attention to the intended subject?",
    "criteria": [
      "Loses the subject",
      "Weak emphasis",
      "Clear emphasis",
      "Powerful, controlled emphasis"
    ]
  },
  "practical_suitability": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How workable is this lens for the stated camera and location constraints?",
    "criteria": [
      "Not workable",
      "Difficult",
      "Workable with care",
      "Straightforward"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0654. Title Treatment Judge

ID: film-animation-title-treatment-judge
Sub-discipline: Title design
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste title treatment descriptions and rank them by genre fit, screen legibility, and opening-sequence impact with user-controlled weights.

Why typed decisions: A score ranker makes design candidates comparable across functional and expressive needs.

TAM: TAM: $2B+ graphic design and title production
SAM: SAM: $180M film title and motion design tools
SOM: SOM: $2M title design professionals

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Title Treatment Judge" 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 title treatment descriptions and rank them by genre fit, screen legibility, and opening-sequence impact with user-controlled weights.
Discipline: Filmmaking & Animation (Title design).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: A score ranker makes design candidates comparable across functional and expressive needs.

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": <Title text, genre, display size, treatment descriptions, and weights>, "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)
{
  "genre_fit": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How well does this treatment visually fit the stated genre?",
    "criteria": [
      "Contradicts genre",
      "Weak association",
      "Clear fit",
      "Strong genre expression"
    ]
  },
  "screen_legibility": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How readable is the title at the intended screen size and duration?",
    "criteria": [
      "Unreadable",
      "Difficult to read",
      "Readable with care",
      "Instantly legible"
    ]
  },
  "opening_impact": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How effectively could this treatment establish the film's opening tone?",
    "criteria": [
      "No tonal effect",
      "Limited effect",
      "Sets a clear tone",
      "Creates a memorable tone"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0655. Environment Concept Sorter

ID: film-animation-environment-concept-sorter
Sub-discipline: Environment design
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste environment concepts and rank them by world coherence, storytelling detail, and camera composition potential using custom weights.

Why typed decisions: Comparable scores help art teams choose concepts that function as both believable worlds and useful shots.

TAM: TAM: $5B+ game and film environment production
SAM: SAM: $350M environment concept tools
SOM: SOM: $3M visual development teams

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Environment Concept Sorter" 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 environment concepts and rank them by world coherence, storytelling detail, and camera composition potential using custom weights.
Discipline: Filmmaking & Animation (Environment design).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: Comparable scores help art teams choose concepts that function as both believable worlds and useful shots.

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": <World rules, scene purpose, concept descriptions, and weights>, "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)
{
  "world_coherence": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How consistently does this environment follow the stated world rules?",
    "criteria": [
      "Major contradictions",
      "Several inconsistencies",
      "Mostly coherent",
      "Fully coherent"
    ]
  },
  "storytelling_detail": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How much does the environment communicate story through visual detail?",
    "criteria": [
      "No useful clues",
      "Few clues",
      "Clear story clues",
      "Rich, meaningful clues"
    ]
  },
  "composition_potential": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How many useful framing and camera opportunities does it suggest?",
    "criteria": [
      "Very limited",
      "Few options",
      "Several options",
      "Rich composition possibilities"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0656. Music Cue Fitboard

ID: film-animation-music-cue-fitboard
Sub-discipline: Film editing
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste scene intent and cue descriptions, then rank cues by emotional alignment, edit flexibility, and tonal restraint using adjustable weights.

Why typed decisions: Scores let editors compare musical function without generating music or replacing the director's taste.

TAM: TAM: $4B+ film music and post-production markets
SAM: SAM: $250M editorial music workflow tools
SOM: SOM: $2M film editors

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Music Cue Fitboard" 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 scene intent and cue descriptions, then rank cues by emotional alignment, edit flexibility, and tonal restraint using adjustable weights.
Discipline: Filmmaking & Animation (Film editing).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: Scores let editors compare musical function without generating music or replacing the director's taste.

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": <Scene intent, cue summaries, edit duration, and weights>, "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)
{
  "emotional_alignment": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How well does this cue support the scene's intended emotional direction?",
    "criteria": [
      "Pulls against it",
      "Weakly supports it",
      "Mostly aligned",
      "Precisely aligned"
    ]
  },
  "edit_flexibility": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How adaptable does this cue seem to the available edit duration?",
    "criteria": [
      "Very hard to adapt",
      "Few usable options",
      "Some flexibility",
      "Highly flexible structure"
    ]
  },
  "tonal_restraint": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How well does the cue avoid overwhelming dialogue or visual emphasis?",
    "criteria": [
      "Overwhelms the scene",
      "Often competes",
      "Mostly balanced",
      "Supports without intrusion"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0657. Texture Library Curator

ID: film-animation-texture-library-curator
Sub-discipline: Texture and materials
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste material descriptions and rank texture assets by visual match, reuse potential, and rendering practicality with artist-set weights.

Why typed decisions: Weighted ratings make asset selection faster and more consistent across shots and departments.

TAM: TAM: $4B+ 3D content and materials markets
SAM: SAM: $300M studio asset libraries
SOM: SOM: $2M animation and VFX teams

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Texture Library Curator" 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 material descriptions and rank texture assets by visual match, reuse potential, and rendering practicality with artist-set weights.
Discipline: Filmmaking & Animation (Texture and materials).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: Weighted ratings make asset selection faster and more consistent across shots and departments.

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": <Material brief, target render style, asset descriptions, and weights>, "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)
{
  "visual_match": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How closely does this texture match the material brief and visual style?",
    "criteria": [
      "Strong mismatch",
      "Partial mismatch",
      "Good match",
      "Exact visual match"
    ]
  },
  "reuse_potential": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How useful is this asset across other planned shots or materials?",
    "criteria": [
      "One-off only",
      "Limited reuse",
      "Reusable in several cases",
      "Broadly reusable"
    ]
  },
  "render_practicality": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How practical is this asset for the stated rendering constraints?",
    "criteria": [
      "Unsuitable",
      "Costly or troublesome",
      "Manageable",
      "Efficient and reliable"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0658. Storyboard Coverage Checker

ID: film-animation-storyboard-coverage-checker
Sub-discipline: Previsualization
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste scene beats and candidate board panels, then rank panels by beat coverage, sequence continuity, and camera clarity with adjustable weights.

Why typed decisions: Per-panel scores reveal weak coverage before a sequence advances into costly production stages.

TAM: TAM: $2B+ preproduction and visualization tools
SAM: SAM: $250M storyboard and previs software
SOM: SOM: $3M film and animation teams

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Storyboard Coverage Checker" 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 scene beats and candidate board panels, then rank panels by beat coverage, sequence continuity, and camera clarity with adjustable weights.
Discipline: Filmmaking & Animation (Previsualization).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: Per-panel scores reveal weak coverage before a sequence advances into costly production stages.

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": <Scene beat list, panel candidates, continuity needs, and weights>, "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)
{
  "beat_coverage": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How well does this panel cover a required scene beat?",
    "criteria": [
      "Misses the beat",
      "Hints at the beat",
      "Covers the beat",
      "Defines the beat clearly"
    ]
  },
  "sequence_continuity": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How smoothly does this panel connect to its neighboring panels?",
    "criteria": [
      "Breaks continuity",
      "Creates a noticeable jump",
      "Connects adequately",
      "Flows naturally"
    ]
  },
  "camera_clarity": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How clearly does the panel convey camera position and movement?",
    "criteria": [
      "Not conveyed",
      "Ambiguous",
      "Mostly clear",
      "Unambiguous and actionable"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0659. Lighting Setup Ranker

ID: film-animation-lighting-setup-ranker
Sub-discipline: Lighting design
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste lighting setup notes and rank options by mood fit, subject separation, and setup feasibility using weights controlled by the lighting team.

Why typed decisions: A dimension-based ranking makes lighting tradeoffs easy to compare while preserving artistic control.

TAM: TAM: $3B+ film lighting and production markets
SAM: SAM: $220M lighting previsualization tools
SOM: SOM: $2M cinematography teams

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Lighting Setup Ranker" 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 lighting setup notes and rank options by mood fit, subject separation, and setup feasibility using weights controlled by the lighting team.
Discipline: Filmmaking & Animation (Lighting design).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: A dimension-based ranking makes lighting tradeoffs easy to compare while preserving artistic control.

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": <Scene mood, location constraints, setup notes, and weights>, "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)
{
  "mood_fit": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How well does this setup support the intended mood?",
    "criteria": [
      "Contradicts mood",
      "Weakly supports mood",
      "Good mood fit",
      "Strongly expresses mood"
    ]
  },
  "subject_separation": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How effectively does it distinguish important subjects from the background?",
    "criteria": [
      "No separation",
      "Poor separation",
      "Adequate separation",
      "Clear, intentional separation"
    ]
  },
  "setup_feasibility": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How feasible is this setup under the stated schedule and equipment limits?",
    "criteria": [
      "Not feasible",
      "Major compromises",
      "Feasible with planning",
      "Straightforward to achieve"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0660. Motion Template Finder

ID: film-animation-motion-template-finder
Sub-discipline: Motion graphics
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste project requirements and motion-template descriptions, then rank templates by brand fit, editability, and delivery compliance with custom weights.

Why typed decisions: Typed scores quickly compare reusable templates on both creative suitability and production constraints.

TAM: TAM: $4B+ motion graphics and creative software
SAM: SAM: $400M template and motion asset markets
SOM: SOM: $3M small studios and freelancers

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Motion Template Finder" 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 project requirements and motion-template descriptions, then rank templates by brand fit, editability, and delivery compliance with custom weights.
Discipline: Filmmaking & Animation (Motion graphics).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: Typed scores quickly compare reusable templates on both creative suitability and production constraints.

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": <Brand traits, deliverable specs, template descriptions, and weights>, "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)
{
  "brand_fit": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How well does this template match the project's brand character?",
    "criteria": [
      "Poor fit",
      "Partial fit",
      "Good fit",
      "Excellent fit"
    ]
  },
  "editability": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How easily can the template be adapted to the project's content?",
    "criteria": [
      "Hard to adapt",
      "Requires substantial changes",
      "Adaptable with modest work",
      "Ready for straightforward customization"
    ]
  },
  "delivery_compliance": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How well does it suit the stated technical delivery requirements?",
    "criteria": [
      "Fails key requirements",
      "Several issues",
      "Meets most requirements",
      "Fully compliant"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0661. Prop Continuity Ledger

ID: film-animation-prop-continuity-ledger
Sub-discipline: Script supervision
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: Paste a scene and prop inventory, and Jev selects which extracted prop mention matches each inventory item or none.

Why typed decisions: Selecting an existing script span preserves the exact wording needed to verify continuity.

TAM: $10B global film and television production software
SAM: $1.2B script-supervision and continuity tools
SOM: $6M independent productions and small studios

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Prop Continuity Ledger" 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 scene and prop inventory, and Jev selects which extracted prop mention matches each inventory item or none.
Discipline: Filmmaking & Animation (Script supervision).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: Selecting an existing script span preserves the exact wording needed to verify continuity.

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": <Scene text, inventory entries, and candidate mention spans>, "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)
{
  "prop_mention": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which candidate span refers to this inventory prop?",
    "criteria": {
      "candidate_1": "The first extracted span plausibly refers to the prop",
      "candidate_2": "The second extracted span plausibly refers to the prop",
      "candidate_3": "The third extracted span plausibly refers to the prop",
      "none": "No candidate span refers to this prop"
    }
  },
  "continuity_relevance": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How useful is the selected mention for checking prop continuity?",
    "criteria": [
      "0: Does not help identify or track the prop",
      "1: Provides a weak clue",
      "2: Clearly identifies or tracks the prop",
      "3: Gives a specific continuity detail such as condition or handling"
    ]
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0662. Location Matchbook

ID: film-animation-location-matchbook
Sub-discipline: Location scouting
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: Paste script pages and a location database, and Jev chooses the best existing location description for each scene or none.

Why typed decisions: A typed selection links a scene to verifiable source material instead of inventing a location description.

TAM: $8B global location and production planning software
SAM: $700M location scouting and breakdown tools
SOM: $4M boutique scouts and production teams

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Location Matchbook" 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 script pages and a location database, and Jev chooses the best existing location description for each scene or none.
Discipline: Filmmaking & Animation (Location scouting).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: A typed selection links a scene to verifiable source material instead of inventing a location description.

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": <Scene excerpts, location records, and candidate text spans>, "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)
{
  "location_match": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which candidate location record best fits the scene?",
    "criteria": {
      "candidate_1": "The first record matches the scene's setting",
      "candidate_2": "The second record matches the scene's setting",
      "candidate_3": "The third record matches the scene's setting",
      "none": "No candidate record is a suitable match"
    }
  },
  "match_confidence": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How strong is the setting match?",
    "criteria": [
      "0: Contradicts the scene setting",
      "1: Shares only a broad setting trait",
      "2: Matches several important setting details",
      "3: Closely matches the scene's specific requirements"
    ]
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0663. Storyboard Beat Finder

ID: film-animation-storyboard-beat-finder
Sub-discipline: Storyboarding
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: Paste a script excerpt and storyboard panel notes, and Jev selects the dialogue or action span that each panel depicts.

Why typed decisions: Choosing an exact script span keeps panels anchored to approved source material.

TAM: $12B global preproduction software
SAM: $900M storyboarding and visualization tools
SOM: $5M freelance artists and small studios

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Storyboard Beat Finder" 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 script excerpt and storyboard panel notes, and Jev selects the dialogue or action span that each panel depicts.
Discipline: Filmmaking & Animation (Storyboarding).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: Choosing an exact script span keeps panels anchored to approved source material.

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": <Script excerpt, panel notes, and extracted dialogue/action spans>, "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)
{
  "panel_anchor": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which candidate script span does this panel depict?",
    "criteria": {
      "candidate_1": "The first span corresponds to the panel action",
      "candidate_2": "The second span corresponds to the panel action",
      "candidate_3": "The third span corresponds to the panel action",
      "none": "No candidate span corresponds to the panel"
    }
  },
  "visual_specificity": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How directly does the selected span support the panel's visual beat?",
    "criteria": [
      "0: No visual connection",
      "1: Implied or vague connection",
      "2: Clear visual beat",
      "3: Specific action or reveal suitable for a panel"
    ]
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0664. Take Note Sorter

ID: film-animation-take-note-sorter
Sub-discipline: Film editing
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: Paste editor notes and a take log, and Jev selects the existing note span that best supports each take decision or none.

Why typed decisions: Selecting the editor's exact note avoids introducing a rationale that was never recorded.

TAM: $9B global post-production software
SAM: $1B editing and review workflow tools
SOM: $5M independent editors and post houses

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Take Note Sorter" 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 editor notes and a take log, and Jev selects the existing note span that best supports each take decision or none.
Discipline: Filmmaking & Animation (Film editing).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: Selecting the editor's exact note avoids introducing a rationale that was never recorded.

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": <Editor notes, take IDs, and candidate note spans>, "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)
{
  "take_note": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which candidate note refers to this take?",
    "criteria": {
      "candidate_1": "The first note clearly concerns this take",
      "candidate_2": "The second note clearly concerns this take",
      "candidate_3": "The third note clearly concerns this take",
      "none": "No candidate note concerns this take"
    }
  },
  "decision_strength": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How strongly does the selected note support the logged decision?",
    "criteria": [
      "0: Does not support the decision",
      "1: Weak or indirect support",
      "2: Clear support",
      "3: Explicitly states the reason for the decision"
    ]
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0665. Subtitle Shot Linker

ID: film-animation-subtitle-shot-linker
Sub-discipline: Editorial finishing
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: Paste subtitle cues and an edit decision list, and Jev picks the existing cue that belongs to each shot or none.

Why typed decisions: Exact cue selection protects approved dialogue and timing references from paraphrase.

TAM: $6B global localization and post-production software
SAM: $600M subtitle and editorial tools
SOM: $3M localization vendors and indie productions

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Subtitle Shot Linker" 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 subtitle cues and an edit decision list, and Jev picks the existing cue that belongs to each shot or none.
Discipline: Filmmaking & Animation (Editorial finishing).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: Exact cue selection protects approved dialogue and timing references from paraphrase.

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": <Subtitle cues, shot IDs, and candidate cue text>, "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)
{
  "cue_match": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which candidate subtitle cue belongs with this shot?",
    "criteria": {
      "candidate_1": "The first cue matches the shot's dialogue",
      "candidate_2": "The second cue matches the shot's dialogue",
      "candidate_3": "The third cue matches the shot's dialogue",
      "none": "No candidate cue belongs with this shot"
    }
  },
  "cue_presence": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the shot contain dialogue represented by one of the candidate cues?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "A candidate cue represents dialogue in this shot",
      "false": "No candidate cue represents dialogue in this shot"
    }
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0666. Lens Note Retriever

ID: film-animation-lens-note-retriever
Sub-discipline: Cinematography
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: Paste camera reports and shot notes, and Jev selects the matching recorded lens or camera value for each shot.

Why typed decisions: Selecting logged values avoids fabricated technical metadata on set or in post.

TAM: $7B global cinematography and production tools
SAM: $500M camera reporting and shot management
SOM: $2M cinematographers and rental houses

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Lens Note Retriever" 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 camera reports and shot notes, and Jev selects the matching recorded lens or camera value for each shot.
Discipline: Filmmaking & Animation (Cinematography).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: Selecting logged values avoids fabricated technical metadata on set or in post.

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": <Shot notes, camera reports, and extracted technical values>, "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)
{
  "camera_value": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which candidate recorded value belongs to this shot?",
    "criteria": {
      "candidate_1": "The first value is supported by the shot record",
      "candidate_2": "The second value is supported by the shot record",
      "candidate_3": "The third value is supported by the shot record",
      "none": "No candidate value is supported by the shot record"
    }
  },
  "metadata_relevance": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How relevant is the selected value to the shot note?",
    "criteria": [
      "0: Unrelated technical value",
      "1: Possibly related",
      "2: Clearly relevant",
      "3: Directly resolves the shot's technical note"
    ]
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0667. Palette Reference Picker

ID: film-animation-palette-reference-picker
Sub-discipline: Color design
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: Paste a color brief and palette library, and Jev selects the existing palette label that best matches the brief or none.

Why typed decisions: Choosing a stored palette keeps the decision tied to approved color assets rather than generated descriptions.

TAM: $5B global design and color workflow software
SAM: $400M palette and visual development tools
SOM: $2M colorists and animation studios

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Palette Reference Picker" 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 color brief and palette library, and Jev selects the existing palette label that best matches the brief or none.
Discipline: Filmmaking & Animation (Color design).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: Choosing a stored palette keeps the decision tied to approved color assets rather than generated descriptions.

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": <Color brief, palette labels, and extracted palette metadata>, "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)
{
  "palette_match": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which candidate palette best fits the brief?",
    "criteria": {
      "candidate_1": "The first palette matches the stated color intent",
      "candidate_2": "The second palette matches the stated color intent",
      "candidate_3": "The third palette matches the stated color intent",
      "none": "No candidate palette fits the brief"
    }
  },
  "brief_alignment": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How closely does the selected palette align with the brief?",
    "criteria": [
      "0: Conflicts with the brief",
      "1: Matches one broad attribute",
      "2: Matches the main color direction",
      "3: Matches the direction and its specific constraints"
    ]
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0668. Rig Control Mapper

ID: film-animation-rig-control-mapper
Sub-discipline: Character animation
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: Paste rig documentation and animator notes, and Jev chooses the documented control name that matches each requested action or none.

Why typed decisions: Selecting a real control label prevents animators from acting on invented rig terminology.

TAM: $10B global 3D animation and VFX software
SAM: $800M rigging and animation pipeline tools
SOM: $4M animation teams and rigging freelancers

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Rig Control Mapper" 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 rig documentation and animator notes, and Jev chooses the documented control name that matches each requested action or none.
Discipline: Filmmaking & Animation (Character animation).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: Selecting a real control label prevents animators from acting on invented rig terminology.

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": <Rig documentation, action notes, and extracted control names>, "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)
{
  "control_match": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which candidate control matches the requested action?",
    "criteria": {
      "candidate_1": "The first control drives the requested action",
      "candidate_2": "The second control drives the requested action",
      "candidate_3": "The third control drives the requested action",
      "none": "No candidate control drives the requested action"
    }
  },
  "control_coverage": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How completely does the selected control cover the requested action?",
    "criteria": [
      "0: Does not control the action",
      "1: Controls only an adjacent or partial action",
      "2: Controls the main action",
      "3: Precisely controls the requested movement"
    ]
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0669. Motion Reference Index

ID: film-animation-motion-reference-index
Sub-discipline: Motion design
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: Paste a motion brief and reference-clip annotations, and Jev selects the existing annotation that best matches the requested movement quality or none.

Why typed decisions: Using an annotated reference grounds motion decisions in clips the team actually has.

TAM: $8B global motion design and animation software
SAM: $600M motion reference and creative workflow tools
SOM: $3M motion studios and independent designers

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Motion Reference Index" 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 motion brief and reference-clip annotations, and Jev selects the existing annotation that best matches the requested movement quality or none.
Discipline: Filmmaking & Animation (Motion design).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: Using an annotated reference grounds motion decisions in clips the team actually has.

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": <Motion brief, clip annotations, and candidate descriptive spans>, "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)
{
  "reference_match": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which candidate annotation best matches the requested movement?",
    "criteria": {
      "candidate_1": "The first annotation describes the requested motion",
      "candidate_2": "The second annotation describes the requested motion",
      "candidate_3": "The third annotation describes the requested motion",
      "none": "No candidate annotation fits the requested motion"
    }
  },
  "motion_fit": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How closely does the selected reference fit the brief?",
    "criteria": [
      "0: Motion qualities conflict",
      "1: Shares a minor quality",
      "2: Matches the main movement quality",
      "3: Matches the movement and its timing or energy"
    ]
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0670. Asset Name Resolver

ID: film-animation-asset-name-resolver
Sub-discipline: Animation production
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: Paste asset notes and a production library, and Jev selects the existing asset name that each note refers to or none.

Why typed decisions: Selecting a library entry prevents mistaken or invented asset names from entering production handoffs.

TAM: $9B global digital asset management software
SAM: $700M media asset and animation pipeline tools
SOM: $4M animation studios and asset coordinators

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Asset Name Resolver" 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 asset notes and a production library, and Jev selects the existing asset name that each note refers to or none.
Discipline: Filmmaking & Animation (Animation production).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: Selecting a library entry prevents mistaken or invented asset names from entering production handoffs.

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": <Asset notes, library names, and extracted identifiers>, "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)
{
  "asset_identity": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which candidate library entry is this note referring to?",
    "criteria": {
      "candidate_1": "The first entry matches the described asset",
      "candidate_2": "The second entry matches the described asset",
      "candidate_3": "The third entry matches the described asset",
      "none": "No candidate entry matches the described asset"
    }
  },
  "identity_certainty": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How specifically does the note identify the selected asset?",
    "criteria": [
      "0: No identifying evidence",
      "1: Broad category only",
      "2: Several distinguishing details",
      "3: Unambiguous identifier or exact name"
    ]
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0671. VFX Plate Matcher

ID: film-animation-vfx-plate-matcher
Sub-discipline: Visual effects
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: Paste shot notes and plate metadata, and Jev selects the plate record that corresponds to each described shot or none.

Why typed decisions: A typed match points artists to existing footage without fabricating plate details.

TAM: $8B global VFX production software
SAM: $650M plate management and review tools
SOM: $3M VFX boutiques and post houses

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "VFX Plate Matcher" 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 shot notes and plate metadata, and Jev selects the plate record that corresponds to each described shot or none.
Discipline: Filmmaking & Animation (Visual effects).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: A typed match points artists to existing footage without fabricating plate details.

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": <Shot notes, plate metadata, and candidate identifiers>, "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)
{
  "plate_match": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which candidate plate record matches this shot?",
    "criteria": {
      "candidate_1": "The first plate matches the shot description",
      "candidate_2": "The second plate matches the shot description",
      "candidate_3": "The third plate matches the shot description",
      "none": "No candidate plate matches the shot"
    }
  },
  "plate_confidence": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How strong is the evidence for this plate match?",
    "criteria": [
      "0: Evidence contradicts the match",
      "1: One weak shared detail",
      "2: Several matching details",
      "3: Matching identifiers and shot details"
    ]
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0672. Sound Cue Locator

ID: film-animation-sound-cue-locator
Sub-discipline: Sound design
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: Paste spotting notes and a sound-effects catalog, and Jev selects the catalog entry that fits each noted cue or none.

Why typed decisions: Selecting a real catalog entry lets sound teams audition known assets instead of receiving invented sound descriptions.

TAM: $6B global audio post-production software
SAM: $450M sound library and spotting tools
SOM: $2M sound designers and small post teams

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Sound Cue Locator" 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 spotting notes and a sound-effects catalog, and Jev selects the catalog entry that fits each noted cue or none.
Discipline: Filmmaking & Animation (Sound design).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: Selecting a real catalog entry lets sound teams audition known assets instead of receiving invented sound descriptions.

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": <Spotting notes, catalog entries, and candidate cue labels>, "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)
{
  "sound_cue": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which candidate catalog entry fits this cue?",
    "criteria": {
      "candidate_1": "The first entry matches the cue's described sound",
      "candidate_2": "The second entry matches the cue's described sound",
      "candidate_3": "The third entry matches the cue's described sound",
      "none": "No candidate entry fits the cue"
    }
  },
  "cue_fit": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How well does the selected sound match the spotting note?",
    "criteria": [
      "0: Wrong sound category",
      "1: Broadly related sound",
      "2: Clear match to the noted cue",
      "3: Match includes the noted texture or context"
    ]
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0673. Wardrobe Continuity Index

ID: film-animation-wardrobe-continuity-index
Sub-discipline: Costume design
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: Paste scene notes and a wardrobe breakdown, and Jev selects the costume entry tied to each character mention or none.

Why typed decisions: Selecting a documented costume entry keeps continuity checks linked to approved wardrobe records.

TAM: $5B global costume and production planning tools
SAM: $350M wardrobe breakdown and continuity software
SOM: $2M costume departments and production designers

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Wardrobe Continuity Index" 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 scene notes and a wardrobe breakdown, and Jev selects the costume entry tied to each character mention or none.
Discipline: Filmmaking & Animation (Costume design).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: Selecting a documented costume entry keeps continuity checks linked to approved wardrobe records.

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": <Scene notes, costume breakdown, and candidate character or garment spans>, "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)
{
  "wardrobe_entry": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which candidate wardrobe entry belongs to this scene mention?",
    "criteria": {
      "candidate_1": "The first entry matches the character and scene",
      "candidate_2": "The second entry matches the character and scene",
      "candidate_3": "The third entry matches the character and scene",
      "none": "No candidate entry matches the mention"
    }
  },
  "continuity_flag": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the selected entry contain a detail relevant to wardrobe continuity?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "It records a continuity-relevant garment, state, or change",
      "false": "It contains no relevant continuity detail"
    }
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0674. Set Dressing Retriever

ID: film-animation-set-dressing-retriever
Sub-discipline: Production design
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: Paste a scene description and set-dressing inventory, and Jev chooses the inventory item referenced by each extracted scene span or none.

Why typed decisions: An exact inventory match is more actionable than generated set-dressing suggestions.

TAM: $6B global production design software
SAM: $400M set and asset planning tools
SOM: $2M production designers and art departments

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Set Dressing Retriever" 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 scene description and set-dressing inventory, and Jev chooses the inventory item referenced by each extracted scene span or none.
Discipline: Filmmaking & Animation (Production design).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: An exact inventory match is more actionable than generated set-dressing suggestions.

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": <Scene description, inventory items, and candidate mention spans>, "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)
{
  "dressing_match": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which inventory item is referenced by this scene span?",
    "criteria": {
      "candidate_1": "The first item is indicated by the scene span",
      "candidate_2": "The second item is indicated by the scene span",
      "candidate_3": "The third item is indicated by the scene span",
      "none": "No candidate item is indicated by the scene span"
    }
  },
  "set_relevance": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How relevant is the selected item to the described set?",
    "criteria": [
      "0: Unrelated to the set",
      "1: Could belong but is not indicated",
      "2: Clearly indicated in the scene",
      "3: Essential to a specific visual or story detail"
    ]
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0675. Caption Source Finder

ID: film-animation-caption-source-finder
Sub-discipline: Accessibility production
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: Paste a transcript and caption file, and Jev selects the exact transcript span corresponding to each caption or none.

Why typed decisions: Selecting source text preserves approved dialogue and makes caption discrepancies easy to audit.

TAM: $7B global accessibility and localization software
SAM: $500M caption and transcript QA tools
SOM: $3M post houses and caption vendors

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Caption Source Finder" 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 transcript and caption file, and Jev selects the exact transcript span corresponding to each caption or none.
Discipline: Filmmaking & Animation (Accessibility production).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: Selecting source text preserves approved dialogue and makes caption discrepancies easy to audit.

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": <Transcript, caption cues, and candidate transcript spans>, "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)
{
  "transcript_span": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which candidate transcript span matches this caption cue?",
    "criteria": {
      "candidate_1": "The first span matches the caption wording",
      "candidate_2": "The second span matches the caption wording",
      "candidate_3": "The third span matches the caption wording",
      "none": "No candidate span matches the caption"
    }
  },
  "caption_alignment": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How closely does the selected span align with the caption?",
    "criteria": [
      "0: Meaning conflicts",
      "1: Partial or uncertain overlap",
      "2: Same utterance with minor variation",
      "3: Exact wording match"
    ]
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0676. Shot Label Auditor

ID: film-animation-shot-label-auditor
Sub-discipline: Editorial organization
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: Paste shot logs and an edit timeline, and Jev selects the logged shot label that corresponds to each timeline note or none.

Why typed decisions: Matching existing labels keeps timeline organization consistent with the production's records.

TAM: $9B global post-production workflow software
SAM: $750M editorial asset organization tools
SOM: $4M editors and post-production coordinators

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Shot Label Auditor" 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 shot logs and an edit timeline, and Jev selects the logged shot label that corresponds to each timeline note or none.
Discipline: Filmmaking & Animation (Editorial organization).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: Matching existing labels keeps timeline organization consistent with the production's records.

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": <Timeline notes, shot log, and candidate labels>, "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)
{
  "shot_label": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which candidate shot label corresponds to this timeline note?",
    "criteria": {
      "candidate_1": "The first label matches the note's shot",
      "candidate_2": "The second label matches the note's shot",
      "candidate_3": "The third label matches the note's shot",
      "none": "No candidate label matches the note"
    }
  },
  "label_consistency": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the selected label use the same identifier as the shot log?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The identifier agrees with the shot log",
      "false": "The identifier is missing or conflicts with the shot log"
    }
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0677. Keyframe Note Linker

ID: film-animation-keyframe-note-linker
Sub-discipline: 2D and 3D animation
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: Paste animator notes and keyframe markers, and Jev selects the note span that refers to each marker or none.

Why typed decisions: Linking markers to exact notes keeps timing and performance decisions traceable to the animator's source comments.

TAM: $10B global animation software
SAM: $700M animation review and production tools
SOM: $3M animation teams and independent artists

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Keyframe Note Linker" 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 animator notes and keyframe markers, and Jev selects the note span that refers to each marker or none.
Discipline: Filmmaking & Animation (2D and 3D animation).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: Linking markers to exact notes keeps timing and performance decisions traceable to the animator's source comments.

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": <Animator notes, marker IDs, and candidate note spans>, "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)
{
  "marker_note": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which candidate note refers to this keyframe marker?",
    "criteria": {
      "candidate_1": "The first note describes this marker's action or timing",
      "candidate_2": "The second note describes this marker's action or timing",
      "candidate_3": "The third note describes this marker's action or timing",
      "none": "No candidate note refers to this marker"
    }
  },
  "timing_relevance": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How directly does the selected note inform this marker?",
    "criteria": [
      "0: No timing or action connection",
      "1: General sequence connection",
      "2: Clear action or timing instruction",
      "3: Specific frame or timing instruction"
    ]
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0678. Camera Move Selector

ID: film-animation-camera-move-selector
Sub-discipline: Virtual production
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: Paste a director's shot brief and a camera-move preset library, and Jev selects the existing preset that best matches the brief or none.

Why typed decisions: Choosing a documented preset gives crews a repeatable move instead of an ambiguous generated instruction.

TAM: $8B global virtual production and camera software
SAM: $550M camera planning and virtual production tools
SOM: $2M virtual production stages and cinematographers

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Camera Move Selector" 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 director's shot brief and a camera-move preset library, and Jev selects the existing preset that best matches the brief or none.
Discipline: Filmmaking & Animation (Virtual production).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: Choosing a documented preset gives crews a repeatable move instead of an ambiguous generated instruction.

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": <Shot brief, preset labels, and extracted move attributes>, "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)
{
  "move_preset": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which candidate camera preset best fits the brief?",
    "criteria": {
      "candidate_1": "The first preset matches the requested move",
      "candidate_2": "The second preset matches the requested move",
      "candidate_3": "The third preset matches the requested move",
      "none": "No candidate preset fits the brief"
    }
  },
  "move_fit": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How well does the preset match the requested camera movement?",
    "criteria": [
      "0: Conflicts with the brief",
      "1: Matches only a broad movement category",
      "2: Matches direction and movement type",
      "3: Matches movement type, direction, and pacing"
    ]
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0679. Animatic Audio Anchor

ID: film-animation-animatic-audio-anchor
Sub-discipline: Animatics
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: Paste an animatic shot list and an audio cue sheet, and Jev selects the cue span that belongs with each shot or none.

Why typed decisions: Selecting an existing cue gives editors a reliable synchronization reference without rewriting audio notes.

TAM: $7B global previsualization and editing software
SAM: $450M animatic and storyboarding workflows
SOM: $2M storyboard artists and animation studios

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Animatic Audio Anchor" 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 an animatic shot list and an audio cue sheet, and Jev selects the cue span that belongs with each shot or none.
Discipline: Filmmaking & Animation (Animatics).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: Selecting an existing cue gives editors a reliable synchronization reference without rewriting audio notes.

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": <Shot list, cue sheet, and candidate cue spans>, "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)
{
  "audio_anchor": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which candidate audio cue belongs with this animatic shot?",
    "criteria": {
      "candidate_1": "The first cue matches the shot's action or timing",
      "candidate_2": "The second cue matches the shot's action or timing",
      "candidate_3": "The third cue matches the shot's action or timing",
      "none": "No candidate cue belongs with this shot"
    }
  },
  "sync_strength": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How clearly does the selected cue align with the shot?",
    "criteria": [
      "0: No apparent alignment",
      "1: Broad sequence alignment",
      "2: Clear action or timing alignment",
      "3: Explicit sync point or beat match"
    ]
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0680. Festival Cut Tracker

ID: film-animation-festival-cut-tracker
Sub-discipline: Film distribution
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: Paste delivery notes and a cut-version log, and Jev selects the existing version entry that satisfies each note or none.

Why typed decisions: Selecting a logged cut version reduces delivery mistakes without inventing version details.

TAM: $5B global media delivery and post-production software
SAM: $350M version tracking and festival delivery tools
SOM: $2M distributors and independent producers

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Festival Cut Tracker" 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 delivery notes and a cut-version log, and Jev selects the existing version entry that satisfies each note or none.
Discipline: Filmmaking & Animation (Film distribution).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: Selecting a logged cut version reduces delivery mistakes without inventing version details.

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": <Delivery notes, version log, and candidate version values>, "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)
{
  "version_match": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which candidate cut version satisfies this delivery note?",
    "criteria": {
      "candidate_1": "The first version meets the stated delivery requirement",
      "candidate_2": "The second version meets the stated delivery requirement",
      "candidate_3": "The third version meets the stated delivery requirement",
      "none": "No candidate version meets the requirement"
    }
  },
  "requirement_met": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the selected version entry explicitly satisfy the delivery requirement?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The entry confirms the required version or specification",
      "false": "The entry does not confirm the requirement"
    }
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0681. Continuity Evidence Desk

ID: film-animation-continuity-evidence-desk
Sub-discipline: Script continuity
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Filmmakers paste script pages and continuity notes, and Jev decides whether each prop, costume, and location claim is supported, routing uncertain mismatches to a human.

Why typed decisions: Typed evidence checks flag specific continuity risks without inventing explanations or silently approving uncertain details.

TAM: $10B+ film production software
SAM: $1.5B production workflow tools
SOM: $5M independent productions

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Continuity Evidence Desk" 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
Filmmakers paste script pages and continuity notes, and Jev decides whether each prop, costume, and location claim is supported, routing uncertain mismatches to a human.
Discipline: Filmmaking & Animation (Script continuity).
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 checks flag specific continuity risks without inventing explanations or silently approving uncertain details.

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": <Script excerpts, continuity notes, and scene references>, "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)
{
  "prop_match": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the cited evidence support the prop continuity claim?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The evidence directly supports the prop, state, and scene claim.",
      "false": "The evidence contradicts the claim or does not establish it."
    }
  },
  "mismatch_type": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Classify the apparent continuity issue.",
    "criteria": {
      "prop": "A hand-held or set-dressing object differs.",
      "costume": "Clothing or wearable appearance differs.",
      "location": "The setting or spatial detail differs.",
      "none": "No supported mismatch is apparent."
    }
  },
  "evidence_strength": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Grade the strength of the cited evidence.",
    "criteria": [
      "1: No relevant evidence",
      "2: Indirect or incomplete evidence",
      "3: Direct evidence with a minor ambiguity",
      "4: Clear, direct evidence"
    ]
  }
}

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

---

## 0682. Storyboard Matchboard

ID: film-animation-storyboard-matchboard
Sub-discipline: Storyboard review
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Storyboard artists paste panel descriptions and approved shot requirements, and Jev decides which panels satisfy each requirement and escalates uncertain matches.

Why typed decisions: A typed match decision links panels to explicit requirements without generating replacement storyboard text.

TAM: $3B+ storyboarding and previsualization
SAM: $500M storyboard review tools
SOM: $3M storyboard teams

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Storyboard Matchboard" 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
Storyboard artists paste panel descriptions and approved shot requirements, and Jev decides which panels satisfy each requirement and escalates uncertain matches.
Discipline: Filmmaking & Animation (Storyboard review).
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: A typed match decision links panels to explicit requirements without generating replacement storyboard text.

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": <Panel descriptions, shot requirements, and panel IDs>, "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)
{
  "shot_requirement_met": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the panel evidence satisfy the cited shot requirement?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The panel clearly depicts the required subject and composition.",
      "false": "The panel conflicts with or does not establish the requirement."
    }
  },
  "match_status": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Classify this panel against the requirement.",
    "criteria": {
      "match": "The requirement is visibly satisfied.",
      "partial": "Some required elements are present, but others are unclear.",
      "mismatch": "The panel contradicts the requirement.",
      "unassessable": "Available panel evidence is insufficient."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0683. Frame Safety Gate

ID: film-animation-frame-safety-gate
Sub-discipline: Visual effects review
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: VFX supervisors paste frame notes and delivery specifications, and Jev decides whether each safety-related claim is evidenced, escalating uncertain frames for review.

Why typed decisions: Typed checks make frame-level risk auditable and avoid treating an unsupported safety claim as approval.

TAM: $2B+ post-production services software
SAM: $300M frame compliance tools
SOM: $2M VFX studios

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Frame Safety 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
VFX supervisors paste frame notes and delivery specifications, and Jev decides whether each safety-related claim is evidenced, escalating uncertain frames for review.
Discipline: Filmmaking & Animation (Visual effects review).
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 checks make frame-level risk auditable and avoid treating an unsupported safety claim as approval.

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": <Frame notes, delivery rules, and timecodes>, "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)
{
  "safe_frame": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the frame evidence support the stated safety claim?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The cited frame evidence satisfies the applicable safety rule.",
      "false": "The frame evidence contradicts or fails to establish the claim."
    }
  },
  "risk_category": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Classify the potential frame issue.",
    "criteria": {
      "flash": "Potentially unsafe flashing or rapid luminance change.",
      "contrast": "Potentially problematic contrast or pattern.",
      "content": "A delivery-specific visual content concern.",
      "none": "No issue is evidenced in the supplied material."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0684. Asset Rights Ledger

ID: film-animation-asset-rights-ledger
Sub-discipline: Production asset clearance
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Producers paste asset records and license terms, and Jev decides whether each asset-use claim is supported, escalating ambiguous rights before delivery.

Why typed decisions: Typed evidence decisions expose clearance gaps without generating legal language or implying that uncertain assets are cleared.

TAM: $5B+ media rights management
SAM: $800M creative asset clearance
SOM: $4M production companies

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Asset Rights Ledger" 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
Producers paste asset records and license terms, and Jev decides whether each asset-use claim is supported, escalating ambiguous rights before delivery.
Discipline: Filmmaking & Animation (Production asset clearance).
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 decisions expose clearance gaps without generating legal language or implying that uncertain assets are cleared.

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": <Asset metadata, license excerpts, and planned usage>, "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)
{
  "use_is_cleared": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the supplied license evidence support the planned asset use?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The evidence covers the asset, usage, territory, and relevant term.",
      "false": "Coverage is contradicted or not established by the evidence."
    }
  },
  "rights_issue": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Classify the apparent rights concern.",
    "criteria": {
      "scope": "The planned use may exceed the licensed scope.",
      "ownership": "Ownership or licensor authority is unclear.",
      "term": "The license term may not cover the project timeline.",
      "none": "No rights gap is apparent in the supplied evidence."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0685. Color Reference Check

ID: film-animation-color-reference-check
Sub-discipline: Color grading
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Colorists paste shot notes, reference descriptions, and review observations, and Jev decides whether each continuity claim matches the supplied evidence, escalating uncertain shots.

Why typed decisions: Typed decisions identify review-worthy shots without substituting generated prose for visual judgment.

TAM: $4B+ color and finishing software
SAM: $600M color review workflows
SOM: $2M grading houses

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Color Reference Check" 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
Colorists paste shot notes, reference descriptions, and review observations, and Jev decides whether each continuity claim matches the supplied evidence, escalating uncertain shots.
Discipline: Filmmaking & Animation (Color grading).
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 decisions identify review-worthy shots without substituting generated prose for visual 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": <Shot notes, reference descriptions, and review observations>, "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)
{
  "grade_matches_reference": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the evidence support the claimed match to the reference?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The supplied observations support the claimed color continuity.",
      "false": "The observations contradict or do not establish the match."
    }
  },
  "color_issue": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Classify the apparent color continuity issue.",
    "criteria": {
      "exposure": "Brightness or exposure appears inconsistent.",
      "white_balance": "Color temperature or neutral balance appears inconsistent.",
      "saturation": "Color intensity appears inconsistent.",
      "none": "No inconsistency is supported by the supplied evidence."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0686. Animation Rig Audit

ID: film-animation-animation-rig-audit
Sub-discipline: Character rigging
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Riggers paste rig test results and control specifications, and Jev decides whether each control claim is evidenced, routing ambiguous failures to human inspection.

Why typed decisions: Typed status and issue classifications make rig verification consistent without generating technical instructions.

TAM: $6B+ animation production tools
SAM: $900M rigging and pipeline QA
SOM: $3M animation studios

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Animation Rig Audit" 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
Riggers paste rig test results and control specifications, and Jev decides whether each control claim is evidenced, routing ambiguous failures to human inspection.
Discipline: Filmmaking & Animation (Character rigging).
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 status and issue classifications make rig verification consistent without generating technical instructions.

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": <Rig test results, control specs, and build IDs>, "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)
{
  "control_behaves_as_specified": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Do the test results support the control behavior claim?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The tests directly demonstrate the specified behavior.",
      "false": "The tests contradict or fail to demonstrate the specification."
    }
  },
  "rig_issue": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Classify the evidenced rig issue.",
    "criteria": {
      "deformation": "The mesh deforms unexpectedly.",
      "control": "A control is missing or behaves incorrectly.",
      "dependency": "A rig dependency or connection appears broken.",
      "none": "No issue is evidenced by the supplied tests."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0687. Motion Spec Sentinel

ID: film-animation-motion-spec-sentinel
Sub-discipline: Motion design
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Motion designers paste animation specs and timing notes, and Jev decides whether each delivered motion claim is supported, escalating uncertain deviations for review.

Why typed decisions: Typed compliance decisions are easy to audit against specifications and do not fabricate revised motion concepts.

TAM: $8B+ motion design software
SAM: $1B motion QA and review
SOM: $4M design studios

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Motion Spec Sentinel" 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
Motion designers paste animation specs and timing notes, and Jev decides whether each delivered motion claim is supported, escalating uncertain deviations for review.
Discipline: Filmmaking & Animation (Motion design).
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 compliance decisions are easy to audit against specifications and do not fabricate revised motion concepts.

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": <Motion specs, timing notes, and delivery observations>, "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)
{
  "timing_claim_supported": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the evidence support the claimed timing compliance?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Observed timing falls within the cited specification.",
      "false": "Timing conflicts with or is not verified against the specification."
    }
  },
  "motion_deviation": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Classify the potential motion deviation.",
    "criteria": {
      "duration": "The animation duration differs from the spec.",
      "easing": "The easing or motion curve differs from the spec.",
      "sequence": "The order or presence of motion events differs.",
      "none": "No deviation is evidenced."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0688. Subtitle Frame Check

ID: film-animation-subtitle-frame-check
Sub-discipline: Subtitle quality control
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Editors paste subtitle cues and frame observations, and Jev decides whether each timing and visibility claim is supported, escalating uncertain cues to a reviewer.

Why typed decisions: Typed checks pinpoint cues needing inspection without rewriting subtitles or auto-approving borderline readability.

TAM: $3B+ localization and accessibility
SAM: $500M subtitle QC
SOM: $2M post-production teams

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Subtitle Frame Check" 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
Editors paste subtitle cues and frame observations, and Jev decides whether each timing and visibility claim is supported, escalating uncertain cues to a reviewer.
Discipline: Filmmaking & Animation (Subtitle quality control).
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 checks pinpoint cues needing inspection without rewriting subtitles or auto-approving borderline readability.

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": <Subtitle cues, timecodes, and frame observations>, "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)
{
  "cue_visible": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the evidence support the claim that this cue is visible for its required duration?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The observations establish adequate visibility and timing.",
      "false": "The observations contradict or do not establish adequate visibility."
    }
  },
  "cue_issue": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Classify the subtitle issue.",
    "criteria": {
      "timing": "Cue timing conflicts with the referenced requirements.",
      "readability": "The cue may be difficult to read against the image.",
      "placement": "The cue overlaps important visual content.",
      "none": "No issue is evidenced."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0689. Location Match File

ID: film-animation-location-match-file
Sub-discipline: Location scouting
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Location scouts paste brief requirements and site notes, and Jev decides which site claims are evidenced, sending uncertain matches to a human scout.

Why typed decisions: Typed classifications compare concrete criteria while leaving nuanced location suitability to people.

TAM: $2B+ location and production services
SAM: $300M scouting workflow tools
SOM: $1M production offices

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Location Match File" 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
Location scouts paste brief requirements and site notes, and Jev decides which site claims are evidenced, sending uncertain matches to a human scout.
Discipline: Filmmaking & Animation (Location scouting).
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 classifications compare concrete criteria while leaving nuanced location suitability to people.

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": <Location brief, site notes, and site IDs>, "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)
{
  "site_claim_verified": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the supplied evidence support the site claim?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The site notes directly establish the claimed attribute.",
      "false": "The notes contradict or do not establish the attribute."
    }
  },
  "site_attribute": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Classify the attribute being assessed.",
    "criteria": {
      "access": "Access, loading, or parking requirements.",
      "power": "Electrical supply or technical infrastructure.",
      "space": "Dimensions, layout, or usable area.",
      "permit": "Permit or usage permission status."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0690. Take Select Verifier

ID: film-animation-take-select-verifier
Sub-discipline: Editorial selects
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Editors paste take logs and director notes, and Jev decides whether each take-selection claim is supported by the cited notes, escalating uncertain selects.

Why typed decisions: Typed decisions preserve the link between a select and its evidence without inventing editorial rationale.

TAM: $7B+ editing and post-production
SAM: $1B editorial workflow tools
SOM: $3M editorial teams

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Take Select Verifier" 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
Editors paste take logs and director notes, and Jev decides whether each take-selection claim is supported by the cited notes, escalating uncertain selects.
Discipline: Filmmaking & Animation (Editorial selects).
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 decisions preserve the link between a select and its evidence without inventing editorial rationale.

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": <Take logs, director notes, and take IDs>, "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)
{
  "select_supported": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the cited evidence support this take-selection claim?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The notes directly support the take's stated selection status.",
      "false": "The notes contradict or do not establish the selection."
    }
  },
  "select_issue": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Classify the selection concern.",
    "criteria": {
      "performance": "Performance suitability is disputed or unclear.",
      "technical": "Focus, exposure, or another technical condition is unclear.",
      "coverage": "The take's coverage or continuity role is unclear.",
      "none": "No concern is evidenced in the supplied notes."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0691. Sound Cue Reconciler

ID: film-animation-sound-cue-reconciler
Sub-discipline: Film sound design
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Sound editors paste cue sheets and picture notes, and Jev decides whether each sound-to-picture claim is supported, escalating ambiguous sync and cue issues.

Why typed decisions: Typed evidence checks surface mismatches for listening review without generating audio or descriptive copy.

TAM: $5B+ audio post-production
SAM: $700M sound editorial tools
SOM: $2M sound teams

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Sound Cue Reconciler" 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
Sound editors paste cue sheets and picture notes, and Jev decides whether each sound-to-picture claim is supported, escalating ambiguous sync and cue issues.
Discipline: Filmmaking & Animation (Film sound design).
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 checks surface mismatches for listening review without generating audio or descriptive copy.

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": <Cue sheets, picture notes, and timecodes>, "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)
{
  "cue_matches_picture": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the evidence support the claimed cue-to-picture match?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The cited notes support the cue's timing and intended event.",
      "false": "The notes contradict or do not establish the match."
    }
  },
  "cue_issue": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Classify the potential cue issue.",
    "criteria": {
      "sync": "Cue timing may not match the picture event.",
      "coverage": "A required event may lack a cue.",
      "identity": "The cue may be assigned to the wrong event.",
      "none": "No issue is evidenced by the notes."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0692. Wardrobe Continuity Cards

ID: film-animation-wardrobe-continuity-cards
Sub-discipline: Costume continuity
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Costume teams paste wardrobe breakdowns and scene notes, and Jev decides whether each wardrobe-state claim is evidenced, escalating uncertain scene transitions.

Why typed decisions: Typed checks catch unsupported costume continuity claims before they become costly reshoots or edit problems.

TAM: $2B+ costume and production services
SAM: $250M costume continuity tools
SOM: $1M costume departments

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Wardrobe Continuity Cards" 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
Costume teams paste wardrobe breakdowns and scene notes, and Jev decides whether each wardrobe-state claim is evidenced, escalating uncertain scene transitions.
Discipline: Filmmaking & Animation (Costume continuity).
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 checks catch unsupported costume continuity claims before they become costly reshoots or edit problems.

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": <Wardrobe breakdowns, scene notes, and character IDs>, "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)
{
  "wardrobe_state_supported": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the evidence support the claimed wardrobe state for this scene?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The breakdown or notes directly support the claimed state.",
      "false": "The evidence contradicts or does not establish the claimed state."
    }
  },
  "wardrobe_issue": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Classify the potential wardrobe mismatch.",
    "criteria": {
      "garment": "A garment or accessory differs.",
      "condition": "Wear, dirt, or damage state differs.",
      "sequence": "The scene-to-scene wardrobe order is unclear.",
      "none": "No mismatch is evidenced."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0693. Set Dressing Inspector

ID: film-animation-set-dressing-inspector
Sub-discipline: Art department
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Set decorators paste scene plans and set notes, and Jev decides whether each dressing claim is supported, escalating uncertain or conflicting details to the art department.

Why typed decisions: Typed verification catches specific evidence gaps while keeping artistic choices under human control.

TAM: $4B+ film production services
SAM: $500M art department workflow
SOM: $2M production designers

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Set Dressing Inspector" 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
Set decorators paste scene plans and set notes, and Jev decides whether each dressing claim is supported, escalating uncertain or conflicting details to the art department.
Discipline: Filmmaking & Animation (Art department).
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 verification catches specific evidence gaps while keeping artistic choices under human control.

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": <Scene plans, set notes, and dressing item IDs>, "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)
{
  "dressing_claim_supported": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the supplied evidence support the dressing claim?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The scene plan or notes establish the item's presence and state.",
      "false": "The evidence contradicts or fails to establish the claim."
    }
  },
  "dressing_issue": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Classify the apparent set-dressing issue.",
    "criteria": {
      "presence": "An item may be missing or unexpectedly present.",
      "placement": "An item's position may conflict with the notes.",
      "state": "An item's condition or appearance may differ.",
      "none": "No issue is supported by the supplied evidence."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0694. VFX Plate Intake

ID: film-animation-vfx-plate-intake
Sub-discipline: Visual effects production
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: VFX coordinators paste shot briefs and plate metadata, and Jev decides whether each plate claim is verified, routing uncertain technical or coverage gaps to a human.

Why typed decisions: Typed intake decisions prevent unsupported plate assumptions from propagating through a complex production pipeline.

TAM: $6B+ VFX production
SAM: $900M VFX pipeline tools
SOM: $3M VFX vendors

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "VFX Plate Intake" 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
VFX coordinators paste shot briefs and plate metadata, and Jev decides whether each plate claim is verified, routing uncertain technical or coverage gaps to a human.
Discipline: Filmmaking & Animation (Visual effects production).
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 intake decisions prevent unsupported plate assumptions from propagating through a complex production pipeline.

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": <Shot briefs, plate metadata, and delivery requirements>, "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)
{
  "plate_requirement_met": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the plate evidence establish that this requirement is met?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Metadata or notes directly confirm the required plate attribute.",
      "false": "Evidence contradicts or does not establish the attribute."
    }
  },
  "plate_gap": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Classify the potential plate gap.",
    "criteria": {
      "coverage": "Required coverage, handles, or frames may be missing.",
      "metadata": "A required metadata field may be absent or inconsistent.",
      "technical": "A technical delivery attribute may not meet requirements.",
      "none": "No gap is evidenced in the supplied material."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0695. Render Farm Gate

ID: film-animation-render-farm-gate
Sub-discipline: Animation pipeline operations
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Pipeline teams paste render manifests and delivery specs, and Jev decides whether each output claim is evidenced, escalating uncertain renders rather than auto-clearing them.

Why typed decisions: Typed verification provides consistent, auditable handoffs without generating fixes or changing render settings.

TAM: $5B+ rendering and pipeline software
SAM: $700M render QA workflows
SOM: $2M animation pipelines

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Render Farm 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
Pipeline teams paste render manifests and delivery specs, and Jev decides whether each output claim is evidenced, escalating uncertain renders rather than auto-clearing them.
Discipline: Filmmaking & Animation (Animation pipeline operations).
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 verification provides consistent, auditable handoffs without generating fixes or changing render settings.

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": <Render manifests, delivery specs, and output IDs>, "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)
{
  "output_spec_verified": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the manifest evidence that the output meets this specification?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The manifest directly confirms the required output attributes.",
      "false": "The evidence contradicts or does not establish compliance."
    }
  },
  "render_issue": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Classify the potential output issue.",
    "criteria": {
      "missing": "An expected frame or file may be absent.",
      "format": "Resolution, encoding, or format may be incorrect.",
      "version": "The output may not match the approved version.",
      "none": "No issue is evidenced in the supplied manifest."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0696. Shot Coverage Map

ID: film-animation-shot-coverage-map
Sub-discipline: Production planning
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Assistant directors paste shot lists and camera reports, and Jev decides whether each coverage claim is evidenced, sending uncertain or unsupported shots to production review.

Why typed decisions: Typed evidence mapping reveals coverage gaps without fabricating completed shots or rewriting schedules.

TAM: $3B+ production management
SAM: $500M shot tracking tools
SOM: $2M film productions

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Shot Coverage Map" 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
Assistant directors paste shot lists and camera reports, and Jev decides whether each coverage claim is evidenced, sending uncertain or unsupported shots to production review.
Discipline: Filmmaking & Animation (Production planning).
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 mapping reveals coverage gaps without fabricating completed shots or rewriting schedules.

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": <Shot lists, camera reports, and scene IDs>, "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)
{
  "shot_completed": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the supplied evidence support the claim that this shot was completed?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "A report or log directly confirms the required shot.",
      "false": "Evidence contradicts or does not establish completion."
    }
  },
  "coverage_status": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Classify the shot's coverage status.",
    "criteria": {
      "complete": "The required coverage is evidenced as complete.",
      "partial": "Some, but not all, required coverage is evidenced.",
      "missing": "The required coverage is not evidenced as completed.",
      "unclear": "The supplied records do not support a reliable status."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0697. Keyframe Spec Check

ID: film-animation-keyframe-spec-check
Sub-discipline: 2D animation
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: 2D animators paste timing charts and keyframe notes, and Jev decides whether each timing claim is supported, escalating ambiguous spacing or exposure deviations for review.

Why typed decisions: Typed judgments make spec review repeatable while leaving expressive animation decisions to artists.

TAM: $4B+ animation software
SAM: $600M 2D animation workflow
SOM: $2M animation teams

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Keyframe Spec Check" 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
2D animators paste timing charts and keyframe notes, and Jev decides whether each timing claim is supported, escalating ambiguous spacing or exposure deviations for review.
Discipline: Filmmaking & Animation (2D animation).
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 judgments make spec review repeatable while leaving expressive animation decisions to artists.

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": <Timing charts, keyframe notes, and scene identifiers>, "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)
{
  "timing_chart_supported": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the supplied evidence support the timing claim?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The chart or notes directly support the claimed timing.",
      "false": "The evidence contradicts or does not establish the timing."
    }
  },
  "timing_issue": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Classify the potential timing deviation.",
    "criteria": {
      "exposure": "The number or order of held frames may be wrong.",
      "spacing": "The stated spacing pattern may not match the chart.",
      "transition": "A key pose or transition may be missing or mistimed.",
      "none": "No deviation is evidenced."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0698. Look Dev Approval

ID: film-animation-look-dev-approval
Sub-discipline: Look development
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Look-development artists paste approved briefs and render review notes, and Jev decides whether each look claim is evidenced, escalating uncertain approvals to an art director.

Why typed decisions: Typed review states distinguish documented matches from ambiguity without generating style descriptions or replacing creative approval.

TAM: $6B+ animation and VFX tools
SAM: $800M look development workflows
SOM: $3M animation and VFX studios

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Look Dev Approval" 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
Look-development artists paste approved briefs and render review notes, and Jev decides whether each look claim is evidenced, escalating uncertain approvals to an art director.
Discipline: Filmmaking & Animation (Look development).
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 review states distinguish documented matches from ambiguity without generating style descriptions or replacing creative approval.

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": <Approved look briefs, render notes, and asset IDs>, "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)
{
  "look_matches_brief": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the supplied evidence support the claim that this look matches the approved brief?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Review notes directly confirm the cited visual requirements.",
      "false": "Notes contradict or do not establish the claimed match."
    }
  },
  "look_deviation": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Classify the potential look-development deviation.",
    "criteria": {
      "material": "Material or surface treatment may differ.",
      "lighting": "Lighting or shadow treatment may differ.",
      "palette": "Color palette or value range may differ.",
      "none": "No deviation is evidenced in the supplied notes."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0699. Camera Move Verifier

ID: film-animation-camera-move-verifier
Sub-discipline: Cinematography
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Cinematographers paste shot plans and camera reports, and Jev decides whether each camera-move claim is evidenced, escalating uncertain deviations for review.

Why typed decisions: Typed checks compare recorded moves against plans without making subjective shot-quality decisions automatically.

TAM: $5B+ cinematography and production tools
SAM: $700M camera workflow software
SOM: $2M camera departments

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Camera Move Verifier" 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
Cinematographers paste shot plans and camera reports, and Jev decides whether each camera-move claim is evidenced, escalating uncertain deviations for review.
Discipline: Filmmaking & Animation (Cinematography).
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 checks compare recorded moves against plans without making subjective shot-quality decisions automatically.

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": <Shot plans, camera reports, and take identifiers>, "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)
{
  "move_matches_plan": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the camera report support the claimed move against the shot plan?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The report directly supports the planned move and direction.",
      "false": "The report contradicts or does not establish the planned move."
    }
  },
  "move_status": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Classify the camera-move result.",
    "criteria": {
      "matched": "The documented move matches the plan.",
      "partial": "Some planned move details match, but others are unclear.",
      "deviation": "The documented move conflicts with the plan.",
      "unverified": "Available reports do not establish what occurred."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0700. Delivery Package Audit

ID: film-animation-delivery-package-audit
Sub-discipline: Film delivery
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Post-production coordinators paste delivery manifests and distributor requirements, and Jev decides whether each package claim is evidenced, routing uncertain fields to a human QC queue.

Why typed decisions: Typed field-level decisions prevent unverified deliverables from being treated as ready for distribution.

TAM: $8B+ media distribution and delivery
SAM: $1B delivery QC software
SOM: $4M post-production companies

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Delivery Package Audit" 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
Post-production coordinators paste delivery manifests and distributor requirements, and Jev decides whether each package claim is evidenced, routing uncertain fields to a human QC queue.
Discipline: Filmmaking & Animation (Film delivery).
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 field-level decisions prevent unverified deliverables from being treated as ready for distribution.

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": <Delivery manifests, distributor requirements, and file metadata>, "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)
{
  "delivery_field_verified": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the supplied evidence verify this delivery field against its requirement?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The manifest or metadata directly satisfies the cited requirement.",
      "false": "Evidence contradicts or does not verify the requirement."
    }
  },
  "delivery_issue": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Classify the potential delivery issue.",
    "criteria": {
      "missing_file": "A required file may be absent.",
      "metadata": "A required metadata value may be incorrect or missing.",
      "specification": "A file may not meet a technical specification.",
      "none": "No issue is evidenced in the supplied package."
    }
  }
}

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

---

# Discipline: Game Design & Interactive Media

Audience: game designers, interactive artists, XR creators
Market anchor: the game industry (~$200B) and >3M indie developers

## 0701. Mechanic Pitch Sorter

ID: games-mechanic-pitch-sorter
Sub-discipline: Game prototyping
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: Paste a mechanic pitch and Jev routes it to a prototype lane while scoring buildability and checking whether its core loop is legible.

Why typed decisions: A fixed lane and calibrated scores make pitches comparable without asking a team to interpret generated prose.

TAM: TAM: global game development tools
SAM: SAM: indie and student game teams
SOM: SOM: hackathon and prototype teams

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Mechanic Pitch Sorter" 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 mechanic pitch and Jev routes it to a prototype lane while scoring buildability and checking whether its core loop is legible.
Discipline: Game Design & Interactive Media (Game prototyping).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: A fixed lane and calibrated scores make pitches comparable without asking a team to interpret generated prose.

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": <Team prototype lanes and current sprint constraints>, "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)
{
  "prototype_lane": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which prototype lane best fits this mechanic?",
    "criteria": {
      "paper": "Can be tested with cards, tokens, or a tabletop simulation",
      "digital_2d": "Needs a simple 2D interactive build",
      "digital_3d": "Depends on spatial 3D interaction",
      "systems_spike": "Needs a focused technical experiment"
    }
  },
  "buildability": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How feasible is a rough prototype within the team's sprint?",
    "criteria": [
      "Not feasible in the sprint",
      "Possible only with major simplification",
      "Feasible with current skills and tools",
      "Straightforward to prototype quickly"
    ]
  },
  "legible_loop": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Can a player understand the core action and its immediate consequence?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The action and consequence are clear from the pitch",
      "false": "The action or consequence is unclear"
    }
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0702. Quest Beat Router

ID: games-quest-beat-router
Sub-discipline: Narrative design
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: Paste a quest beat and Jev routes it to a narrative function while checking player agency and scoring its gameplay relevance.

Why typed decisions: Typed beat categories and checks help writers organize content consistently before implementation.

TAM: TAM: interactive narrative production
SAM: SAM: narrative game studios and writers
SOM: SOM: small teams structuring quest content

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Quest Beat Router" 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 quest beat and Jev routes it to a narrative function while checking player agency and scoring its gameplay relevance.
Discipline: Game Design & Interactive Media (Narrative design).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: Typed beat categories and checks help writers organize content consistently before implementation.

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": <Quest arc outline and narrative design goals>, "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)
{
  "beat_function": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "What is this beat's primary narrative function?",
    "criteria": {
      "setup": "Introduces a goal, threat, or situation",
      "choice": "Presents a meaningful player decision",
      "reveal": "Changes what the player knows",
      "payoff": "Resolves or rewards an earlier setup"
    }
  },
  "player_agency": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the beat give the player a consequential action or decision?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Player action or choice affects the experience",
      "false": "The beat is effectively passive"
    }
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0703. Level Blockout Desk

ID: games-level-blockout-desk
Sub-discipline: Level design
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: Paste a level brief and Jev routes it to a blockout focus while scoring navigation clarity and checking for a meaningful landmark.

Why typed decisions: A consistent structural classification surfaces layout needs earlier than free-form feedback.

TAM: TAM: game level-design software and services
SAM: SAM: game studios and level-design teams
SOM: SOM: independent level designers

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Level Blockout Desk" 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 level brief and Jev routes it to a blockout focus while scoring navigation clarity and checking for a meaningful landmark.
Discipline: Game Design & Interactive Media (Level design).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: A consistent structural classification surfaces layout needs earlier than free-form feedback.

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": <Level objectives, player abilities, and target session length>, "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)
{
  "blockout_focus": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which blockout focus should guide the first layout pass?",
    "criteria": {
      "navigation": "Route readability and orientation",
      "combat": "Encounter space and tactical cover",
      "traversal": "Movement challenges and spatial flow",
      "exploration": "Optional paths and environmental discovery"
    }
  },
  "navigation_clarity": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How clearly does the brief support readable navigation?",
    "criteria": [
      "No clear route or orientation cues",
      "Route is partly understandable",
      "Route and key cues are mostly clear",
      "Route and landmarks are unambiguous"
    ]
  },
  "landmark_present": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the brief identify a distinctive landmark that aids orientation?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "A recognizable spatial landmark is specified",
      "false": "No useful landmark is specified"
    }
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0704. Playtest Note Sorter

ID: games-playtest-note-sorter
Sub-discipline: User research
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: Paste anonymized playtest notes and Jev routes each note to a research theme while scoring issue severity.

Why typed decisions: Stable categories and severity levels make qualitative notes easier to compare across sessions.

TAM: TAM: game user research
SAM: SAM: studios running player tests
SOM: SOM: small research and design teams

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Playtest Note Sorter" 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 anonymized playtest notes and Jev routes each note to a research theme while scoring issue severity.
Discipline: Game Design & Interactive Media (User research).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: Stable categories and severity levels make qualitative notes easier to compare across sessions.

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": <Study questions and team's playtest theme taxonomy>, "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)
{
  "research_theme": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which theme best describes this playtest note?",
    "criteria": {
      "usability": "Controls, interface, or comprehension",
      "difficulty": "Challenge, failure, or pacing",
      "engagement": "Interest, emotion, or motivation",
      "technical": "Performance, bugs, or device behavior"
    }
  },
  "severity": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How strongly does this issue affect the player's experience?",
    "criteria": [
      "Minor observation with little impact",
      "Noticeable but recoverable friction",
      "Major disruption to progress or enjoyment",
      "Blocks progress or makes play impossible"
    ]
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0705. XR Comfort Gate

ID: games-xr-comfort-gate
Sub-discipline: XR interaction design
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: Paste an XR interaction description and Jev routes it to a comfort review category while scoring motion risk and checking whether a user-controlled exit exists.

Why typed decisions: Typed risk flags help teams triage comfort concerns consistently without substituting for user testing.

TAM: TAM: XR development and design
SAM: SAM: XR studios and experience creators
SOM: SOM: XR teams reviewing interaction comfort

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "XR Comfort 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 an XR interaction description and Jev routes it to a comfort review category while scoring motion risk and checking whether a user-controlled exit exists.
Discipline: Game Design & Interactive Media (XR interaction design).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: Typed risk flags help teams triage comfort concerns consistently without substituting for user testing.

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": <Target XR device, locomotion settings, and comfort guidelines>, "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)
{
  "comfort_category": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which comfort review category is most relevant?",
    "criteria": {
      "locomotion": "Player movement through the virtual space",
      "camera": "Viewpoint movement or forced camera changes",
      "interaction": "Reach, posture, or repeated physical actions",
      "sensory": "Visual, audio, or other sensory intensity"
    }
  },
  "motion_risk": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How much discomfort risk does the described motion present?",
    "criteria": [
      "No notable motion-related risk",
      "Low risk with limited exposure",
      "Moderate risk for some users",
      "High risk or sustained forced motion"
    ]
  },
  "user_exit": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Can the user pause, exit, or regain control when needed?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "A clear user-controlled pause or exit is available",
      "false": "No clear user-controlled pause or exit is described"
    }
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0706. Accessibility Pass Router

ID: games-accessibility-pass-router
Sub-discipline: Game accessibility
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: Paste a mechanic or interface description and Jev routes it to an accessibility review area while checking for an adjustable alternative.

Why typed decisions: A fixed review taxonomy creates actionable coverage tracking instead of open-ended commentary.

TAM: TAM: accessible game development
SAM: SAM: game studios and accessibility consultants
SOM: SOM: teams adding accessibility review to production

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Accessibility Pass Router" 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 mechanic or interface description and Jev routes it to an accessibility review area while checking for an adjustable alternative.
Discipline: Game Design & Interactive Media (Game accessibility).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: A fixed review taxonomy creates actionable coverage tracking instead of open-ended commentary.

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": <Supported platforms and accessibility requirements>, "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)
{
  "access_area": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which accessibility area should receive the review?",
    "criteria": {
      "vision": "Visual access, contrast, or nonvisual cues",
      "hearing": "Audio access, captions, or sound cues",
      "motor": "Input demands, timing, or repeated actions",
      "cognitive": "Comprehension, memory, or information load"
    }
  },
  "adjustable_alternative": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the description include an adjustable or alternative way to engage?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "A usable alternative or adjustment is specified",
      "false": "No alternative or adjustment is specified"
    }
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0707. Sound Cue Librarian

ID: games-sound-cue-librarian
Sub-discipline: Game audio
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: Paste a sound-cue brief and Jev routes it to an audio function while scoring how important it is for gameplay comprehension.

Why typed decisions: Typed cue roles and importance levels support searchable asset planning without generating replacement copy.

TAM: TAM: interactive audio production
SAM: SAM: game audio teams and composers
SOM: SOM: indie teams organizing sound assets

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Sound Cue Librarian" 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 sound-cue brief and Jev routes it to an audio function while scoring how important it is for gameplay comprehension.
Discipline: Game Design & Interactive Media (Game audio).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: Typed cue roles and importance levels support searchable asset planning without generating replacement copy.

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": <Game audio taxonomy and known accessibility mix requirements>, "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)
{
  "cue_role": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "What is the cue's primary role?",
    "criteria": {
      "feedback": "Confirms a player action or system result",
      "warning": "Signals danger, failure, or urgency",
      "ambience": "Establishes place or atmosphere",
      "navigation": "Guides attention or movement"
    }
  },
  "gameplay_importance": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How essential is this cue to understanding or acting in gameplay?",
    "criteria": [
      "Purely decorative",
      "Helpful but nonessential",
      "Important to timely understanding",
      "Critical to safe or successful play"
    ]
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0708. Animation State Router

ID: games-animation-state-router
Sub-discipline: Character animation
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: Paste an animation-state description and Jev routes it to a state family while checking whether a clear transition trigger is defined.

Why typed decisions: Explicit state labels and transition checks reduce ambiguity in implementation handoffs.

TAM: TAM: animation and game production
SAM: SAM: character art and engineering teams
SOM: SOM: small teams building state-driven characters

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Animation State Router" 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 an animation-state description and Jev routes it to a state family while checking whether a clear transition trigger is defined.
Discipline: Game Design & Interactive Media (Character animation).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: Explicit state labels and transition checks reduce ambiguity in implementation handoffs.

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": <Character controller states and animation pipeline constraints>, "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)
{
  "state_family": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which animation state family does this describe?",
    "criteria": {
      "locomotion": "Idle, walking, running, or other movement",
      "action": "Attack, interact, use, or perform",
      "reaction": "Hit, stagger, evade, or respond",
      "transition": "Enter, exit, blend, or change states"
    }
  },
  "trigger_defined": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is a clear condition for entering or leaving this state specified?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "An observable trigger or condition is specified",
      "false": "The transition condition is missing or unclear"
    }
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0709. Cinematic Shot Desk

ID: games-cinematic-shot-desk
Sub-discipline: Realtime cinematics
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: Paste a cinematic shot brief and Jev routes it to a shot purpose while scoring whether it preserves player orientation.

Why typed decisions: Consistent shot-purpose tags and orientation checks help teams review sequences efficiently.

TAM: TAM: realtime cinematic production
SAM: SAM: game cinematics and narrative teams
SOM: SOM: studios integrating cinematics into play

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Cinematic Shot Desk" 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 cinematic shot brief and Jev routes it to a shot purpose while scoring whether it preserves player orientation.
Discipline: Game Design & Interactive Media (Realtime cinematics).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: Consistent shot-purpose tags and orientation checks help teams review sequences efficiently.

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": <Scene context, camera rules, and player-control handoff points>, "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)
{
  "shot_purpose": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "What is the primary purpose of this shot?",
    "criteria": {
      "establish": "Shows setting, scale, or spatial relationships",
      "emotion": "Emphasizes a character or emotional beat",
      "action": "Clarifies an event or physical action",
      "transition": "Moves between scenes or control states"
    }
  },
  "orientation": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How well does the shot preserve the player's sense of spatial orientation?",
    "criteria": [
      "Likely to disorient the player",
      "Orientation is weakly supported",
      "Most spatial relationships remain clear",
      "Position and direction remain very clear"
    ]
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0710. Tutorial Step Triage

ID: games-tutorial-step-triage
Sub-discipline: Onboarding design
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: Paste a tutorial step and Jev routes it to an instruction type while checking whether the player can practice the taught action immediately.

Why typed decisions: Typed instruction roles and practice checks help teams spot tutorial steps that explain without teaching.

TAM: TAM: game UX and onboarding
SAM: SAM: studios designing first-time play
SOM: SOM: teams improving tutorial flows

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Tutorial Step Triage" 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 tutorial step and Jev routes it to an instruction type while checking whether the player can practice the taught action immediately.
Discipline: Game Design & Interactive Media (Onboarding design).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: Typed instruction roles and practice checks help teams spot tutorial steps that explain without teaching.

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": <Player onboarding goals and known tutorial sequence>, "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)
{
  "instruction_type": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "What kind of learning does this step primarily support?",
    "criteria": {
      "input": "How to use a control or interface",
      "rule": "How a system or mechanic works",
      "goal": "What the player should try to achieve",
      "feedback": "What an outcome or signal means"
    }
  },
  "immediate_practice": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Can the player try the taught action immediately in this step?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The step provides an immediate practice opportunity",
      "false": "Practice is delayed or absent"
    }
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0711. Narrative Choice Audit

ID: games-narrative-choice-audit
Sub-discipline: Choice-driven narrative
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: Paste a player-choice description and Jev routes it to a choice type while scoring how distinct its outcomes appear to be.

Why typed decisions: Fixed choice labels and outcome-distinction scores make branching structures easier to audit at scale.

TAM: TAM: branching narrative games
SAM: SAM: narrative design teams
SOM: SOM: studios auditing choice-driven content

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Narrative Choice Audit" 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 player-choice description and Jev routes it to a choice type while scoring how distinct its outcomes appear to be.
Discipline: Game Design & Interactive Media (Choice-driven narrative).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: Fixed choice labels and outcome-distinction scores make branching structures easier to audit at scale.

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": <Branch map and narrative design rules for meaningful choices>, "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)
{
  "choice_type": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "What kind of decision is this choice primarily asking the player to make?",
    "criteria": {
      "ethical": "Expresses values or moral priorities",
      "tactical": "Changes an immediate plan or advantage",
      "relational": "Affects trust or a character relationship",
      "exploratory": "Chooses what to investigate or discover"
    }
  },
  "outcome_distinction": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How distinct are the described outcomes from one another?",
    "criteria": [
      "Outcomes appear effectively identical",
      "Differences are slight or delayed",
      "Outcomes differ in a noticeable way",
      "Outcomes lead to clearly distinct consequences"
    ]
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0712. Environmental Story Sorter

ID: games-environmental-story-sorter
Sub-discipline: Environmental storytelling
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: Paste an environmental story element and Jev routes it to a storytelling function while checking whether it can be read without mandatory text.

Why typed decisions: Typed visual-story roles help art teams plan environmental evidence and review text dependence.

TAM: TAM: game world and environment art
SAM: SAM: level art and worldbuilding teams
SOM: SOM: teams building story-rich environments

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Environmental Story Sorter" 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 an environmental story element and Jev routes it to a storytelling function while checking whether it can be read without mandatory text.
Discipline: Game Design & Interactive Media (Environmental storytelling).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: Typed visual-story roles help art teams plan environmental evidence and review text dependence.

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": <World lore, visual storytelling goals, and content constraints>, "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)
{
  "story_function": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "What storytelling function does this element primarily serve?",
    "criteria": {
      "history": "Suggests past events or prior inhabitants",
      "worldbuilding": "Reveals how the setting works",
      "character": "Expresses a character's traits or presence",
      "foreshadow": "Hints at a future event or threat"
    }
  },
  "visual_readable": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Can the element communicate its main story function without mandatory written text?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Visual or spatial cues carry the main meaning",
      "false": "Written text is necessary to understand it"
    }
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0713. Haptic Moment Router

ID: games-haptic-moment-router
Sub-discipline: Haptic design
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: Paste a haptic-feedback brief and Jev routes it to a feedback role while scoring how clearly it distinguishes the event from other sensations.

Why typed decisions: Typed roles and distinctiveness scores help teams prevent inconsistent or overloaded haptic vocabularies.

TAM: TAM: interactive haptics
SAM: SAM: controller-based game and XR teams
SOM: SOM: teams designing haptic feedback systems

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Haptic Moment Router" 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 haptic-feedback brief and Jev routes it to a feedback role while scoring how clearly it distinguishes the event from other sensations.
Discipline: Game Design & Interactive Media (Haptic design).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: Typed roles and distinctiveness scores help teams prevent inconsistent or overloaded haptic vocabularies.

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": <Supported controller capabilities and existing haptic patterns>, "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)
{
  "feedback_role": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "What is the primary purpose of this haptic feedback?",
    "criteria": {
      "confirmation": "Confirms an action or state change",
      "impact": "Communicates a collision or physical event",
      "warning": "Signals danger or an important condition",
      "texture": "Conveys material, surface, or atmosphere"
    }
  },
  "distinctiveness": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How clearly can this sensation be distinguished from other haptic events?",
    "criteria": [
      "Likely indistinguishable from other feedback",
      "Only slightly distinct",
      "Mostly recognizable",
      "Highly recognizable and specific"
    ]
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0714. Procedural Content Gate

ID: games-procedural-content-gate
Sub-discipline: Procedural generation
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: Paste a procedural-content rule and Jev routes it to a generation concern while checking whether the rule preserves player-facing constraints.

Why typed decisions: A fixed concern map catches common system-design risks with compact, reviewable decisions.

TAM: TAM: procedural content tools
SAM: SAM: game teams using procedural systems
SOM: SOM: small teams validating generation rules

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Procedural Content 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 procedural-content rule and Jev routes it to a generation concern while checking whether the rule preserves player-facing constraints.
Discipline: Game Design & Interactive Media (Procedural generation).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: A fixed concern map catches common system-design risks with compact, reviewable decisions.

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": <Generation rules, content bounds, and player experience targets>, "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)
{
  "generation_concern": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which procedural-generation concern is most central?",
    "criteria": {
      "variety": "Generated outcomes need meaningful diversity",
      "balance": "Generated outcomes must remain fair or viable",
      "coherence": "Generated elements must fit the world or rules",
      "readability": "Generated outcomes must remain understandable"
    }
  },
  "constraints_preserved": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the rule specify constraints that protect the intended player experience?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Relevant player-facing bounds are specified",
      "false": "Experience-protecting bounds are absent or unclear"
    }
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0715. Museum Interaction Sorter

ID: games-museum-interaction-sorter
Sub-discipline: Interactive installation design
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: Paste an installation interaction brief and Jev routes it to an experience mode while scoring whether its intended audience can complete the interaction unaided.

Why typed decisions: Typed modes and audience-fit scores make installation concepts easier to compare against venue needs.

TAM: TAM: interactive exhibition experiences
SAM: SAM: museums, galleries, and exhibit studios
SOM: SOM: small teams prototyping public installations

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Museum Interaction Sorter" 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 an installation interaction brief and Jev routes it to an experience mode while scoring whether its intended audience can complete the interaction unaided.
Discipline: Game Design & Interactive Media (Interactive installation design).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: Typed modes and audience-fit scores make installation concepts easier to compare against venue needs.

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": <Venue conditions, audience profile, and exhibit objectives>, "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)
{
  "experience_mode": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which experience mode best describes this interaction?",
    "criteria": {
      "explore": "Visitors discover content at their own pace",
      "create": "Visitors make or compose something",
      "collaborate": "Visitors contribute with other people",
      "perform": "Visitors trigger a staged or responsive experience"
    }
  },
  "unaided_access": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How likely is the intended audience to complete the interaction without staff help?",
    "criteria": [
      "Most visitors are unlikely to complete it",
      "Many visitors may need assistance",
      "Most visitors can complete it independently",
      "The interaction is immediately accessible"
    ]
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0716. WebXR Scene Router

ID: games-webxr-scene-router
Sub-discipline: WebXR experiences
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: Paste a WebXR scene brief and Jev routes it to an implementation focus while checking whether the core experience degrades gracefully on simpler devices.

Why typed decisions: Typed implementation lanes and device-resilience checks guide scope decisions without requiring a prose review.

TAM: TAM: WebXR creation tools and services
SAM: SAM: browser-based XR creators
SOM: SOM: teams shipping cross-device WebXR prototypes

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "WebXR Scene Router" 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 WebXR scene brief and Jev routes it to an implementation focus while checking whether the core experience degrades gracefully on simpler devices.
Discipline: Game Design & Interactive Media (WebXR experiences).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: Typed implementation lanes and device-resilience checks guide scope decisions without requiring a prose review.

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": <Target browsers, device capabilities, and performance budget>, "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)
{
  "implementation_focus": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which implementation focus dominates this scene?",
    "criteria": {
      "spatial_ui": "Panels, controls, or spatial interface elements",
      "world_interaction": "Manipulating or touching virtual objects",
      "embodiment": "Presence, avatar, or body-relative interaction",
      "spatial_audio": "Positioned sound or audio-led navigation"
    }
  },
  "graceful_degradation": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the brief provide a usable fallback for devices with reduced capability?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "A reduced-capability fallback is specified",
      "false": "No usable fallback is specified"
    }
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0717. Live Event Beat Sorter

ID: games-live-event-beat-sorter
Sub-discipline: Interactive performance
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: Paste a live interactive event beat and Jev routes it to a production function while checking whether audience participation has a defined fallback.

Why typed decisions: Typed event roles and contingency checks help production teams keep live experiences coherent under variable attendance.

TAM: TAM: interactive live experiences
SAM: SAM: performance producers and creative studios
SOM: SOM: small teams prototyping audience-driven events

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Live Event Beat Sorter" 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 live interactive event beat and Jev routes it to a production function while checking whether audience participation has a defined fallback.
Discipline: Game Design & Interactive Media (Interactive performance).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: Typed event roles and contingency checks help production teams keep live experiences coherent under variable attendance.

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": <Run-of-show, venue limits, and audience participation plan>, "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)
{
  "production_function": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "What production function does this beat primarily serve?",
    "criteria": {
      "welcome": "Orients or welcomes the audience",
      "participation": "Invites an audience action or contribution",
      "reveal": "Introduces a new event, character, or piece of information",
      "transition": "Moves between segments or spaces"
    }
  },
  "participation_fallback": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "If audience participation is low, does the beat still work?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The beat has a defined low-participation path",
      "false": "The beat depends on participation with no fallback"
    }
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0718. Puzzle Dependency Mapper

ID: games-puzzle-dependency-mapper
Sub-discipline: Puzzle design
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: 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.

Why typed decisions: Typed puzzle roles and clue-availability scores expose progression risks more consistently than generated suggestions.

TAM: TAM: puzzle and adventure game design
SAM: SAM: studios creating puzzle content
SOM: SOM: designers reviewing puzzle progression

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Puzzle Dependency Mapper" 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 description and Jev routes it to a puzzle role while scoring whether its required clues are available before the player needs them.
Discipline: Game Design & Interactive Media (Puzzle design).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: Typed puzzle roles and clue-availability scores expose progression risks more consistently than generated suggestions.

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 sequence, clue locations, and player knowledge assumptions>, "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)
{
  "puzzle_role": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "What role does this puzzle primarily serve?",
    "criteria": {
      "gate": "Blocks access until solved",
      "teaching": "Introduces or reinforces a mechanic",
      "story": "Reveals narrative information",
      "optional": "Rewards exploration without blocking progress"
    }
  },
  "clue_availability": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How reliably can the player find the needed clues before attempting the puzzle?",
    "criteria": [
      "Essential clues may be unavailable",
      "Some clues are easy to miss",
      "Most required clues are accessible",
      "Required clues are clearly available in advance"
    ]
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0719. Game Jam Scope Sorter

ID: games-game-jam-scope-sorter
Sub-discipline: Game jam production
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: Paste a game-jam concept and Jev routes it to a scope strategy while scoring whether its essential experience fits the team's available time.

Why typed decisions: A discrete scope route and feasibility score help teams commit to buildable concepts quickly.

TAM: TAM: game development production tools
SAM: SAM: game jam participants and educators
SOM: SOM: teams making short-format prototypes

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Game Jam Scope Sorter" 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 game-jam concept and Jev routes it to a scope strategy while scoring whether its essential experience fits the team's available time.
Discipline: Game Design & Interactive Media (Game jam production).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: A discrete scope route and feasibility score help teams commit to buildable concepts quickly.

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": <Jam duration, team skills, tools, and required deliverables>, "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)
{
  "scope_strategy": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which scope strategy best fits this concept?",
    "criteria": {
      "single_loop": "Build one polished core interaction",
      "vertical_slice": "Create a short representative segment",
      "paper_first": "Test the concept without a full digital build",
      "technical_spike": "Prove one uncertain technical feature"
    }
  },
  "time_fit": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How well does the essential experience fit the team's available time?",
    "criteria": [
      "Essential experience is out of reach",
      "Fits only after major cuts",
      "Fits with deliberate scope control",
      "Comfortably fits the available time"
    ]
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0720. Visual Novel Asset Desk

ID: games-visual-novel-asset-desk
Sub-discipline: Visual novel production
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: Paste a scene asset brief and Jev routes it to an asset family while checking whether its emotional tone matches the scene purpose.

Why typed decisions: Typed asset labels and tone-fit decisions make large scene inventories easier to review and hand off.

TAM: TAM: visual novel production
SAM: SAM: visual novel studios and creators
SOM: SOM: small narrative art teams

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Visual Novel Asset Desk" 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 scene asset brief and Jev routes it to an asset family while checking whether its emotional tone matches the scene purpose.
Discipline: Game Design & Interactive Media (Visual novel production).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: Typed asset labels and tone-fit decisions make large scene inventories easier to review and hand off.

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": <Asset naming taxonomy, character roster, and scene mood board>, "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)
{
  "asset_family": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which asset family should receive this brief?",
    "criteria": {
      "background": "Location art or environmental scene",
      "character_sprite": "Character pose, outfit, or expression",
      "cg_illustration": "A special composed story illustration",
      "interface": "Menus, dialogue presentation, or visual navigation"
    }
  },
  "tone_match": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How well does the described asset tone fit the scene's intended emotion?",
    "criteria": [
      "Tone conflicts with the scene",
      "Tone only partly supports the scene",
      "Tone generally supports the scene",
      "Tone strongly reinforces the scene"
    ]
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0721. Encounter Rhythm Audit

ID: games-encounter-rhythm-audit
Sub-discipline: Game combat design
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: 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.

Why typed decisions: Independent yes-or-no checks make the design gate reproducible instead of relying on a persuasive but subjective critique.

TAM: Global game development tools: ~$10B
SAM: Combat design and prototyping tools: ~$1B
SOM: Indie and mid-size teams: ~$5M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Encounter Rhythm Audit" 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 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.
Discipline: Game Design & Interactive Media (Game combat 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: Independent yes-or-no checks make the design gate reproducible instead of relying on a persuasive but subjective critique.

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": <Encounter brief and player abilities>, "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)
{
  "pressure_variety": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the encounter demand more than one kind of player response?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Players must respond to at least two distinct tactical pressures.",
      "false": "The encounter can be handled with one repeated response."
    }
  },
  "counterplay": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does each major threat have a learnable counterplay?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Players can recognize and act on a specific response to each major threat.",
      "false": "A major threat lacks an actionable response."
    }
  },
  "failure_readability": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Would players be able to understand why they failed?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Failure follows from legible rules or cues.",
      "false": "Failure is likely to feel arbitrary or unexplained."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0722. Quest Branch Gate

ID: games-quest-branch-gate
Sub-discipline: Narrative systems design
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: 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.

Why typed decisions: Typed gates catch structural omissions consistently without inventing story content.

TAM: Narrative and game development tools: ~$10B
SAM: Interactive narrative authoring tools: ~$700M
SOM: Narrative design teams: ~$4M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Quest Branch 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 quest branch specification and Jev checks for distinct outcomes, state continuity, and player-visible consequences; code approves the branch only if all checks pass.
Discipline: Game Design & Interactive Media (Narrative systems 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: Typed gates catch structural omissions consistently without inventing story content.

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": <Quest nodes, transitions, and world flags>, "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)
{
  "outcome_distinction": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Do the branch outcomes differ in a meaningful way?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Outcomes change events, resources, relationships, or available paths.",
      "false": "Outcomes converge without a meaningful difference."
    }
  },
  "state_continuity": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Can each transition be followed using the stated world flags?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Transitions reference available and consistently defined state.",
      "false": "A transition depends on missing or contradictory state."
    }
  },
  "visible_consequence": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Can the player perceive a consequence of the choice?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The specification includes a player-visible result or feedback.",
      "false": "The choice has no perceptible consequence."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0723. Tutorial Friction Scan

ID: games-tutorial-friction-scan
Sub-discipline: UX design for games
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: 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.

Why typed decisions: Separate boolean checks make a simple, auditable rule more useful than a generated review paragraph.

TAM: Game UX and development tools: ~$10B
SAM: Tutorial and onboarding design tools: ~$500M
SOM: Game UX teams: ~$3M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Tutorial Friction Scan" 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 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.
Discipline: Game Design & Interactive Media (UX design for games).
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: Separate boolean checks make a simple, auditable rule more useful than a generated review paragraph.

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": <Tutorial steps, prompts, and actions>, "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)
{
  "concept_overload": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does a step introduce too many new concepts at once?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "A step introduces multiple unfamiliar concepts without separation.",
      "false": "New concepts are introduced in manageable steps."
    }
  },
  "action_feedback": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does each taught action receive clear feedback?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The sequence shows an understandable result after the action.",
      "false": "The action has no clear feedback."
    }
  },
  "safe_practice": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Can players practice the taught action before meaningful punishment?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "A low-risk opportunity to try the action is included.",
      "false": "The action is tested under consequential pressure immediately."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0724. Level Sightline Check

ID: games-level-sightline-check
Sub-discipline: Level design
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste a level layout summary and Jev checks for goal visibility, landmark distinction, and route legibility; code marks navigation risk if any check fails.

Why typed decisions: Binary spatial-design criteria support fast iteration and can be reviewed consistently across layouts.

TAM: Game development tools: ~$10B
SAM: Level design and layout tools: ~$800M
SOM: Level design teams: ~$4M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Level Sightline Check" 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 level layout summary and Jev checks for goal visibility, landmark distinction, and route legibility; code marks navigation risk if any check fails.
Discipline: Game Design & Interactive Media (Level 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: Binary spatial-design criteria support fast iteration and can be reviewed consistently across layouts.

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": <Room graph, landmarks, and objective placement>, "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)
{
  "goal_visibility": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Can players see or otherwise locate the current goal from the stated decision points?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The goal or a clear directional cue is available at key decisions.",
      "false": "Key decisions provide no usable goal cue."
    }
  },
  "landmark_distinction": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Are major landmarks distinguishable from one another?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Landmarks have distinct visual or spatial identities.",
      "false": "Major landmarks are easy to confuse."
    }
  },
  "route_legibility": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Can players infer a plausible route through the level?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The layout provides readable connections or directional cues.",
      "false": "Connections are ambiguous or misleading."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0725. Accessibility Cue Audit

ID: games-accessibility-cue-audit
Sub-discipline: Accessible game design
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste a mechanic and its feedback cues and Jev checks for non-color signaling, adjustable timing, and essential information redundancy; code raises a review flag if any check fails.

Why typed decisions: Independent checks identify specific accessibility gaps without treating generated advice as a compliance verdict.

TAM: Game development and accessibility tools: ~$10B
SAM: Accessibility testing and design tools: ~$500M
SOM: Accessibility-focused game teams: ~$3M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Accessibility Cue Audit" 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 mechanic and its feedback cues and Jev checks for non-color signaling, adjustable timing, and essential information redundancy; code raises a review flag if any check fails.
Discipline: Game Design & Interactive Media (Accessible game 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: Independent checks identify specific accessibility gaps without treating generated advice as a compliance verdict.

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": <Mechanic description and feedback settings>, "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)
{
  "noncolor_signal": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is essential information conveyed without relying on color alone?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Shape, label, pattern, position, or another cue supplements color.",
      "false": "Color alone carries essential information."
    }
  },
  "timing_control": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Can players adjust or avoid a time-critical response?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Timing is adjustable or a non-time-critical alternative exists.",
      "false": "Success depends on fixed rapid timing."
    }
  },
  "information_redundancy": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is essential feedback available through more than one perceptual channel or presentation mode?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "A suitable alternative cue or mode conveys the essential information.",
      "false": "Essential information has only one inaccessible presentation."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0726. Puzzle Fairness Gate

ID: games-puzzle-fairness-gate
Sub-discipline: Puzzle design
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: 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.

Why typed decisions: Explicit yes-or-no tests help teams find fairness risks before playtesting without fabricating puzzle solutions.

TAM: Game development tools: ~$10B
SAM: Puzzle and level design tools: ~$600M
SOM: Puzzle design teams: ~$3M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

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

---

## 0727. Choice Consequence Lens

ID: games-choice-consequence-lens
Sub-discipline: Interactive storytelling
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste a branching choice and its outcomes and Jev checks for consequence visibility, option distinction, and state follow-through; code flags choices that fail any check.

Why typed decisions: Typed conditions let narrative designers audit choice structure without generating replacement dialogue.

TAM: Interactive narrative and game tools: ~$10B
SAM: Branching narrative design tools: ~$700M
SOM: Narrative design teams: ~$4M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Choice Consequence Lens" 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 branching choice and its outcomes and Jev checks for consequence visibility, option distinction, and state follow-through; code flags choices that fail any check.
Discipline: Game Design & Interactive Media (Interactive storytelling).
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: Typed conditions let narrative designers audit choice structure without generating replacement dialogue.

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": <Choice text, outcome summaries, and state changes>, "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)
{
  "consequence_visibility": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the choice produce a perceptible consequence?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The player can observe a result of the choice.",
      "false": "No perceptible result is specified."
    }
  },
  "option_distinction": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Do the options express meaningfully different intentions or tradeoffs?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Options differ in intent, cost, or likely outcome.",
      "false": "Options are functionally or semantically near-identical."
    }
  },
  "state_followthrough": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does later content reflect the choice through tracked state?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The specification carries the choice into a later event or state change.",
      "false": "No later state or content reflects the choice."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0728. Enemy Telegraph Review

ID: games-enemy-telegraph-review
Sub-discipline: Combat animation design
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste an enemy attack timeline and Jev checks for advance warning, distinct attack cues, and a viable response window; code flags attacks that fail any check.

Why typed decisions: A fixed checklist supports tuning across many attacks more consistently than freeform prose feedback.

TAM: Game development and animation tools: ~$10B
SAM: Combat animation and tuning tools: ~$500M
SOM: Combat design teams: ~$3M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Enemy Telegraph Review" 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 an enemy attack timeline and Jev checks for advance warning, distinct attack cues, and a viable response window; code flags attacks that fail any check.
Discipline: Game Design & Interactive Media (Combat animation 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: A fixed checklist supports tuning across many attacks more consistently than freeform prose feedback.

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": <Attack timeline, animation cues, and player response rules>, "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)
{
  "advance_warning": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the attack signal danger before its damaging moment?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "A cue precedes the point where the attack can harm the player.",
      "false": "The damaging moment arrives without advance warning."
    }
  },
  "cue_distinction": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Can players distinguish this attack cue from other attacks?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The cue communicates a distinct attack or response category.",
      "false": "The cue is easily confused with other attacks."
    }
  },
  "response_window": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is there enough stated opportunity to perform a valid response?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "A feasible dodge, block, interruption, or other response fits the timing.",
      "false": "No valid response fits the stated timing."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0729. Worldbuilding Consistency Desk

ID: games-worldbuilding-consistency-desk
Sub-discipline: Game narrative design
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste a worldbuilding entry alongside canon rules and Jev checks for rule compatibility, timeline compatibility, and faction consistency; code sends any failed check to human review.

Why typed decisions: Independent consistency checks are easier to audit than generated summaries and leave canon decisions with the team.

TAM: Game development and narrative tools: ~$10B
SAM: Game lore and continuity tools: ~$400M
SOM: Narrative teams: ~$2M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Worldbuilding Consistency Desk" 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 worldbuilding entry alongside canon rules and Jev checks for rule compatibility, timeline compatibility, and faction consistency; code sends any failed check to human review.
Discipline: Game Design & Interactive Media (Game narrative 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: Independent consistency checks are easier to audit than generated summaries and leave canon decisions with the team.

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": <Lore entry, canon rules, timeline, and faction 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)
{
  "rule_compatibility": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the entry comply with the supplied world rules?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The entry does not contradict any supplied rule.",
      "false": "The entry contradicts a supplied rule."
    }
  },
  "timeline_compatibility": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the entry fit the supplied chronology?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Dates and event ordering are compatible with the timeline.",
      "false": "A date or event ordering conflicts with the timeline."
    }
  },
  "faction_consistency": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the entry align with the stated faction traits or relationships?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Faction behavior and relationships fit the supplied canon.",
      "false": "A faction detail conflicts with supplied canon."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0730. XR Comfort Checkpoint

ID: games-xr-comfort-checkpoint
Sub-discipline: XR interaction design
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste an XR interaction flow and Jev checks for stable orientation, reachable controls, and a seated or reduced-motion alternative; code blocks release review if any check fails.

Why typed decisions: Clear binary checks surface known comfort risks early without pretending to replace user testing.

TAM: XR development and design tools: ~$5B
SAM: XR comfort and interaction tools: ~$300M
SOM: XR studios: ~$2M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "XR Comfort Checkpoint" 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 an XR interaction flow and Jev checks for stable orientation, reachable controls, and a seated or reduced-motion alternative; code blocks release review if any check fails.
Discipline: Game Design & Interactive Media (XR interaction 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: Clear binary checks surface known comfort risks early without pretending to replace user testing.

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": <XR interaction steps, movement model, and device constraints>, "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)
{
  "orientation_stability": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the flow avoid unexpected forced changes in player orientation?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Orientation changes are player-controlled or clearly signaled and manageable.",
      "false": "The flow forces unexpected orientation changes."
    }
  },
  "reachable_controls": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Are required controls reachable within the stated play space?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Required interactions fit the stated reach and movement constraints.",
      "false": "A required interaction exceeds the stated reach or space."
    }
  },
  "alternative_mode": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is a seated or reduced-motion way to complete the interaction provided?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "A suitable alternative mode is specified.",
      "false": "No seated or reduced-motion alternative is specified."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0731. Procedural Asset Guard

ID: games-procedural-asset-guard
Sub-discipline: Procedural content design
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste procedural generation rules and sample outputs and Jev checks for constraint compliance, gameplay readability, and seeded reproducibility; code rejects a batch if any check fails.

Why typed decisions: Boolean batch gates make content validation repeatable and easy to attach to a generation pipeline.

TAM: Game development tools: ~$10B
SAM: Procedural content validation tools: ~$500M
SOM: Procedural design teams: ~$3M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Procedural Asset Guard" 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 procedural generation rules and sample outputs and Jev checks for constraint compliance, gameplay readability, and seeded reproducibility; code rejects a batch if any check fails.
Discipline: Game Design & Interactive Media (Procedural content 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: Boolean batch gates make content validation repeatable and easy to attach to a generation pipeline.

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": <Generation rules, constraints, and sample outputs>, "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)
{
  "constraint_compliance": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Do the samples obey every stated generation constraint?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "No sample violates a supplied constraint.",
      "false": "At least one sample violates a supplied constraint."
    }
  },
  "gameplay_readability": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Can players read the gameplay-relevant elements in the samples?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Critical paths, hazards, and interactables remain discernible.",
      "false": "A gameplay-relevant element is obscured or ambiguous."
    }
  },
  "seed_reproducibility": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Can a sample be reproduced from its stated seed and settings?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The seed and settings are sufficient to reproduce the sample.",
      "false": "The sample cannot be reliably reproduced from the supplied data."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0732. Soundscape Mix Gate

ID: games-soundscape-mix-gate
Sub-discipline: Interactive audio design
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste a gameplay audio event map and Jev checks for critical sound priority, overlapping-event clarity, and accessibility alternatives; code flags the mix plan if any check fails.

Why typed decisions: Typed checks help protect functional audio cues without generating or judging audio assets as prose.

TAM: Game audio and development tools: ~$5B
SAM: Interactive audio design tools: ~$300M
SOM: Game audio teams: ~$2M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Soundscape Mix 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 gameplay audio event map and Jev checks for critical sound priority, overlapping-event clarity, and accessibility alternatives; code flags the mix plan if any check fails.
Discipline: Game Design & Interactive Media (Interactive audio 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: Typed checks help protect functional audio cues without generating or judging audio assets as prose.

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": <Audio event map, priority rules, and accessibility settings>, "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)
{
  "critical_priority": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Are critical gameplay cues prioritized over nonessential sounds?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Critical cues have a stated priority or ducking rule.",
      "false": "Critical cues can be masked by nonessential sounds."
    }
  },
  "overlap_clarity": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Do simultaneous important events remain distinguishable?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The plan separates or differentiates overlapping important cues.",
      "false": "Important overlapping cues are likely to be confused."
    }
  },
  "audio_alternative": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is essential audio information available through a visual or haptic alternative?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "A suitable non-audio cue conveys essential information.",
      "false": "Essential information is audio-only."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0733. Live Event Readiness

ID: games-live-event-readiness
Sub-discipline: Live game events
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste a live-event run sheet and Jev checks for start conditions, recovery paths, and player-facing state changes; code marks the event ready only when all three pass.

Why typed decisions: Independent operational checks reduce launch ambiguity and provide a clear, machine-readable readiness gate.

TAM: Live game operations tools: ~$5B
SAM: Event planning and validation tools: ~$300M
SOM: Live game teams: ~$2M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Live Event Readiness" 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 live-event run sheet and Jev checks for start conditions, recovery paths, and player-facing state changes; code marks the event ready only when all three pass.
Discipline: Game Design & Interactive Media (Live game events).
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: Independent operational checks reduce launch ambiguity and provide a clear, machine-readable readiness gate.

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": <Event schedule, triggers, fallback steps, and player states>, "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)
{
  "start_condition": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is the event start condition explicit and testable?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "A measurable trigger or schedule defines when the event starts.",
      "false": "The start condition is ambiguous or untestable."
    }
  },
  "recovery_path": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is there a recovery path for a failed or interrupted event?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "A fallback or restart procedure is specified.",
      "false": "No recovery procedure is specified."
    }
  },
  "player_state_change": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the event define how player state changes during and after it?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Relevant player state updates and reset behavior are specified.",
      "false": "State updates or reset behavior are missing."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0734. Exhibit Interaction Pass

ID: games-exhibit-interaction-pass
Sub-discipline: Museum interactive media
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste an exhibit interaction flow and Jev checks for visitor orientation, low-friction entry, and a defined ending; code flags flows missing any condition.

Why typed decisions: Simple, typed criteria give exhibit teams consistent checks across experiences with different content.

TAM: Interactive media and exhibit technology: ~$4B
SAM: Museum interactive design tools: ~$250M
SOM: Exhibit design studios: ~$1.5M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Exhibit Interaction Pass" 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 an exhibit interaction flow and Jev checks for visitor orientation, low-friction entry, and a defined ending; code flags flows missing any condition.
Discipline: Game Design & Interactive Media (Museum interactive media).
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: Simple, typed criteria give exhibit teams consistent checks across experiences with different content.

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": <Exhibit flow, visitor prompts, and completion states>, "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)
{
  "visitor_orientation": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Can visitors tell what the interaction is and how to begin?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The experience provides a clear purpose and entry action.",
      "false": "Purpose or first action is unclear."
    }
  },
  "low_friction_entry": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Can a visitor join without disrupting someone already using it?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The flow supports turn-taking, drop-in use, or a clear available state.",
      "false": "Joining requires interrupting or confusing the current user."
    }
  },
  "defined_ending": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the interaction indicate when it is complete?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "A completion state or clear exit cue is specified.",
      "false": "Visitors receive no clear indication of completion."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0735. Player Research Screener

ID: games-player-research-screener
Sub-discipline: Game user research
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste a study brief and anonymous participant profiles and Jev checks for eligibility, exclusion conflicts, and coverage gaps; code shortlists profiles that meet all required conditions.

Why typed decisions: Typed eligibility decisions are auditable and easier to apply consistently than generated participant summaries.

TAM: User research and game development tools: ~$10B
SAM: Game research recruiting and screening tools: ~$300M
SOM: Game research teams: ~$2M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Player Research Screener" 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 study brief and anonymous participant profiles and Jev checks for eligibility, exclusion conflicts, and coverage gaps; code shortlists profiles that meet all required conditions.
Discipline: Game Design & Interactive Media (Game user research).
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: Typed eligibility decisions are auditable and easier to apply consistently than generated participant summaries.

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": <Study criteria and anonymized participant profile JSON>, "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)
{
  "eligibility_match": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does this profile meet the study's required participant criteria?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "All required criteria are supported by the profile.",
      "false": "A required criterion is unmet or unsupported."
    }
  },
  "exclusion_conflict": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the profile trigger any stated exclusion rule?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "At least one exclusion condition applies.",
      "false": "No stated exclusion condition applies."
    }
  },
  "coverage_gap": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Would including this profile address a stated underrepresented segment?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The profile contributes to a segment marked as underrepresented.",
      "false": "The profile does not address a stated coverage gap."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0736. Mod Safety Triage

ID: games-mod-safety-triage
Sub-discipline: UGC game design
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste a user-generated content item and its ruleset and Jev checks for prohibited content, personal data exposure, and rule evasion; code routes it for review if any risk check passes.

Why typed decisions: Separate policy flags support transparent moderation queues without generating moderation messages.

TAM: UGC and moderation tools: ~$8B
SAM: Game UGC safety tooling: ~$500M
SOM: UGC platform teams: ~$3M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Mod Safety Triage" 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 user-generated content item and its ruleset and Jev checks for prohibited content, personal data exposure, and rule evasion; code routes it for review if any risk check passes.
Discipline: Game Design & Interactive Media (UGC game 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: Separate policy flags support transparent moderation queues without generating moderation messages.

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": <UGC item, platform policy, and reporting metadata>, "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)
{
  "prohibited_content": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the item appear to contain content prohibited by the supplied policy?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The item appears to match a stated prohibited category.",
      "false": "No stated prohibited category appears to apply."
    }
  },
  "personal_data": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the item expose personal or identifying information?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The item appears to include personal or identifying information.",
      "false": "No personal or identifying information is apparent."
    }
  },
  "rule_evasion": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the item appear designed to evade a stated content rule?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The item appears to disguise or circumvent a stated rule.",
      "false": "No apparent attempt to evade a stated rule."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0737. Camera Comfort Audit

ID: games-camera-comfort-audit
Sub-discipline: Camera and motion design
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste a camera behavior spec and Jev checks for player control, motion-sickness safeguards, and gameplay readability; code sends the spec to review if any check fails.

Why typed decisions: A small set of explicit checks can be applied repeatedly to camera behaviors without relying on subjective generated commentary.

TAM: Game development tools: ~$10B
SAM: Camera design and testing tools: ~$250M
SOM: Camera design teams: ~$1.5M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Camera Comfort Audit" 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 camera behavior spec and Jev checks for player control, motion-sickness safeguards, and gameplay readability; code sends the spec to review if any check fails.
Discipline: Game Design & Interactive Media (Camera and motion 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: A small set of explicit checks can be applied repeatedly to camera behaviors without relying on subjective generated commentary.

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": <Camera rules, motion settings, and gameplay context>, "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)
{
  "player_control": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Can the player control or predict significant camera movement?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Movement is player-controlled or clearly predictable from play.",
      "false": "Significant movement is unexpected and not controllable."
    }
  },
  "motion_safeguard": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the spec provide a safeguard for motion-sensitive players?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "A relevant option such as reduced shake or motion is specified.",
      "false": "No motion-related safeguard is specified."
    }
  },
  "action_readability": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the camera keep the important gameplay action readable?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The framing preserves visibility of critical threats and interactions.",
      "false": "Critical action can leave view or become obscured."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0738. Art Direction Drift

ID: games-art-direction-drift
Sub-discipline: Game art direction
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste an asset brief and project style rules and Jev checks for palette fit, shape-language fit, and world-context fit; code flags assets that fail any consistency check.

Why typed decisions: Typed consistency checks create a quick review queue while leaving artistic approval to the art team.

TAM: Game art and development tools: ~$10B
SAM: Art pipeline review tools: ~$400M
SOM: Game art teams: ~$2M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Art Direction Drift" 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 an asset brief and project style rules and Jev checks for palette fit, shape-language fit, and world-context fit; code flags assets that fail any consistency check.
Discipline: Game Design & Interactive Media (Game art direction).
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: Typed consistency checks create a quick review queue while leaving artistic approval to the art team.

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": <Asset brief, reference rules, and world context>, "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)
{
  "palette_fit": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the asset fit the stated palette rules?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Its stated colors align with the project's palette rules.",
      "false": "Its stated colors conflict with the palette rules."
    }
  },
  "shape_language_fit": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the asset fit the project's stated shape language?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Its silhouette and forms align with the supplied style rules.",
      "false": "Its forms conflict with the supplied style rules."
    }
  },
  "world_context_fit": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the asset make sense in its stated world context?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Its materials and function fit the described setting.",
      "false": "Its materials or function conflict with the described setting."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0739. Economy Exploit Watch

ID: games-economy-exploit-watch
Sub-discipline: Game economy design
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste a player transaction path and economy rules and Jev checks for unintended duplication, bypassed costs, and unrecoverable states; code flags a path if any exploit condition is detected.

Why typed decisions: Independent boolean checks turn economy review into a repeatable test gate rather than an open-ended critique.

TAM: Game economy and development tools: ~$5B
SAM: Economy simulation and QA tools: ~$300M
SOM: Economy design teams: ~$2M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Economy Exploit Watch" 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 player transaction path and economy rules and Jev checks for unintended duplication, bypassed costs, and unrecoverable states; code flags a path if any exploit condition is detected.
Discipline: Game Design & Interactive Media (Game economy 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: Independent boolean checks turn economy review into a repeatable test gate rather than an open-ended critique.

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": <Transaction sequence, item flows, and economy rules>, "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)
{
  "duplication_risk": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Can this path create or duplicate value without a corresponding cost?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The path appears to grant repeatable value without an offsetting cost.",
      "false": "Value creation has a stated cost or limit."
    }
  },
  "cost_bypass": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Can the path bypass a required payment or eligibility rule?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "A required cost or restriction can be skipped.",
      "false": "The required cost and restrictions remain enforced."
    }
  },
  "unrecoverable_state": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Can the path leave a player in an unrecoverable economy state?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The path can prevent required progress without a recovery route.",
      "false": "A recovery route or safe lower bound is specified."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0740. Cinematic Skip Integrity

ID: games-cinematic-skip-integrity
Sub-discipline: Game cinematics
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste a cinematic sequence and its skip behavior and Jev checks for essential information delivery, state synchronization, and safe skip points; code blocks the sequence from approval if any check fails.

Why typed decisions: Binary integrity checks protect both narrative comprehension and game state without generating script revisions.

TAM: Game development and cinematic tools: ~$10B
SAM: Cinematic pipeline validation tools: ~$250M
SOM: Cinematic design teams: ~$1.5M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Cinematic Skip Integrity" 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 cinematic sequence and its skip behavior and Jev checks for essential information delivery, state synchronization, and safe skip points; code blocks the sequence from approval if any check fails.
Discipline: Game Design & Interactive Media (Game cinematics).
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: Binary integrity checks protect both narrative comprehension and game state without generating script revisions.

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": <Cinematic beats, skip points, and gameplay state transitions>, "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)
{
  "essential_information": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does essential gameplay information remain available when the cinematic is skipped?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Skipped information is repeated or accessible elsewhere.",
      "false": "Skipping removes essential gameplay information."
    }
  },
  "state_synchronization": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Do normal playback and skip paths reach compatible game states?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Both paths set required flags and gameplay state consistently.",
      "false": "The paths can produce missing or conflicting state."
    }
  },
  "safe_skip_point": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Can players skip without interrupting an unsafe transition or losing control unexpectedly?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Skip points lead to a defined, playable state.",
      "false": "A skip can leave control or transitions in an undefined state."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0741. Mechanic Matchboard

ID: games-mechanic-matchboard
Sub-discipline: Game systems design
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste mechanic cards and a design brief, and Jev scores each mechanic on its fit with the intended player experience.

Why typed decisions: Comparable typed scores make mechanics easy to rank with adjustable priorities instead of relying on subjective generated commentary.

TAM: $2B–5B/yr
SAM: $200M–600M/yr
SOM: $1M–5M/yr

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Mechanic Matchboard" 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 mechanic cards and a design brief, and Jev scores each mechanic on its fit with the intended player experience.
Discipline: Game Design & Interactive Media (Game systems design).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: Comparable typed scores make mechanics easy to rank with adjustable priorities instead of relying on subjective generated commentary.

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": <Mechanic cards and target experience brief>, "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)
{
  "experience_fit": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score how well each mechanic supports the target player experience.",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Conflicts with the target experience",
      "2 — Weak or indirect support",
      "3 — Clear support",
      "4 — Strongly defines the experience"
    ]
  },
  "implementation_fit": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score how well each mechanic fits the stated scope and implementation constraints.",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Impractical within constraints",
      "2 — Significant scope risk",
      "3 — Feasible with manageable work",
      "4 — Fits scope cleanly"
    ]
  },
  "distinctiveness": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score how distinct each mechanic feels from the other candidates.",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Nearly interchangeable",
      "2 — Some familiar differences",
      "3 — Clearly differentiated",
      "4 — Highly distinctive"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0742. Questline Compass

ID: games-questline-compass
Sub-discipline: Narrative design
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste quest summaries and a campaign outline, and Jev scores each quest for its role in the larger arc.

Why typed decisions: Typed scores let writers rank quests against shared narrative criteria without asking a model to rewrite their story.

TAM: $1B–3B/yr
SAM: $100M–300M/yr
SOM: $500K–3M/yr

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Questline Compass" 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 quest summaries and a campaign outline, and Jev scores each quest for its role in the larger arc.
Discipline: Game Design & Interactive Media (Narrative design).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: Typed scores let writers rank quests against shared narrative criteria without asking a model to rewrite their story.

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": <Quest summaries and campaign arc outline>, "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)
{
  "arc_contribution": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score how much each quest advances the campaign arc.",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — No meaningful contribution",
      "2 — Minor connective contribution",
      "3 — Clear arc contribution",
      "4 — Essential turning point"
    ]
  },
  "character_relevance": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score how strongly each quest develops or reveals relevant characters.",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Characters are incidental",
      "2 — Limited character relevance",
      "3 — Clear character development",
      "4 — Central to character change"
    ]
  },
  "pacing_value": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score the quest's value to campaign pacing.",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Disrupts the intended pacing",
      "2 — Adds little pacing value",
      "3 — Supports a useful rhythm",
      "4 — Creates a valuable pacing shift"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0743. Level Flow Ledger

ID: games-level-flow-ledger
Sub-discipline: Level design
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste room descriptions and a level goal, and Jev scores each room for flow, challenge, and spatial clarity.

Why typed decisions: A common score scale produces a sortable room review that designers can weight toward exploration, action, or readability.

TAM: $1B–4B/yr
SAM: $150M–500M/yr
SOM: $1M–5M/yr

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Level Flow Ledger" 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 room descriptions and a level goal, and Jev scores each room for flow, challenge, and spatial clarity.
Discipline: Game Design & Interactive Media (Level design).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: A common score scale produces a sortable room review that designers can weight toward exploration, action, or readability.

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": <Room descriptions and level goals>, "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)
{
  "navigation_clarity": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score how clearly each room communicates routes and points of interest.",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Routes are confusing",
      "2 — Important routes are easy to miss",
      "3 — Main routes are clear",
      "4 — Routes and landmarks read immediately"
    ]
  },
  "challenge_fit": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score how well the room's challenge fits its intended place in the level.",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Poorly suited to its role",
      "2 — Some mismatch in intensity",
      "3 — Appropriate challenge",
      "4 — Exceptionally well-calibrated challenge"
    ]
  },
  "flow_contribution": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score how well the room contributes to the intended level flow.",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Breaks the flow",
      "2 — Adds friction or little momentum",
      "3 — Supports the flow",
      "4 — Creates a strong, purposeful transition"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0744. Encounter Tuning Board

ID: games-encounter-tuning-board
Sub-discipline: Combat design
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste encounter briefs and party assumptions, and Jev scores each encounter for difficulty, tactical variety, and fairness.

Why typed decisions: Normalized scores let combat teams tune encounter priorities consistently while keeping final balance decisions in their hands.

TAM: $1B–3B/yr
SAM: $100M–400M/yr
SOM: $500K–3M/yr

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Encounter Tuning Board" 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 encounter briefs and party assumptions, and Jev scores each encounter for difficulty, tactical variety, and fairness.
Discipline: Game Design & Interactive Media (Combat design).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: Normalized scores let combat teams tune encounter priorities consistently while keeping final balance decisions in their hands.

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": <Encounter briefs and player party assumptions>, "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)
{
  "difficulty_fit": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score how well each encounter's difficulty fits its intended position.",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Far too easy or punishing",
      "2 — Noticeably miscalibrated",
      "3 — Appropriate for its position",
      "4 — Precisely calibrated"
    ]
  },
  "tactical_variety": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score the variety of meaningful tactical choices in each encounter.",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Little meaningful choice",
      "2 — A few repetitive options",
      "3 — Several distinct approaches",
      "4 — Rich, interdependent tactics"
    ]
  },
  "fairness": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score how fair the encounter feels given its information and counterplay.",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Largely unavoidable failure",
      "2 — Counterplay is unclear or limited",
      "3 — Readable with viable counterplay",
      "4 — Clear threats and satisfying counterplay"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0745. Dialogue Branch Audit

ID: games-dialogue-branch-audit
Sub-discipline: Interactive narrative
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste dialogue branch summaries and character goals, and Jev scores each branch for agency, coherence, and consequence.

Why typed decisions: Comparable scores reveal which branches merit attention without replacing authored dialogue with model-written text.

TAM: $1B–4B/yr
SAM: $100M–400M/yr
SOM: $500K–3M/yr

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Dialogue Branch Audit" 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 dialogue branch summaries and character goals, and Jev scores each branch for agency, coherence, and consequence.
Discipline: Game Design & Interactive Media (Interactive narrative).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: Comparable scores reveal which branches merit attention without replacing authored dialogue with model-written text.

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": <Branch summaries and character goals>, "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)
{
  "player_agency": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score how much meaningful agency each branch gives the player.",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — No meaningful choice",
      "2 — Choice is mostly cosmetic",
      "3 — Choice affects the scene",
      "4 — Choice meaningfully shapes outcomes"
    ]
  },
  "character_coherence": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score how well each branch fits the characters' established motives.",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Contradicts established motives",
      "2 — Weakly supported by characterization",
      "3 — Consistent with characterization",
      "4 — Deeply expresses character motives"
    ]
  },
  "consequence_clarity": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score how clearly each branch's consequences register in the experience.",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Consequences are absent or opaque",
      "2 — Consequences are easy to overlook",
      "3 — Consequences are apparent",
      "4 — Consequences are clear and resonant"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0746. Art Direction Sorter

ID: games-art-direction-sorter
Sub-discipline: Game art direction
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste visual asset descriptions and an art brief, and Jev scores each asset for stylistic fit, readability, and priority.

Why typed decisions: Weighted typed ratings help art teams triage large asset lists without inviting ungrounded visual-copy generation.

TAM: $1B–3B/yr
SAM: $100M–350M/yr
SOM: $500K–3M/yr

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Art Direction Sorter" 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 visual asset descriptions and an art brief, and Jev scores each asset for stylistic fit, readability, and priority.
Discipline: Game Design & Interactive Media (Game art direction).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: Weighted typed ratings help art teams triage large asset lists without inviting ungrounded visual-copy generation.

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": <Asset descriptions and art direction brief>, "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)
{
  "style_fit": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score how well each asset description fits the art direction.",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Conflicts with the brief",
      "2 — Weak stylistic fit",
      "3 — Good stylistic fit",
      "4 — Strongly embodies the art direction"
    ]
  },
  "gameplay_readability": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score how readily the asset's gameplay role can be read.",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Role is unclear",
      "2 — Role is easy to confuse",
      "3 — Role is generally readable",
      "4 — Role is unmistakable"
    ]
  },
  "production_priority": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score how important the asset is to the current production milestone.",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Nonessential for the milestone",
      "2 — Useful but deferrable",
      "3 — Important to the milestone",
      "4 — Critical path asset"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0747. Sound Cue Index

ID: games-sound-cue-index
Sub-discipline: Game audio design
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste sound-cue descriptions and scene context, and Jev scores cues for emotional fit, gameplay utility, and mix priority.

Why typed decisions: Rankable scores help audio teams compare cues consistently while retaining human control of creative and mix decisions.

TAM: $1B–3B/yr
SAM: $100M–350M/yr
SOM: $500K–3M/yr

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Sound Cue Index" 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 sound-cue descriptions and scene context, and Jev scores cues for emotional fit, gameplay utility, and mix priority.
Discipline: Game Design & Interactive Media (Game audio design).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: Rankable scores help audio teams compare cues consistently while retaining human control of creative and mix decisions.

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": <Sound-cue descriptions and scene context>, "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)
{
  "emotional_fit": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score how well each cue supports the scene's intended emotion.",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Undermines the intended emotion",
      "2 — Weak emotional alignment",
      "3 — Supports the intended emotion",
      "4 — Strongly amplifies the intended emotion"
    ]
  },
  "gameplay_utility": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score how useful each cue is for communicating gameplay information.",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Provides no useful signal",
      "2 — Signal is subtle or redundant",
      "3 — Communicates useful information",
      "4 — Essential, clear gameplay feedback"
    ]
  },
  "mix_priority": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score how important the cue is to the intended audio mix.",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Low-priority background detail",
      "2 — Supporting layer",
      "3 — Prominent mix element",
      "4 — Must remain clearly audible"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0748. Tutorial Step Sorter

ID: games-tutorial-step-sorter
Sub-discipline: Player onboarding
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste tutorial step descriptions and the target audience, and Jev scores each step for necessity, clarity, and timing.

Why typed decisions: Comparable ratings expose redundant or poorly timed steps without generating replacement instructions.

TAM: $1B–4B/yr
SAM: $100M–400M/yr
SOM: $500K–3M/yr

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Tutorial Step Sorter" 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 tutorial step descriptions and the target audience, and Jev scores each step for necessity, clarity, and timing.
Discipline: Game Design & Interactive Media (Player onboarding).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: Comparable ratings expose redundant or poorly timed steps without generating replacement instructions.

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": <Tutorial steps and target audience profile>, "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)
{
  "learning_necessity": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score how necessary each step is for learning the intended skill.",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Skill can be learned without it",
      "2 — Offers minor reinforcement",
      "3 — Important for learning",
      "4 — Essential foundation"
    ]
  },
  "instruction_clarity": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score how clearly each step communicates what the player should learn or do.",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Unclear purpose or action",
      "2 — Requires substantial inference",
      "3 — Generally clear",
      "4 — Immediately understandable"
    ]
  },
  "timing_fit": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score how well the step is timed for the player's learning progression.",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Arrives much too early or late",
      "2 — Timing creates avoidable friction",
      "3 — Well-timed",
      "4 — Precisely timed to player readiness"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0749. Accessibility Passboard

ID: games-accessibility-passboard
Sub-discipline: Game accessibility
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste feature descriptions and an accessibility target, and Jev scores each feature for barrier reduction, reach, and implementation priority.

Why typed decisions: A consistent scorecard supports transparent prioritization while leaving accessibility validation and design decisions to experts.

TAM: $500M–2B/yr
SAM: $75M–250M/yr
SOM: $300K–2M/yr

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Accessibility Passboard" 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 feature descriptions and an accessibility target, and Jev scores each feature for barrier reduction, reach, and implementation priority.
Discipline: Game Design & Interactive Media (Game accessibility).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: A consistent scorecard supports transparent prioritization while leaving accessibility validation and design decisions to experts.

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": <Feature descriptions and accessibility targets>, "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)
{
  "barrier_reduction": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score how much each feature reduces barriers for its intended users.",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Little or no barrier reduction",
      "2 — Reduces a limited barrier",
      "3 — Meaningfully reduces a barrier",
      "4 — Removes a substantial access barrier"
    ]
  },
  "user_reach": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score how broadly each feature benefits the intended user groups.",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Benefits very few intended users",
      "2 — Benefits a narrow group",
      "3 — Benefits several user groups",
      "4 — Benefits a broad range of users"
    ]
  },
  "implementation_priority": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score how important the feature is to the stated accessibility target.",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Low relevance to the target",
      "2 — Helpful supporting feature",
      "3 — Important to the target",
      "4 — Foundational to meeting the target"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0750. Spatial Scene Planner

ID: games-spatial-scene-planner
Sub-discipline: XR environment design
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste XR scene concepts and comfort constraints, and Jev scores each concept for spatial legibility, comfort, and interaction potential.

Why typed decisions: Typed dimensions give XR teams comparable concept rankings with weights they can adapt to different audiences and devices.

TAM: $1B–4B/yr
SAM: $100M–450M/yr
SOM: $500K–4M/yr

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Spatial Scene Planner" 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 XR scene concepts and comfort constraints, and Jev scores each concept for spatial legibility, comfort, and interaction potential.
Discipline: Game Design & Interactive Media (XR environment design).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: Typed dimensions give XR teams comparable concept rankings with weights they can adapt to different audiences and devices.

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": <XR scene concepts and comfort constraints>, "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)
{
  "spatial_legibility": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score how clearly each scene communicates scale, orientation, and spatial relationships.",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Spatial relationships are confusing",
      "2 — Orientation is often uncertain",
      "3 — Space is generally legible",
      "4 — Space is immediately legible"
    ]
  },
  "comfort_fit": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score how well each concept fits the stated comfort constraints.",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Conflicts with key constraints",
      "2 — Has notable comfort risks",
      "3 — Fits the constraints",
      "4 — Strongly supports comfortable use"
    ]
  },
  "interaction_potential": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score the scene's potential for meaningful spatial interaction.",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Little meaningful interaction",
      "2 — Limited interaction opportunities",
      "3 — Several useful interactions",
      "4 — Interaction is integral to the concept"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0751. Gesture Set Evaluator

ID: games-gesture-set-evaluator
Sub-discipline: XR interaction design
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste gesture definitions and interaction contexts, and Jev scores each gesture for discoverability, comfort, and precision.

Why typed decisions: A score ranker enables consistent comparison of interaction candidates without pretending to replace user testing.

TAM: $500M–2B/yr
SAM: $75M–250M/yr
SOM: $300K–2M/yr

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Gesture Set Evaluator" 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 gesture definitions and interaction contexts, and Jev scores each gesture for discoverability, comfort, and precision.
Discipline: Game Design & Interactive Media (XR interaction design).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: A score ranker enables consistent comparison of interaction candidates without pretending to replace user testing.

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": <Gesture definitions and interaction contexts>, "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)
{
  "discoverability": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score how readily a new user could discover each gesture's purpose.",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Purpose is opaque",
      "2 — Requires explicit teaching",
      "3 — Purpose is reasonably discoverable",
      "4 — Purpose is intuitive in context"
    ]
  },
  "physical_comfort": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score the gesture's expected physical comfort for repeated use.",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Likely uncomfortable",
      "2 — Fatigue or strain is plausible",
      "3 — Generally comfortable",
      "4 — Comfortable for repeated use"
    ]
  },
  "input_precision": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score how reliably the gesture can express its intended input.",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Highly ambiguous input",
      "2 — Frequent misread risk",
      "3 — Reliable in ordinary use",
      "4 — Precise and robust input"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0752. Exhibit Interaction Queue

ID: games-exhibit-interaction-queue
Sub-discipline: Interactive installation design
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste installation interaction concepts and venue constraints, and Jev scores each for visitor engagement, throughput, and resilience.

Why typed decisions: Comparable scores help teams prioritize concepts under real venue constraints instead of relying on generated pitches.

TAM: $1B–3B/yr
SAM: $100M–300M/yr
SOM: $500K–3M/yr

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Exhibit Interaction Queue" 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 installation interaction concepts and venue constraints, and Jev scores each for visitor engagement, throughput, and resilience.
Discipline: Game Design & Interactive Media (Interactive installation design).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: Comparable scores help teams prioritize concepts under real venue constraints instead of relying on generated pitches.

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": <Interaction concepts and venue constraints>, "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)
{
  "visitor_engagement": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score each concept's potential to engage its intended visitors.",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Little visitor involvement",
      "2 — Brief or shallow involvement",
      "3 — Sustained, relevant engagement",
      "4 — Highly absorbing engagement"
    ]
  },
  "visitor_throughput": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score how well the interaction supports the required visitor throughput.",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Far below throughput needs",
      "2 — Creates significant bottlenecks",
      "3 — Meets expected flow",
      "4 — Supports smooth high throughput"
    ]
  },
  "operational_resilience": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score how well the concept can withstand interruptions and operating constraints.",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Easily disrupted",
      "2 — Requires frequent intervention",
      "3 — Operates reliably with routine support",
      "4 — Robust under varied conditions"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0753. Projection Map Picker

ID: games-projection-map-picker
Sub-discipline: Projection mapping
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste projection sequence descriptions and site notes, and Jev scores each sequence for spatial fit, visual impact, and setup feasibility.

Why typed decisions: A weighted scorecard quickly compares sequence candidates while keeping artistic intent and site judgment with creators.

TAM: $500M–2B/yr
SAM: $75M–250M/yr
SOM: $300K–2M/yr

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Projection Map Picker" 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 projection sequence descriptions and site notes, and Jev scores each sequence for spatial fit, visual impact, and setup feasibility.
Discipline: Game Design & Interactive Media (Projection mapping).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: A weighted scorecard quickly compares sequence candidates while keeping artistic intent and site judgment with creators.

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": <Projection sequences and site 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)
{
  "spatial_fit": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score how well each sequence uses the site's geometry and surfaces.",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Poor fit to the site",
      "2 — Uses the site superficially",
      "3 — Fits the site well",
      "4 — Makes distinctive use of site geometry"
    ]
  },
  "visual_impact": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score the expected visual impact of each sequence for its audience.",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Low visual impact",
      "2 — Some memorable moments",
      "3 — Strong, coherent impact",
      "4 — Striking and memorable impact"
    ]
  },
  "setup_feasibility": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score how feasible each sequence is under the stated setup conditions.",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Impractical to set up",
      "2 — Significant technical risk",
      "3 — Feasible with planned effort",
      "4 — Straightforward within constraints"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0754. Playtest Clip Queue

ID: games-playtest-clip-queue
Sub-discipline: UX research for games
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste playtest clip notes and research goals, and Jev scores each clip for evidence strength, design relevance, and follow-up priority.

Why typed decisions: Typed comparable ratings turn qualitative observations into a sortable review queue without fabricating research findings.

TAM: $1B–3B/yr
SAM: $100M–350M/yr
SOM: $500K–3M/yr

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Playtest Clip Queue" 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 playtest clip notes and research goals, and Jev scores each clip for evidence strength, design relevance, and follow-up priority.
Discipline: Game Design & Interactive Media (UX research for games).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: Typed comparable ratings turn qualitative observations into a sortable review queue without fabricating research findings.

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": <Playtest clip notes and research goals>, "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)
{
  "evidence_strength": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score how strongly each note supports an observable playtest finding.",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Speculative or unsupported",
      "2 — Limited evidence",
      "3 — Clear observed evidence",
      "4 — Repeated or especially compelling evidence"
    ]
  },
  "design_relevance": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score how relevant each clip is to the stated design question.",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Not relevant",
      "2 — Indirectly relevant",
      "3 — Directly relevant",
      "4 — Central to the design question"
    ]
  },
  "followup_priority": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score how urgently the observation warrants follow-up.",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — No follow-up needed",
      "2 — Worth monitoring",
      "3 — Follow-up recommended",
      "4 — Immediate follow-up warranted"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0755. Narrative Prop Index

ID: games-narrative-prop-index
Sub-discipline: Environmental storytelling
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste prop descriptions and nearby scene context, and Jev scores each prop for story contribution, discoverability, and world fit.

Why typed decisions: A shared scoring rubric helps narrative and environment teams rank props without generating lore or overriding authorial intent.

TAM: $500M–2B/yr
SAM: $50M–200M/yr
SOM: $250K–2M/yr

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Narrative Prop Index" 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 prop descriptions and nearby scene context, and Jev scores each prop for story contribution, discoverability, and world fit.
Discipline: Game Design & Interactive Media (Environmental storytelling).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: A shared scoring rubric helps narrative and environment teams rank props without generating lore or overriding authorial intent.

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": <Prop descriptions and scene context>, "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)
{
  "story_contribution": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score how much each prop contributes to environmental storytelling.",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — No story contribution",
      "2 — Minor atmospheric contribution",
      "3 — Clear story contribution",
      "4 — Essential narrative clue or motif"
    ]
  },
  "discoverability": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score how likely players are to notice the prop in context.",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Easily overlooked",
      "2 — Noticeable only to attentive players",
      "3 — Likely to be noticed",
      "4 — Unmissable at the intended moment"
    ]
  },
  "world_fit": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score how well the prop fits the established world and scene.",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Contradicts the world",
      "2 — Weakly fits the setting",
      "3 — Fits the world",
      "4 — Strongly reinforces the world"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0756. Procedural Rule Bench

ID: games-procedural-rule-bench
Sub-discipline: Procedural generation
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste generation rules and target content examples, and Jev scores each rule set for variety, control, and thematic fit.

Why typed decisions: Normalized scores make rule sets comparable across creative priorities while leaving actual generation and tuning to the team.

TAM: $1B–4B/yr
SAM: $100M–400M/yr
SOM: $500K–3M/yr

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Procedural Rule Bench" 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 generation rules and target content examples, and Jev scores each rule set for variety, control, and thematic fit.
Discipline: Game Design & Interactive Media (Procedural generation).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: Normalized scores make rule sets comparable across creative priorities while leaving actual generation and tuning to the team.

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": <Procedural rules and target content examples>, "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)
{
  "output_variety": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score the range of meaningfully different outputs each rule set can support.",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Outputs are nearly identical",
      "2 — Limited variation",
      "3 — Clear variety",
      "4 — Broad, meaningful variety"
    ]
  },
  "designer_control": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score how much intentional control the rule set gives designers.",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Little predictable control",
      "2 — Outcomes are hard to steer",
      "3 — Useful controls are available",
      "4 — Fine-grained, reliable control"
    ]
  },
  "theme_fit": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score how well likely outputs fit the target theme.",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Often conflicts with the theme",
      "2 — Weak or inconsistent fit",
      "3 — Generally fits the theme",
      "4 — Strongly reinforces the theme"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0757. Cosmetic Set Curator

ID: games-cosmetic-set-curator
Sub-discipline: Game cosmetics
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste cosmetic item descriptions and a collection theme, and Jev scores each item for theme fit, silhouette variety, and collection value.

Why typed decisions: Typed ratings support transparent collection curation while avoiding generated descriptions or opaque recommendations.

TAM: $2B–6B/yr
SAM: $200M–700M/yr
SOM: $1M–6M/yr

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Cosmetic Set Curator" 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 cosmetic item descriptions and a collection theme, and Jev scores each item for theme fit, silhouette variety, and collection value.
Discipline: Game Design & Interactive Media (Game cosmetics).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: Typed ratings support transparent collection curation while avoiding generated descriptions or opaque recommendations.

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": <Cosmetic item descriptions and collection theme>, "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)
{
  "theme_fit": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score how well each item fits the collection theme.",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Conflicts with the theme",
      "2 — Loosely connected",
      "3 — Clearly fits",
      "4 — Defines the theme"
    ]
  },
  "silhouette_variety": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score how much each item adds visual variety to the existing collection.",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Duplicates existing silhouettes",
      "2 — Adds minor variation",
      "3 — Adds a distinct silhouette",
      "4 — Fills a major visual gap"
    ]
  },
  "collection_value": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score the item's contribution to the collection as a whole.",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Adds little collection value",
      "2 — Adds a narrow use case",
      "3 — Strengthens the collection",
      "4 — Becomes a signature collection piece"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0758. Card Set Balance Desk

ID: games-card-set-balance-desk
Sub-discipline: Card game design
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste card concepts and format rules, and Jev scores each card for role clarity, strategic utility, and balance risk.

Why typed decisions: Comparable typed dimensions help designers triage card candidates without asking a model to invent or rebalance cards.

TAM: $1B–4B/yr
SAM: $100M–450M/yr
SOM: $500K–4M/yr

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Card Set Balance Desk" 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 card concepts and format rules, and Jev scores each card for role clarity, strategic utility, and balance risk.
Discipline: Game Design & Interactive Media (Card game design).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: Comparable typed dimensions help designers triage card candidates without asking a model to invent or rebalance cards.

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": <Card concepts and format rules>, "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)
{
  "role_clarity": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score how clearly each card's intended role comes across.",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Role is unclear",
      "2 — Role is easy to misread",
      "3 — Role is clear",
      "4 — Role is immediately distinctive"
    ]
  },
  "strategic_utility": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score how much meaningful strategic utility each card offers.",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Little practical utility",
      "2 — Situational or repetitive utility",
      "3 — Useful strategic option",
      "4 — Enables rich strategic choices"
    ]
  },
  "balance_risk": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score the severity of each card's potential balance risk.",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Minimal apparent risk",
      "2 — Limited watchlist risk",
      "3 — Significant testing priority",
      "4 — High risk requiring review"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0759. Branching Film Mapper

ID: games-branching-film-mapper
Sub-discipline: Interactive film
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste interactive scene summaries and an edit outline, and Jev scores each branch for audience agency, edit continuity, and dramatic payoff.

Why typed decisions: Weighted scores compare branch candidates on production-specific concerns without generating screenplay material.

TAM: $500M–2B/yr
SAM: $50M–200M/yr
SOM: $250K–2M/yr

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Branching Film Mapper" 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 interactive scene summaries and an edit outline, and Jev scores each branch for audience agency, edit continuity, and dramatic payoff.
Discipline: Game Design & Interactive Media (Interactive film).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: Weighted scores compare branch candidates on production-specific concerns without generating screenplay material.

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": <Interactive scene summaries and edit outline>, "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)
{
  "audience_agency": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score how meaningfully each branch gives the audience control.",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — No meaningful control",
      "2 — Mostly cosmetic control",
      "3 — Meaningful scene influence",
      "4 — Strongly shapes the experience"
    ]
  },
  "edit_continuity": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score how well each branch maintains continuity with the edit outline.",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Breaks continuity",
      "2 — Creates notable continuity friction",
      "3 — Fits the outline",
      "4 — Integrates cleanly across branches"
    ]
  },
  "dramatic_payoff": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score the dramatic payoff of the choices in each branch.",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Little or no payoff",
      "2 — Limited payoff",
      "3 — Satisfying payoff",
      "4 — Strong, choice-specific payoff"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0760. Escape Room Puzzle Queue

ID: games-escape-room-puzzle-queue
Sub-discipline: Location-based experiences
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste puzzle briefs and group profiles, and Jev scores each puzzle for clue fairness, collaboration, and venue fit.

Why typed decisions: A stable score scale ranks puzzle candidates across experience goals without replacing playtesting or facilitator expertise.

TAM: $500M–2B/yr
SAM: $75M–250M/yr
SOM: $300K–2M/yr

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Escape Room Puzzle Queue" 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 puzzle briefs and group profiles, and Jev scores each puzzle for clue fairness, collaboration, and venue fit.
Discipline: Game Design & Interactive Media (Location-based experiences).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: A stable score scale ranks puzzle candidates across experience goals without replacing playtesting or facilitator expertise.

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 briefs and participant group profiles>, "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_fairness": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score how fairly the puzzle communicates the information needed to solve it.",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Key information is inaccessible",
      "2 — Clues are easy to misinterpret",
      "3 — Clues support a fair solve",
      "4 — Clues are clear, satisfying, and fair"
    ]
  },
  "collaboration": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score how well the puzzle encourages useful collaboration.",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Solitary with no shared contribution",
      "2 — Collaboration is optional but shallow",
      "3 — Multiple participants can contribute",
      "4 — Requires satisfying shared coordination"
    ]
  },
  "venue_fit": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "Score how well the puzzle fits the stated venue and operating conditions.",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Poor fit to venue conditions",
      "2 — Requires notable workarounds",
      "3 — Fits with routine setup",
      "4 — Naturally suits the venue"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0761. Questline Prop Picker

ID: games-questline-prop-picker
Sub-discipline: Narrative game design
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: Paste quest dialogue and an inventory list, and Jev selects which exact listed prop the dialogue implies the player should receive—or none.

Why typed decisions: Selecting a real inventory value prevents invented item names from breaking quest logic.

TAM: $20B+ games tools
SAM: $2B narrative production
SOM: $2M indie teams

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Questline Prop Picker" 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 quest dialogue and an inventory list, and Jev selects which exact listed prop the dialogue implies the player should receive—or none.
Discipline: Game Design & Interactive Media (Narrative game design).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: Selecting a real inventory value prevents invented item names from breaking quest logic.

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": <Dialogue spans and extracted inventory IDs>, "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)
{
  "reward_prop": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which listed prop is explicitly or strongly implied as the reward?",
    "criteria": {
      "prop_1": "Candidate inventory prop 1",
      "prop_2": "Candidate inventory prop 2",
      "prop_3": "Candidate inventory prop 3",
      "none": "No listed prop is supported"
    }
  },
  "reward_is_explicit": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the dialogue clearly identify a reward?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "A reward is clearly stated or implied",
      "false": "No reward is identifiable"
    }
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0762. Subtitle Beat Matcher

ID: games-subtitle-beat-matcher
Sub-discipline: Game localization
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: Paste subtitle lines and a sequence of animation cues, and Jev selects the cue that best matches each line—or none.

Why typed decisions: Choosing an existing cue preserves production timing labels and avoids fabricated references.

TAM: $5B+ localization tools
SAM: $600M game localization
SOM: $1M localization teams

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Subtitle Beat Matcher" 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 subtitle lines and a sequence of animation cues, and Jev selects the cue that best matches each line—or none.
Discipline: Game Design & Interactive Media (Game localization).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: Choosing an existing cue preserves production timing labels and avoids fabricated references.

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": <Subtitle spans and extracted cue IDs>, "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)
{
  "matching_cue": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which cue best matches the line's action or emotion?",
    "criteria": {
      "cue_1": "Candidate animation cue 1",
      "cue_2": "Candidate animation cue 2",
      "cue_3": "Candidate animation cue 3",
      "none": "No cue fits"
    }
  },
  "timing_conflict": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Would using this cue likely conflict with the line's timing?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The cue is likely too long or mistimed",
      "false": "The cue appears timing-compatible"
    }
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0763. Level Landmark Index

ID: games-level-landmark-index
Sub-discipline: Level design
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: Paste a level brief and a list of named map landmarks, and Jev selects the landmark each instruction refers to—or none.

Why typed decisions: Selecting an authored landmark keeps navigation links anchored to the actual map vocabulary.

TAM: $12B+ game development tools
SAM: $1B level design software
SOM: $1M studios

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Level Landmark Index" 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 level brief and a list of named map landmarks, and Jev selects the landmark each instruction refers to—or none.
Discipline: Game Design & Interactive Media (Level design).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: Selecting an authored landmark keeps navigation links anchored to the actual map vocabulary.

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": <Brief spans and extracted landmark names>, "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)
{
  "referenced_landmark": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which listed landmark does this instruction refer to?",
    "criteria": {
      "landmark_1": "Candidate landmark 1",
      "landmark_2": "Candidate landmark 2",
      "landmark_3": "Candidate landmark 3",
      "none": "No listed landmark is referenced"
    }
  },
  "navigation_critical": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is this reference necessary for navigating the level?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The reference is needed to understand the route",
      "false": "The reference is optional flavor or context"
    }
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0764. Mechanic Phrase Finder

ID: games-mechanic-phrase-finder
Sub-discipline: Systems design
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: Paste a design brief and an approved mechanic glossary, and Jev selects the glossary term that each passage describes—or none.

Why typed decisions: Reusing approved mechanic labels prevents generated terminology from fragmenting a design document.

TAM: $10B+ game tools
SAM: $900M systems design workflows
SOM: $1M design teams

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Mechanic Phrase Finder" 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 design brief and an approved mechanic glossary, and Jev selects the glossary term that each passage describes—or none.
Discipline: Game Design & Interactive Media (Systems design).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: Reusing approved mechanic labels prevents generated terminology from fragmenting a design document.

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": <Brief spans and extracted glossary terms>, "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)
{
  "mechanic_term": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which approved mechanic term best matches this passage?",
    "criteria": {
      "term_1": "Candidate mechanic term 1",
      "term_2": "Candidate mechanic term 2",
      "term_3": "Candidate mechanic term 3",
      "none": "No glossary term fits"
    }
  },
  "player_facing": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the passage describe an action available to the player?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "It describes a player action or capability",
      "false": "It describes something else"
    }
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0765. Palette Asset Resolver

ID: games-palette-asset-resolver
Sub-discipline: Game art production
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: Paste art notes and a palette inventory, and Jev selects the existing palette swatch the notes refer to—or none.

Why typed decisions: Picking a real swatch ID is safer than generating color names that do not exist in the asset library.

TAM: $8B+ creative software
SAM: $700M game art pipelines
SOM: $1M art teams

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Palette Asset Resolver" 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 art notes and a palette inventory, and Jev selects the existing palette swatch the notes refer to—or none.
Discipline: Game Design & Interactive Media (Game art production).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: Picking a real swatch ID is safer than generating color names that do not exist in the asset library.

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": <Art-note spans and extracted swatch IDs>, "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)
{
  "palette_swatch": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which listed swatch is indicated by the note?",
    "criteria": {
      "swatch_1": "Candidate palette swatch 1",
      "swatch_2": "Candidate palette swatch 2",
      "swatch_3": "Candidate palette swatch 3",
      "none": "No listed swatch is indicated"
    }
  },
  "color_specific": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How specifically does the note identify a color?",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Only a vague mood or impression",
      "2: Broad color family",
      "3: Clear hue or named color",
      "4: Exact swatch, code, or highly specific color"
    ]
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0766. Sound Cue Librarian

ID: games-sound-cue-librarian-1
Sub-discipline: Game audio
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: Paste a scene description and a sound-cue catalog, and Jev selects the catalog cue that best matches the described event—or none.

Why typed decisions: Choosing a catalog entry keeps audio implementation tied to files the team actually has.

TAM: $6B+ game audio tools
SAM: $500M interactive audio
SOM: $1M audio teams

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Sound Cue Librarian" 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 scene description and a sound-cue catalog, and Jev selects the catalog cue that best matches the described event—or none.
Discipline: Game Design & Interactive Media (Game audio).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: Choosing a catalog entry keeps audio implementation tied to files the team actually has.

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": <Scene spans and extracted cue filenames>, "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)
{
  "sound_cue": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which available cue best matches the described event?",
    "criteria": {
      "cue_1": "Candidate sound cue 1",
      "cue_2": "Candidate sound cue 2",
      "cue_3": "Candidate sound cue 3",
      "none": "No available cue fits"
    }
  },
  "source_identifiable": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the description identify a distinct sound source or event?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "A distinct source or event is identifiable",
      "false": "The sound is too vague or absent"
    }
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0767. Branch Label Auditor

ID: games-branch-label-auditor
Sub-discipline: Interactive narrative
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: Paste branching-story text and a set of existing node labels, and Jev selects the label each transition points to—or none.

Why typed decisions: Selecting an existing node label avoids creating broken or nonexistent story links.

TAM: $4B+ narrative tools
SAM: $350M branching-story software
SOM: $800K narrative studios

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Branch Label Auditor" 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 branching-story text and a set of existing node labels, and Jev selects the label each transition points to—or none.
Discipline: Game Design & Interactive Media (Interactive narrative).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: Selecting an existing node label avoids creating broken or nonexistent story links.

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": <Transition spans and extracted node labels>, "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)
{
  "target_node": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which listed node is the transition targeting?",
    "criteria": {
      "node_1": "Candidate story node 1",
      "node_2": "Candidate story node 2",
      "node_3": "Candidate story node 3",
      "none": "No listed node is supported"
    }
  },
  "transition_clear": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is the intended transition destination clear from the text?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The destination is clear",
      "false": "The destination is ambiguous or missing"
    }
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0768. XR Gesture Binder

ID: games-xr-gesture-binder
Sub-discipline: XR interaction design
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: Paste interaction specifications and a gesture library, and Jev selects the gesture that a specification describes—or none.

Why typed decisions: Binding to a real gesture definition keeps prototypes consistent with the interaction library.

TAM: $8B+ XR development tools
SAM: $900M XR interaction design
SOM: $1M XR studios

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "XR Gesture Binder" 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 interaction specifications and a gesture library, and Jev selects the gesture that a specification describes—or none.
Discipline: Game Design & Interactive Media (XR interaction design).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: Binding to a real gesture definition keeps prototypes consistent with the interaction library.

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": <Specification spans and extracted gesture IDs>, "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)
{
  "gesture_match": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which listed gesture best matches the described interaction?",
    "criteria": {
      "gesture_1": "Candidate gesture 1",
      "gesture_2": "Candidate gesture 2",
      "gesture_3": "Candidate gesture 3",
      "none": "No listed gesture fits"
    }
  },
  "gesture_unambiguous": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Can a user distinguish this gesture from the others in the library?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The described gesture is distinguishable",
      "false": "It is ambiguous or overlaps another gesture"
    }
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0769. Haptic Pattern Selector

ID: games-haptic-pattern-selector
Sub-discipline: Haptic design
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: Paste gameplay event notes and a library of haptic patterns, and Jev selects the pattern that best fits each event—or none.

Why typed decisions: Selecting authored patterns preserves device-tested timing and intensity rather than inventing unusable settings.

TAM: $3B+ haptics and game tools
SAM: $250M haptic design workflows
SOM: $500K studios

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Haptic Pattern Selector" 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 gameplay event notes and a library of haptic patterns, and Jev selects the pattern that best fits each event—or none.
Discipline: Game Design & Interactive Media (Haptic design).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: Selecting authored patterns preserves device-tested timing and intensity rather than inventing unusable settings.

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": <Event spans and extracted haptic pattern IDs>, "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)
{
  "haptic_pattern": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which listed pattern best fits the event's purpose and feel?",
    "criteria": {
      "pattern_1": "Candidate haptic pattern 1",
      "pattern_2": "Candidate haptic pattern 2",
      "pattern_3": "Candidate haptic pattern 3",
      "none": "No listed pattern fits"
    }
  },
  "event_salience": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How important is it for the player to notice this event?",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Subtle background feedback",
      "2: Helpful but nonessential cue",
      "3: Important gameplay feedback",
      "4: Critical alert or 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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0770. Cutscene Shot Locator

ID: games-cutscene-shot-locator
Sub-discipline: Cinematic design
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: Paste a cutscene script and a shot list, and Jev selects the shot entry that supports each scripted beat—or none.

Why typed decisions: Selecting an existing shot keeps script annotations traceable to the actual storyboard.

TAM: $10B+ animation and game tools
SAM: $800M cinematic workflows
SOM: $1M narrative teams

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Cutscene Shot Locator" 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 cutscene script and a shot list, and Jev selects the shot entry that supports each scripted beat—or none.
Discipline: Game Design & Interactive Media (Cinematic design).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: Selecting an existing shot keeps script annotations traceable to the actual storyboard.

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": <Script spans and extracted shot IDs>, "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)
{
  "supporting_shot": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which listed shot best supports this scripted beat?",
    "criteria": {
      "shot_1": "Candidate storyboard shot 1",
      "shot_2": "Candidate storyboard shot 2",
      "shot_3": "Candidate storyboard shot 3",
      "none": "No listed shot supports it"
    }
  },
  "visual_dependency": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the beat depend on a specific visual detail?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "A specific visual detail is necessary",
      "false": "The beat does not rely on a specific visual"
    }
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0771. UI String Slotter

ID: games-ui-string-slotter
Sub-discipline: Game UX and UI
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: Paste interface requirements and an approved string bank, and Jev selects the existing string that belongs in each UI slot—or none.

Why typed decisions: Reusing approved strings preserves localization keys and prevents unreviewed copy from entering builds.

TAM: $15B+ UX and design software
SAM: $1B game UI workflows
SOM: $1M game UX teams

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "UI String Slotter" 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 interface requirements and an approved string bank, and Jev selects the existing string that belongs in each UI slot—or none.
Discipline: Game Design & Interactive Media (Game UX and UI).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: Reusing approved strings preserves localization keys and prevents unreviewed copy from entering builds.

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": <Requirement spans and extracted string keys>, "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)
{
  "ui_string": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which approved string best fits this interface slot?",
    "criteria": {
      "string_1": "Candidate localized string 1",
      "string_2": "Candidate localized string 2",
      "string_3": "Candidate localized string 3",
      "none": "No approved string fits"
    }
  },
  "action_match": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the selected string describe the required player action?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "It accurately describes the action",
      "false": "It does not accurately describe the action"
    }
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0772. Accessibility Cue Mapper

ID: games-accessibility-cue-mapper
Sub-discipline: Accessible game design
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: Paste accessibility review notes and an existing cue inventory, and Jev selects the cue or setting explicitly implicated by each note—or none.

Why typed decisions: Selecting an existing control or cue makes remediation traceable and avoids fabricated feature names.

TAM: $5B+ accessibility software
SAM: $400M game accessibility
SOM: $1M studios

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Accessibility Cue Mapper" 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 accessibility review notes and an existing cue inventory, and Jev selects the cue or setting explicitly implicated by each note—or none.
Discipline: Game Design & Interactive Media (Accessible game design).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: Selecting an existing control or cue makes remediation traceable and avoids fabricated feature names.

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": <Review-note spans and extracted feature IDs>, "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)
{
  "affected_feature": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which listed accessibility feature is implicated by this note?",
    "criteria": {
      "feature_1": "Candidate accessibility feature 1",
      "feature_2": "Candidate accessibility feature 2",
      "feature_3": "Candidate accessibility feature 3",
      "none": "No listed feature is implicated"
    }
  },
  "blocks_progress": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the issue prevent or materially hinder progression?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Progression is prevented or materially hindered",
      "false": "Progression remains possible"
    }
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0773. Worldbuilding Canon Checker

ID: games-worldbuilding-canon-checker
Sub-discipline: Game worldbuilding
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: Paste lore passages and a canon glossary, and Jev selects the existing character, place, or faction name each passage refers to—or none.

Why typed decisions: Choosing canonical names keeps lore references consistent without adding invented entities.

TAM: $7B+ writing and game tools
SAM: $500M worldbuilding workflows
SOM: $800K narrative teams

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Worldbuilding Canon Checker" 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 lore passages and a canon glossary, and Jev selects the existing character, place, or faction name each passage refers to—or none.
Discipline: Game Design & Interactive Media (Game worldbuilding).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: Choosing canonical names keeps lore references consistent without adding invented entities.

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": <Lore spans and extracted canon names>, "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)
{
  "canon_entity": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which listed canon entity does this passage refer to?",
    "criteria": {
      "entity_1": "Candidate canon entity 1",
      "entity_2": "Candidate canon entity 2",
      "entity_3": "Candidate canon entity 3",
      "none": "No listed entity is referenced"
    }
  },
  "canon_conflict": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the passage appear to contradict the supplied canon entry?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The passage conflicts with the canon entry",
      "false": "No clear conflict is present"
    }
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0774. Tutorial Trigger Matcher

ID: games-tutorial-trigger-matcher
Sub-discipline: Game onboarding
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: Paste tutorial steps and a list of gameplay triggers, and Jev selects the trigger that matches each instruction—or none.

Why typed decisions: Selecting actual trigger IDs produces implementable tutorial links instead of invented event names.

TAM: $12B+ game development tools
SAM: $900M onboarding systems
SOM: $1M game teams

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Tutorial Trigger Matcher" 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 tutorial steps and a list of gameplay triggers, and Jev selects the trigger that matches each instruction—or none.
Discipline: Game Design & Interactive Media (Game onboarding).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: Selecting actual trigger IDs produces implementable tutorial links instead of invented event names.

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": <Tutorial spans and extracted trigger IDs>, "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)
{
  "tutorial_trigger": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which listed trigger should activate this tutorial step?",
    "criteria": {
      "trigger_1": "Candidate gameplay trigger 1",
      "trigger_2": "Candidate gameplay trigger 2",
      "trigger_3": "Candidate gameplay trigger 3",
      "none": "No listed trigger fits"
    }
  },
  "trigger_actionable": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the step describe an action the player can perform at that moment?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The action is currently available",
      "false": "The action is unavailable or unclear"
    }
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0775. Exhibit Media Linker

ID: games-exhibit-media-linker
Sub-discipline: Interactive exhibitions
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: Paste exhibit labels and a media asset catalog, and Jev selects the existing image, clip, or artifact that a label refers to—or none.

Why typed decisions: Selecting catalog assets preserves curatorial references and prevents links to nonexistent media.

TAM: $6B+ museum technology
SAM: $500M interactive exhibitions
SOM: $700K exhibit teams

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Exhibit Media Linker" 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 exhibit labels and a media asset catalog, and Jev selects the existing image, clip, or artifact that a label refers to—or none.
Discipline: Game Design & Interactive Media (Interactive exhibitions).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: Selecting catalog assets preserves curatorial references and prevents links to nonexistent media.

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": <Label spans and extracted media asset IDs>, "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)
{
  "exhibit_asset": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which listed media asset does this label refer to?",
    "criteria": {
      "asset_1": "Candidate exhibit asset 1",
      "asset_2": "Candidate exhibit asset 2",
      "asset_3": "Candidate exhibit asset 3",
      "none": "No listed asset is referenced"
    }
  },
  "reference_certain": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is the asset reference clear enough to link automatically?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The reference uniquely identifies an asset",
      "false": "The reference is ambiguous"
    }
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0776. Performance Cue Sorter

ID: games-performance-cue-sorter
Sub-discipline: Live interactive performance
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: Paste a performance script and a cue sheet, and Jev selects the existing lighting, projection, or interaction cue that matches each stage direction—or none.

Why typed decisions: Selecting cue-sheet entries keeps rehearsal notes connected to executable show controls.

TAM: $4B+ live production technology
SAM: $300M interactive performance tools
SOM: $500K production teams

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Performance Cue Sorter" 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 performance script and a cue sheet, and Jev selects the existing lighting, projection, or interaction cue that matches each stage direction—or none.
Discipline: Game Design & Interactive Media (Live interactive performance).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: Selecting cue-sheet entries keeps rehearsal notes connected to executable show controls.

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": <Stage-direction spans and extracted cue IDs>, "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)
{
  "performance_cue": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which listed cue best matches this stage direction?",
    "criteria": {
      "cue_1": "Candidate show cue 1",
      "cue_2": "Candidate show cue 2",
      "cue_3": "Candidate show cue 3",
      "none": "No listed cue fits"
    }
  },
  "cue_safety": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Could firing this cue at the indicated moment create a safety concern?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The cue may create a safety concern",
      "false": "No clear safety concern is indicated"
    }
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0777. Boardgame Rule Crosslinker

ID: games-boardgame-rule-crosslinker
Sub-discipline: Tabletop game design
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: Paste draft rules and an approved component list, and Jev selects the component each rule passage names—or none.

Why typed decisions: Choosing listed component names exposes mismatches without inserting components the game does not contain.

TAM: $2B+ tabletop design tools
SAM: $150M tabletop publishing workflows
SOM: $300K designers

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Boardgame Rule Crosslinker" 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 draft rules and an approved component list, and Jev selects the component each rule passage names—or none.
Discipline: Game Design & Interactive Media (Tabletop game design).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: Choosing listed component names exposes mismatches without inserting components the game does not contain.

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": <Rule spans and extracted component names>, "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)
{
  "rule_component": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which listed component is named or clearly referenced?",
    "criteria": {
      "component_1": "Candidate game component 1",
      "component_2": "Candidate game component 2",
      "component_3": "Candidate game component 3",
      "none": "No listed component is referenced"
    }
  },
  "component_use_clear": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is the component's role clear in this rule passage?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The passage makes the component's role clear",
      "false": "The role is ambiguous or missing"
    }
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0778. AR Anchor Resolver

ID: games-ar-anchor-resolver
Sub-discipline: Augmented reality design
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: Paste an AR scene brief and a set of authored spatial anchors, and Jev selects the anchor each instruction refers to—or none.

Why typed decisions: Selecting a real anchor ID keeps spatial behaviors attached to authored scene coordinates.

TAM: $8B+ AR creation tools
SAM: $900M AR experience design
SOM: $1M AR creators

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "AR Anchor Resolver" 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 an AR scene brief and a set of authored spatial anchors, and Jev selects the anchor each instruction refers to—or none.
Discipline: Game Design & Interactive Media (Augmented reality design).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: Selecting a real anchor ID keeps spatial behaviors attached to authored scene coordinates.

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": <Scene-instruction spans and extracted anchor IDs>, "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)
{
  "spatial_anchor": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which listed anchor does this instruction refer to?",
    "criteria": {
      "anchor_1": "Candidate spatial anchor 1",
      "anchor_2": "Candidate spatial anchor 2",
      "anchor_3": "Candidate spatial anchor 3",
      "none": "No listed anchor is supported"
    }
  },
  "spatial_reference_clear": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is the spatial reference precise enough to resolve?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The reference identifies a specific anchor",
      "false": "The reference is ambiguous or absent"
    }
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0779. Emotion Tag Curator

ID: games-emotion-tag-curator
Sub-discipline: Interactive storytelling
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: Paste character dialogue and an approved emotion-tag set, and Jev selects the best-fitting existing tag for each line—or none.

Why typed decisions: Selecting controlled tags keeps emotion metadata consistent for branching and performance systems.

TAM: $5B+ narrative production tools
SAM: $400M interactive story metadata
SOM: $700K narrative teams

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Emotion Tag Curator" 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 character dialogue and an approved emotion-tag set, and Jev selects the best-fitting existing tag for each line—or none.
Discipline: Game Design & Interactive Media (Interactive storytelling).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: Selecting controlled tags keeps emotion metadata consistent for branching and performance systems.

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": <Dialogue spans and extracted emotion tags>, "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)
{
  "emotion_tag": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which approved tag best describes the line's conveyed emotion?",
    "criteria": {
      "tag_1": "Candidate emotion tag 1",
      "tag_2": "Candidate emotion tag 2",
      "tag_3": "Candidate emotion tag 3",
      "none": "No listed tag fits"
    }
  },
  "emotion_intensity": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How strongly is the emotion conveyed in the line?",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Barely perceptible or uncertain",
      "2: Present but understated",
      "3: Clearly conveyed",
      "4: Strong or unmistakable"
    ]
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0780. Build Note Asset Finder

ID: games-build-note-asset-finder
Sub-discipline: Game production
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: Paste build notes and an asset manifest, and Jev selects the exact existing asset path implicated by each note—or none.

Why typed decisions: Selecting a manifest path makes issue triage actionable without guessing filenames or inventing assets.

TAM: $15B+ game production software
SAM: $1B asset pipeline workflows
SOM: $1M production teams

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Build Note Asset Finder" 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 build notes and an asset manifest, and Jev selects the exact existing asset path implicated by each note—or none.
Discipline: Game Design & Interactive Media (Game production).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: Selecting a manifest path makes issue triage actionable without guessing filenames or inventing assets.

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": <Build-note spans and extracted asset paths>, "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)
{
  "implicated_asset": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which listed asset path is implicated by this note?",
    "criteria": {
      "path_1": "Candidate asset path 1",
      "path_2": "Candidate asset path 2",
      "path_3": "Candidate asset path 3",
      "none": "No listed asset is implicated"
    }
  },
  "asset_match_confidence": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How directly does the note identify the asset?",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Only a broad system or category is mentioned",
      "2: Asset type is suggested",
      "3: Name or context strongly points to one asset",
      "4: Exact path or unique identifier is given"
    ]
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0781. Quest Logic Inspector

ID: games-quest-logic-inspector
Sub-discipline: Narrative design
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Paste quest specifications and linked narrative evidence; Jev decides whether quest claims are supported, which inconsistency class applies, and how severe it is, routing uncertain checks to human review.

Why typed decisions: Typed evidence checks and severity levels make it clear which quest needs review without inventing narrative text.

TAM: $10B+ narrative game development
SAM: $1B quest and content tooling
SOM: $5M–$20M early adopters

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Quest Logic Inspector" 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 quest specifications and linked narrative evidence; Jev decides whether quest claims are supported, which inconsistency class applies, and how severe it is, routing uncertain checks to human review.
Discipline: Game Design & Interactive Media (Narrative design).
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 checks and severity levels make it clear which quest needs review without inventing narrative text.

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": <Quest JSON and cited narrative passages>, "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)
{
  "claims_supported": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the cited evidence support each quest requirement and dependency?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Every checked claim is directly supported by its cited passage or specification.",
      "false": "At least one claim lacks direct support or contradicts the evidence."
    }
  },
  "issue_type": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "What best describes the most important verified issue?",
    "criteria": {
      "no_issue": "No material inconsistency found.",
      "dependency": "A prerequisite or state dependency is inconsistent.",
      "continuity": "Quest facts conflict with established narrative."
    }
  },
  "severity": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How severe is the confirmed issue for quest implementation?",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Cosmetic or negligible.",
      "2: Could confuse implementation or players.",
      "3: Blocks progression or contradicts a core quest requirement."
    ]
  }
}

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

---

## 0782. Prop Continuity Check

ID: games-prop-continuity-check
Sub-discipline: Production design
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Paste prop manifests and scene notes; Jev verifies each continuity claim against the notes, classifies mismatches, and sends uncertain cases to a human review queue.

Why typed decisions: A field-level verdict tied to evidence helps teams resolve specific continuity risks faster than generated prose.

TAM: $5B+ production design software
SAM: $500M prop and continuity tools
SOM: $2M–$10M specialist teams

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Prop Continuity Check" 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 prop manifests and scene notes; Jev verifies each continuity claim against the notes, classifies mismatches, and sends uncertain cases to a human review queue.
Discipline: Game Design & Interactive Media (Production design).
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: A field-level verdict tied to evidence helps teams resolve specific continuity risks faster than generated prose.

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": <Prop manifest fields and scene 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)
{
  "prop_match": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the evidence confirm this prop's identity, state, and location for the scene?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "All checked fields match the cited scene evidence.",
      "false": "A field is contradicted or not evidenced."
    }
  },
  "mismatch_kind": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which mismatch is supported by the evidence?",
    "criteria": {
      "identity": "Wrong or ambiguous prop identity.",
      "state": "Prop condition or configuration differs.",
      "location": "Prop placement or scene location differs.",
      "none": "No supported mismatch."
    }
  },
  "impact": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How much does the confirmed mismatch affect production?",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Minor documentation cleanup.",
      "2: Requires a scene or asset adjustment.",
      "3: Risks a failed shoot, render, or handoff."
    ]
  }
}

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

---

## 0783. Motion Capture Gate

ID: games-motion-capture-gate
Sub-discipline: Motion capture
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Paste motion-capture take metadata and review annotations; Jev checks each readiness claim against recorded evidence, assigns a defect class, and escalates uncertain takes to an animator.

Why typed decisions: Typed readiness and defect decisions support a repeatable ingest gate without subjective autogenerated notes.

TAM: $3B+ motion capture market
SAM: $300M animation capture workflow tools
SOM: $1M–$8M studios

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Motion Capture 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 motion-capture take metadata and review annotations; Jev checks each readiness claim against recorded evidence, assigns a defect class, and escalates uncertain takes to an animator.
Discipline: Game Design & Interactive Media (Motion capture).
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 readiness and defect decisions support a repeatable ingest gate without subjective autogenerated notes.

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": <Take metadata, capture logs, and annotations>, "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)
{
  "take_ready": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the evidence support the take's stated capture-readiness fields?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Required fields are evidenced and no blocking defect is indicated.",
      "false": "A readiness field is unsupported or a blocking defect is indicated."
    }
  },
  "defect_class": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which evidenced issue best describes the take?",
    "criteria": {
      "tracking": "Tracking or marker evidence indicates a problem.",
      "performance": "Performance or timing evidence indicates a problem.",
      "metadata": "Required metadata is missing or inconsistent.",
      "none": "No evidenced defect."
    }
  },
  "severity": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How serious is the evidenced issue for downstream animation?",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Usable with minor cleanup.",
      "2: Needs targeted repair or review.",
      "3: Likely unusable without recapture or major repair."
    ]
  }
}

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

---

## 0784. Level Flow Auditor

ID: games-level-flow-auditor
Sub-discipline: Level design
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Paste level-flow graphs and playtest observations; Jev verifies traversal and objective claims against the evidence, labels the likely issue, and queues uncertain findings for designers.

Why typed decisions: A structured finding linked to observed evidence is easier to act on than generated level-design commentary.

TAM: $10B+ level design and testing tools
SAM: $1B level validation software
SOM: $5M–$25M design teams

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Level Flow Auditor" 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 level-flow graphs and playtest observations; Jev verifies traversal and objective claims against the evidence, labels the likely issue, and queues uncertain findings for designers.
Discipline: Game Design & Interactive Media (Level design).
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: A structured finding linked to observed evidence is easier to act on than generated level-design commentary.

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": <Level graph, objective rules, and playtest observations>, "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)
{
  "flow_claim_valid": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the evidence confirm the stated route, gate, or objective behavior?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The graph and observations support the stated behavior.",
      "false": "The behavior is contradicted or not demonstrated."
    }
  },
  "flow_issue": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which evidenced flow issue is most relevant?",
    "criteria": {
      "blocked": "A required route or objective is unreachable.",
      "ambiguous": "The evidence supports multiple unclear routes or goals.",
      "sequence": "Objective or gate order conflicts with the specification.",
      "none": "No evidenced flow issue."
    }
  },
  "player_impact": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How strongly does the issue affect progression?",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Minor navigation friction.",
      "2: Likely causes confusion or backtracking.",
      "3: Blocks or breaks intended progression."
    ]
  }
}

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

---

## 0785. Accessibility Spec Gate

ID: games-accessibility-spec-gate
Sub-discipline: Game accessibility
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Paste accessibility requirements and build-test results; Jev checks each compliance claim against its test evidence, selects the concern type, and sends uncertain results to an accessibility reviewer.

Why typed decisions: Per-requirement typed verification makes gaps auditable and avoids treating unsupported prose as compliance.

TAM: $5B+ accessibility software and services
SAM: $500M game accessibility tooling
SOM: $2M–$12M studios and publishers

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Accessibility Spec 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 accessibility requirements and build-test results; Jev checks each compliance claim against its test evidence, selects the concern type, and sends uncertain results to an accessibility reviewer.
Discipline: Game Design & Interactive Media (Game accessibility).
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: Per-requirement typed verification makes gaps auditable and avoids treating unsupported prose as compliance.

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": <Accessibility requirement fields and test results>, "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)
{
  "requirement_met": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the supplied test evidence demonstrate that this requirement is met?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The test directly demonstrates the requirement under the stated conditions.",
      "false": "The test contradicts the requirement or does not demonstrate it."
    }
  },
  "concern": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which evidence-backed concern applies?",
    "criteria": {
      "input": "Input or remapping requirement concern.",
      "visual": "Visual, color, or text presentation concern.",
      "audio": "Audio cue or caption requirement concern.",
      "none": "No supported concern."
    }
  },
  "risk": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How serious is the confirmed gap for access?",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Limited impact or workaround is evidenced.",
      "2: Meaningful barrier for some players.",
      "3: Core play or essential information is inaccessible."
    ]
  }
}

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

---

## 0786. Asset License Sentinel

ID: games-asset-license-sentinel
Sub-discipline: Digital asset management
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Paste asset records, license terms, and intended-use fields; Jev verifies each usage claim against the supplied terms, categorizes risk, and escalates uncertain cases for legal review.

Why typed decisions: Typed, evidence-linked license checks surface specific exceptions without pretending to replace legal judgment.

TAM: $10B+ digital asset management
SAM: $800M creative license compliance
SOM: $3M–$15M game teams

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Asset License Sentinel" 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 asset records, license terms, and intended-use fields; Jev verifies each usage claim against the supplied terms, categorizes risk, and escalates uncertain cases for legal review.
Discipline: Game Design & Interactive Media (Digital asset management).
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 license checks surface specific exceptions without pretending to replace legal 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": <Asset metadata, license clauses, and intended use>, "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)
{
  "use_permitted": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Do the supplied terms support the stated asset use?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The cited terms clearly permit the stated use and context.",
      "false": "Terms prohibit the use or do not establish permission."
    }
  },
  "risk_type": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "What best describes the evidenced licensing concern?",
    "criteria": {
      "commercial": "Commercial-use permission is unclear or restricted.",
      "attribution": "Required attribution is missing or unclear.",
      "redistribution": "Modification or redistribution permission is unclear.",
      "none": "No supported concern."
    }
  },
  "risk_level": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How consequential is the confirmed concern?",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Minor record or attribution correction.",
      "2: Requires permission clarification before release.",
      "3: Could block release or create substantial exposure."
    ]
  }
}

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

---

## 0787. Shader Compatibility Desk

ID: games-shader-compatibility-desk
Sub-discipline: Real-time graphics
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Paste shader manifests, target-platform specs, and build logs; Jev verifies compatibility claims against the logs, identifies the failure class, and routes uncertain cases to graphics engineers.

Why typed decisions: Typed compatibility and failure decisions map directly to build triage rather than requiring interpretation of generated explanations.

TAM: $8B+ graphics development tools
SAM: $700M shader and build validation
SOM: $2M–$10M graphics teams

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Shader Compatibility Desk" 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 shader manifests, target-platform specs, and build logs; Jev verifies compatibility claims against the logs, identifies the failure class, and routes uncertain cases to graphics engineers.
Discipline: Game Design & Interactive Media (Real-time graphics).
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 compatibility and failure decisions map directly to build triage rather than requiring interpretation of generated explanations.

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": <Shader configuration, platform targets, and build logs>, "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)
{
  "target_compatible": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Do build evidence and target specifications support this shader's compatibility claim?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The shader builds and meets the stated target constraints in evidence.",
      "false": "Evidence shows a failure or does not verify the claim."
    }
  },
  "failure_class": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which evidenced compatibility issue applies?",
    "criteria": {
      "api": "Graphics API or feature-level mismatch.",
      "performance": "Performance or resource-budget limit.",
      "variant": "Shader variant or permutation issue.",
      "none": "No supported issue."
    }
  },
  "build_impact": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How severe is the confirmed issue for the target build?",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Nonblocking visual or optimization concern.",
      "2: Feature degradation or targeted repair needed.",
      "3: Build failure or essential rendering feature unavailable."
    ]
  }
}

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

---

## 0788. Audio Cue Verifier

ID: games-audio-cue-verifier
Sub-discipline: Game audio
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Paste audio event tables, implementation logs, and playtest checks; Jev verifies cue-trigger claims against evidence, classifies mismatches, and queues uncertain events for sound designers.

Why typed decisions: Structured event verdicts reveal which trigger or mix field needs attention without generating subjective audio notes.

TAM: $5B+ game audio and middleware
SAM: $400M audio implementation QA
SOM: $1M–$7M studios

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Audio Cue Verifier" 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 audio event tables, implementation logs, and playtest checks; Jev verifies cue-trigger claims against evidence, classifies mismatches, and queues uncertain events for sound designers.
Discipline: Game Design & Interactive Media (Game audio).
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: Structured event verdicts reveal which trigger or mix field needs attention without generating subjective audio notes.

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": <Audio event fields, logs, and playtest checks>, "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)
{
  "cue_triggered": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the evidence confirm the cue triggers under its specified condition?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Logs or tests demonstrate the specified trigger and event.",
      "false": "The trigger is contradicted or not demonstrated."
    }
  },
  "audio_issue": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which evidenced issue best fits?",
    "criteria": {
      "missing": "Expected cue is absent.",
      "timing": "Cue timing or trigger condition is wrong.",
      "mix": "Level, priority, or mix behavior conflicts with specification.",
      "none": "No supported issue."
    }
  },
  "player_effect": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How much does the confirmed issue affect play?",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Minor polish issue.",
      "2: Important feedback is unclear or inconsistent.",
      "3: Essential gameplay information is lost or misleading."
    ]
  }
}

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

---

## 0789. XR Comfort Gate

ID: games-xr-comfort-gate-1
Sub-discipline: XR experience design
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Paste XR interaction specs and device-test measurements; Jev verifies comfort and safety claims against test evidence, assigns a risk level, and routes uncertain results to human review.

Why typed decisions: Typed evidence checks support conservative safety triage without presenting generated advice as a safety assessment.

TAM: $10B+ XR development ecosystem
SAM: $1B XR testing and design tools
SOM: $3M–$15M XR studios

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "XR Comfort 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 XR interaction specs and device-test measurements; Jev verifies comfort and safety claims against test evidence, assigns a risk level, and routes uncertain results to human review.
Discipline: Game Design & Interactive Media (XR experience design).
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 checks support conservative safety triage without presenting generated advice as a safety assessment.

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": <Interaction fields, device profile, and test measurements>, "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)
{
  "comfort_claim_supported": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the test evidence support the stated comfort or safety claim for this device profile?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Relevant tests support the claim under the specified conditions.",
      "false": "Evidence contradicts the claim or is insufficient."
    }
  },
  "risk_source": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which evidenced risk source applies?",
    "criteria": {
      "locomotion": "Movement or acceleration behavior.",
      "interaction": "Reach, collision, or interaction behavior.",
      "display": "Display, tracking, or frame behavior.",
      "none": "No supported risk source."
    }
  },
  "risk_level": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How serious is the evidence-backed concern?",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Low concern with a documented mitigation.",
      "2: Needs design adjustment or additional testing.",
      "3: Potentially severe discomfort or safety concern."
    ]
  }
}

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

---

## 0790. Branching Story Validator

ID: games-branching-story-validator
Sub-discipline: Interactive fiction
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Paste branching narrative graphs and choice conditions; Jev verifies each path and condition claim against the graph, labels the defect, and escalates uncertain branches for author review.

Why typed decisions: Typed path validation catches concrete logic faults while leaving creative interpretation to the author.

TAM: $3B+ interactive narrative tools
SAM: $300M branching story QA
SOM: $1M–$6M creators and studios

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Branching Story Validator" 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 branching narrative graphs and choice conditions; Jev verifies each path and condition claim against the graph, labels the defect, and escalates uncertain branches for author review.
Discipline: Game Design & Interactive Media (Interactive fiction).
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 path validation catches concrete logic faults while leaving creative interpretation to the author.

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": <Story graph, branch conditions, and passage IDs>, "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)
{
  "path_valid": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the graph evidence support the stated path and its conditions?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The path is reachable and its conditions match the specification.",
      "false": "The path is unreachable, contradictory, or unverified."
    }
  },
  "defect_type": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which evidenced branch defect applies?",
    "criteria": {
      "dead_end": "A required path ends unexpectedly.",
      "condition": "A choice condition is missing or inconsistent.",
      "continuity": "Branch outcomes conflict with established state.",
      "none": "No supported defect."
    }
  },
  "impact": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How much does the confirmed defect affect the experience?",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Minor optional-path issue.",
      "2: A meaningful choice or outcome is affected.",
      "3: A major route or ending is unreachable or broken."
    ]
  }
}

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

---

## 0791. Haptic Pattern Inspector

ID: games-haptic-pattern-inspector
Sub-discipline: Haptics design
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Paste haptic event specifications and device-test traces; Jev checks each pattern claim against trace evidence, classifies mismatches, and escalates uncertain tests to a haptics designer.

Why typed decisions: Typed conformance results let teams compare device behavior against explicit pattern requirements.

TAM: $2B+ haptics technology market
SAM: $250M interactive haptics tooling
SOM: $1M–$5M game and XR teams

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Haptic Pattern Inspector" 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 haptic event specifications and device-test traces; Jev checks each pattern claim against trace evidence, classifies mismatches, and escalates uncertain tests to a haptics designer.
Discipline: Game Design & Interactive Media (Haptics design).
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 conformance results let teams compare device behavior against explicit pattern requirements.

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": <Haptic event specs, device models, and test traces>, "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)
{
  "pattern_matches": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the trace support the specified haptic pattern on this device?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Measured timing and intensity meet the stated pattern bounds.",
      "false": "A bound is violated or the trace is insufficient."
    }
  },
  "mismatch": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which evidence-backed mismatch applies?",
    "criteria": {
      "timing": "Duration or timing differs from the specification.",
      "intensity": "Intensity or amplitude differs from the specification.",
      "device": "Device capability or mapping is inconsistent.",
      "none": "No supported mismatch."
    }
  },
  "importance": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How much does the mismatch affect intended feedback?",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Small perceptual variation.",
      "2: Feedback meaning or consistency is reduced.",
      "3: Critical tactile cue is absent or misleading."
    ]
  }
}

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

---

## 0792. Localization Context Gate

ID: games-localization-context-gate
Sub-discipline: Game localization
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Paste localized UI strings, source context, and layout-test results; Jev verifies each meaning and fit claim against the evidence, flags the issue type, and queues uncertain fields for a linguist.

Why typed decisions: Field-level semantic and layout decisions direct human attention to the exact string that needs review.

TAM: $70B+ localization services
SAM: $2B game localization workflow tools
SOM: $5M–$25M studios and LSPs

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Localization Context 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 localized UI strings, source context, and layout-test results; Jev verifies each meaning and fit claim against the evidence, flags the issue type, and queues uncertain fields for a linguist.
Discipline: Game Design & Interactive Media (Game localization).
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: Field-level semantic and layout decisions direct human attention to the exact string that needs review.

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": <Source strings, localized fields, context, and layout results>, "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)
{
  "meaning_preserved": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the supplied context and review evidence support meaning preservation?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Evidence supports equivalent intent in the given context.",
      "false": "Evidence indicates a meaning shift or does not establish equivalence."
    }
  },
  "issue_type": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which evidenced localization concern applies?",
    "criteria": {
      "meaning": "Meaning or tone differs from source intent.",
      "fit": "String exceeds or conflicts with layout constraints.",
      "terminology": "Approved term usage is inconsistent.",
      "none": "No supported concern."
    }
  },
  "severity": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How consequential is the confirmed issue in context?",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Minor polish issue.",
      "2: Noticeable comprehension or presentation problem.",
      "3: Misleads players or blocks essential UI use."
    ]
  }
}

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

---

## 0793. Tutorial Step Auditor

ID: games-tutorial-step-auditor
Sub-discipline: UX design
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Paste tutorial steps, control mappings, and playtest logs; Jev verifies each instruction-to-action claim against the logs, classifies the breakdown, and escalates uncertain steps to UX review.

Why typed decisions: Typed links between instructions and observed actions pinpoint teachability failures without writing tutorial copy.

TAM: $10B+ game UX tooling
SAM: $1B tutorial analytics and QA
SOM: $3M–$15M game teams

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Tutorial Step Auditor" 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 tutorial steps, control mappings, and playtest logs; Jev verifies each instruction-to-action claim against the logs, classifies the breakdown, and escalates uncertain steps to UX review.
Discipline: Game Design & Interactive Media (UX design).
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 links between instructions and observed actions pinpoint teachability failures without writing tutorial copy.

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": <Tutorial step fields, controls, and playtest events>, "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)
{
  "action_demonstrated": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Do the logs show that the specified instruction leads to the intended action?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Observed events demonstrate the intended action after the step.",
      "false": "The action differs or the evidence is insufficient."
    }
  },
  "breakdown": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which evidenced tutorial breakdown applies?",
    "criteria": {
      "control": "Control mapping or input expectation mismatch.",
      "sequence": "Step order or prerequisite mismatch.",
      "feedback": "Completion feedback is absent or inconsistent.",
      "none": "No supported breakdown."
    }
  },
  "severity": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How much does the issue impede learning?",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Small friction with clear recovery.",
      "2: Players often need retries or outside help.",
      "3: Players cannot learn or perform a core action."
    ]
  }
}

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

---

## 0794. UGC Safety Queue

ID: games-ugc-safety-queue
Sub-discipline: User-generated content
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Paste user-created level metadata, asset references, and rule signals; Jev verifies each policy-relevant claim against the supplied evidence, categorizes it, and routes uncertain cases to moderators.

Why typed decisions: Typed decisions create consistent moderation queues while keeping ambiguous creative content under human review.

TAM: $20B+ UGC and creator platforms
SAM: $2B creator content moderation tools
SOM: $5M–$20M game platforms

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "UGC Safety Queue" 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 user-created level metadata, asset references, and rule signals; Jev verifies each policy-relevant claim against the supplied evidence, categorizes it, and routes uncertain cases to moderators.
Discipline: Game Design & Interactive Media (User-generated content).
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 decisions create consistent moderation queues while keeping ambiguous creative content under human review.

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": <UGC fields, policy rules, and evidence signals>, "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)
{
  "policy_violation": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the evidence support a violation of the specified content rule?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Specific supplied evidence meets the stated rule criteria.",
      "false": "Evidence does not meet the criteria or is inconclusive."
    }
  },
  "category": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which evidenced policy category applies?",
    "criteria": {
      "asset": "Restricted or unlicensed asset use.",
      "safety": "Prohibited harmful or dangerous content.",
      "privacy": "Personal or sensitive information exposure.",
      "none": "No supported violation."
    }
  },
  "severity": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How serious is the confirmed violation?",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Low-impact rule issue.",
      "2: Meaningful policy breach requiring action.",
      "3: Severe or urgent risk requiring priority review."
    ]
  }
}

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

---

## 0795. Exhibit Interaction Check

ID: games-exhibit-interaction-check
Sub-discipline: Interactive exhibition design
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Paste exhibit interaction scripts, sensor logs, and accessibility checks; Jev verifies each behavior claim against test evidence, selects the issue class, and escalates uncertain findings to curators or technicians.

Why typed decisions: Typed behavior checks help teams resolve concrete installation failures while preserving curatorial judgment.

TAM: $50B+ museum and exhibition technology
SAM: $2B interactive exhibit software
SOM: $2M–$10M venues and studios

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Exhibit Interaction Check" 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 exhibit interaction scripts, sensor logs, and accessibility checks; Jev verifies each behavior claim against test evidence, selects the issue class, and escalates uncertain findings to curators or technicians.
Discipline: Game Design & Interactive Media (Interactive exhibition design).
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 behavior checks help teams resolve concrete installation failures while preserving curatorial 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": <Interaction script, sensor events, and test checks>, "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)
{
  "interaction_works": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the evidence confirm the interaction behaves as specified?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The test demonstrates the expected trigger and outcome.",
      "false": "The outcome is contradicted or not demonstrated."
    }
  },
  "issue": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which evidenced issue applies?",
    "criteria": {
      "sensor": "Sensor or trigger response is unreliable.",
      "sequence": "Interaction steps or state transitions are wrong.",
      "access": "A required access mode is unavailable or inconsistent.",
      "none": "No supported issue."
    }
  },
  "impact": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How strongly does the issue affect the visitor experience?",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Minor inconvenience.",
      "2: A meaningful feature is unreliable or difficult to use.",
      "3: The interaction or essential exhibit content is inaccessible."
    ]
  }
}

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

---

## 0796. Virtual Camera Scout

ID: games-virtual-camera-scout
Sub-discipline: Virtual production
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Paste virtual-camera shot plans, tracking reports, and recorded takes; Jev verifies shot and tracking claims against the reports, categorizes problems, and sends uncertain takes to the virtual-production team.

Why typed decisions: Typed validation ties each camera decision to capture evidence and enables fast, repeatable take triage.

TAM: $3B+ virtual production technology
SAM: $500M virtual camera workflow tools
SOM: $2M–$12M production teams

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Virtual Camera Scout" 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 virtual-camera shot plans, tracking reports, and recorded takes; Jev verifies shot and tracking claims against the reports, categorizes problems, and sends uncertain takes to the virtual-production team.
Discipline: Game Design & Interactive Media (Virtual production).
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 validation ties each camera decision to capture evidence and enables fast, repeatable take triage.

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": <Shot fields, camera settings, tracking reports, and take 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)
{
  "shot_valid": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Do tracking and take evidence support the stated shot requirements?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Recorded evidence meets the stated framing and tracking conditions.",
      "false": "A requirement is contradicted or unverified."
    }
  },
  "problem": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which evidenced issue best fits?",
    "criteria": {
      "tracking": "Tracking drift or loss is indicated.",
      "framing": "Framing or camera-path requirement is missed.",
      "sync": "Camera, render, or capture synchronization is inconsistent.",
      "none": "No supported issue."
    }
  },
  "severity": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How seriously does the issue affect the take?",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Small adjustment needed.",
      "2: Take needs a reshoot or targeted repair.",
      "3: Take is unusable for the intended shot."
    ]
  }
}

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

---

## 0797. Procedural Art Gate

ID: games-procedural-art-gate
Sub-discipline: Procedural art
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Paste procedural asset parameters, reference constraints, and generated asset checks; Jev verifies each constraint claim against the evidence, classifies deviations, and queues uncertain assets for artist review.

Why typed decisions: Typed constraint outcomes separate measurable deviations from artistic decisions that require a human.

TAM: $5B+ 3D content creation software
SAM: $700M procedural art validation
SOM: $2M–$10M game art teams

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Procedural Art 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 procedural asset parameters, reference constraints, and generated asset checks; Jev verifies each constraint claim against the evidence, classifies deviations, and queues uncertain assets for artist review.
Discipline: Game Design & Interactive Media (Procedural art).
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 constraint outcomes separate measurable deviations from artistic decisions that require a human.

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": <Generator parameters, reference constraints, and asset checks>, "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)
{
  "constraints_met": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the supplied evidence show the asset meets its stated constraints?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "All evaluated constraints are supported by checks.",
      "false": "A constraint is violated or lacks evidence."
    }
  },
  "deviation": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which evidenced deviation applies?",
    "criteria": {
      "silhouette": "Shape or silhouette constraint is missed.",
      "material": "Material or palette constraint is missed.",
      "scale": "Scale, bounds, or placement constraint is missed.",
      "none": "No supported deviation."
    }
  },
  "severity": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How consequential is the confirmed deviation for production?",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Acceptable variation or minor correction.",
      "2: Asset needs revision before integration.",
      "3: Asset breaks a key visual or technical requirement."
    ]
  }
}

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

---

## 0798. Digital Twin Scene Check

ID: games-digital-twin-scene-check
Sub-discipline: Spatial computing
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Paste digital-twin scene data, sensor snapshots, and interaction requirements; Jev verifies object-state claims against the snapshots, identifies mismatch types, and escalates uncertain fields to a scene operator.

Why typed decisions: Typed state checks make discrepancies between a designed scene and observed conditions actionable and auditable.

TAM: $20B+ digital twin software
SAM: $1B interactive spatial scene tools
SOM: $3M–$15M XR and simulation teams

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Digital Twin Scene Check" 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 digital-twin scene data, sensor snapshots, and interaction requirements; Jev verifies object-state claims against the snapshots, identifies mismatch types, and escalates uncertain fields to a scene operator.
Discipline: Game Design & Interactive Media (Spatial computing).
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 state checks make discrepancies between a designed scene and observed conditions actionable and auditable.

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": <Scene object fields, sensor snapshots, and interaction rules>, "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)
{
  "scene_state_correct": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Do the snapshots support the stated object state and location?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Available sensor or inspection evidence confirms the fields.",
      "false": "A field conflicts with evidence or cannot be verified."
    }
  },
  "mismatch_type": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which evidenced scene mismatch applies?",
    "criteria": {
      "state": "Object condition or status differs.",
      "position": "Object position or orientation differs.",
      "interaction": "Interaction availability or behavior differs.",
      "none": "No supported mismatch."
    }
  },
  "impact": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How consequential is the confirmed mismatch?",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Visual discrepancy with little functional effect.",
      "2: Interaction or operational accuracy is affected.",
      "3: Safety-critical or core scene behavior is compromised."
    ]
  }
}

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

---

## 0799. Live Event Cuekeeper

ID: games-live-event-cuekeeper
Sub-discipline: Interactive live events
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Paste interactive show cue sheets, rehearsal logs, and sensor-trigger records; Jev verifies cue conditions against the records, classifies failures, and routes uncertain cues to a stage manager.

Why typed decisions: Typed evidence-based cue decisions are easier to audit under time pressure than generated event summaries.

TAM: $10B+ live event technology
SAM: $1B interactive event control tools
SOM: $2M–$10M event producers

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Live Event Cuekeeper" 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 interactive show cue sheets, rehearsal logs, and sensor-trigger records; Jev verifies cue conditions against the records, classifies failures, and routes uncertain cues to a stage manager.
Discipline: Game Design & Interactive Media (Interactive live events).
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-based cue decisions are easier to audit under time pressure than generated event summaries.

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": <Cue sheet fields, rehearsal logs, and trigger records>, "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)
{
  "cue_condition_met": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Do rehearsal records support the cue's stated trigger and outcome?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Records demonstrate the specified condition and resulting cue.",
      "false": "The condition or outcome is contradicted or unverified."
    }
  },
  "failure_type": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which evidenced cue issue applies?",
    "criteria": {
      "trigger": "Trigger condition or timing is wrong.",
      "routing": "Cue is routed to the wrong device or operator.",
      "recovery": "Fallback or reset behavior is missing or inconsistent.",
      "none": "No supported issue."
    }
  },
  "show_risk": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How seriously could the confirmed issue affect the event?",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Minor disruption with straightforward recovery.",
      "2: Visible interruption or significant operator intervention.",
      "3: Show-critical interaction fails or creates a safety concern."
    ]
  }
}

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

---

## 0800. Game Economy Proofcheck

ID: games-game-economy-proofcheck
Sub-discipline: Game economy design
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Paste economy tables, item rules, and simulation outputs; Jev verifies balance and progression claims against the supplied runs, categorizes anomalies, and escalates uncertain results to economy designers.

Why typed decisions: Typed evidence checks identify which numeric claim is unsupported while leaving balance tradeoffs to designers.

TAM: $10B+ game analytics and design tools
SAM: $1B economy simulation software
SOM: $3M–$15M game studios

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Game Economy Proofcheck" 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 economy tables, item rules, and simulation outputs; Jev verifies balance and progression claims against the supplied runs, categorizes anomalies, and escalates uncertain results to economy designers.
Discipline: Game Design & Interactive Media (Game economy design).
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 checks identify which numeric claim is unsupported while leaving balance tradeoffs to designers.

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": <Economy fields, item rules, and simulation summaries>, "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)
{
  "economy_claim_supported": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Do the simulation results support the stated economy or progression claim?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Runs under the stated assumptions support the claim.",
      "false": "Runs contradict the claim or do not test it adequately."
    }
  },
  "anomaly": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which evidenced economy anomaly applies?",
    "criteria": {
      "progression": "Progression pace differs from the target.",
      "resource": "Resource generation or sinks are inconsistent.",
      "exploit": "A repeatable exploit or runaway loop appears.",
      "none": "No supported anomaly."
    }
  },
  "severity": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How strongly does the confirmed anomaly affect the economy?",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Small deviation within expected variation.",
      "2: Noticeable balance or pacing distortion.",
      "3: Breaks progression, market stability, or core reward structure."
    ]
  }
}

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

---

# Discipline: Theater & Live Performance

Audience: directors, playwrights, performers, lighting and stage designers
Market anchor: the live performance market (~$30B globally) with >100K active companies

## 0801. Audition Triage Desk

ID: theater-audition-triage-desk
Sub-discipline: Casting
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: A casting director pastes audition notes and role breakdowns, and Jev routes each candidate to a callback, hold, or pass with a fit assessment.

Why typed decisions: A fixed disposition and calibrated fit score make candidates sortable without asking generated prose to make opaque casting recommendations.

TAM: Global casting services: $5B–$10B
SAM: Performing-arts casting: $1B–$3B
SOM: Independent and regional theaters: $10M–$50M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Audition Triage Desk" 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
A casting director pastes audition notes and role breakdowns, and Jev routes each candidate to a callback, hold, or pass with a fit assessment.
Discipline: Theater & Live Performance (Casting).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: A fixed disposition and calibrated fit score make candidates sortable without asking generated prose to make opaque casting recommendations.

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": <Role breakdown, audition notes, and current casting priorities>, "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)
{
  "casting_route": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which next-step category best fits this candidate?",
    "criteria": {
      "callback": "Strong match; invite to the next round",
      "hold": "Potential fit; compare with remaining candidates",
      "pass": "Does not fit the role's current needs"
    }
  },
  "role_fit": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How closely does the candidate fit the role requirements?",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Major mismatch",
      "2: Partial match with notable gaps",
      "3: Strong match with minor gaps",
      "4: Exceptional match"
    ]
  },
  "materials_complete": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Do the submitted materials cover the essential audition requirements?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "All essential requested materials are present",
      "false": "At least one essential requested material is missing"
    }
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0802. Scene Shift Mapper

ID: theater-scene-shift-mapper
Sub-discipline: Stage management
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: A stage manager pastes scene summaries and changeover notes, and Jev routes each transition to a preset, crew shift, or scenic automation plan.

Why typed decisions: An explicit operational category and risk level are easier to assign consistently than to extract from free-form suggestions.

TAM: Global theater production operations: $3B–$8B
SAM: Stage-management software and services: $300M–$900M
SOM: Small and midsize venues: $5M–$25M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Scene Shift Mapper" 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
A stage manager pastes scene summaries and changeover notes, and Jev routes each transition to a preset, crew shift, or scenic automation plan.
Discipline: Theater & Live Performance (Stage management).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: An explicit operational category and risk level are easier to assign consistently than to extract from free-form suggestions.

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": <Scene summaries, current preset list, and changeover constraints>, "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)
{
  "shift_route": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which changeover method best suits this transition?",
    "criteria": {
      "preset": "Place or reset items before the transition",
      "crew_shift": "Move scenery manually during the transition",
      "automation": "Use powered or tracked scenic movement"
    }
  },
  "changeover_risk": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How demanding is this transition to execute reliably?",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Simple, ample time, few dependencies",
      "2: Manageable with routine coordination",
      "3: Tight timing or several dependencies",
      "4: High-risk, complex, or safety-sensitive"
    ]
  },
  "clear_path": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is the proposed route clear of stated obstructions and conflicts?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "No route obstruction or conflict is identified",
      "false": "An obstruction or conflict is identified"
    }
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0803. Lighting Cue Sorter

ID: theater-lighting-cue-sorter
Sub-discipline: Lighting design
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: A lighting designer pastes script excerpts and cue notes, and Jev routes each cue to a cue family while rating its transition intensity.

Why typed decisions: Typed cue families and a consistent intensity grade support fast cue-sheet organization without inventing lighting instructions.

TAM: Global stage-lighting equipment and software: $8B–$15B
SAM: Theater lighting design tools: $500M–$1.5B
SOM: Independent theater lighting teams: $10M–$40M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Lighting Cue Sorter" 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
A lighting designer pastes script excerpts and cue notes, and Jev routes each cue to a cue family while rating its transition intensity.
Discipline: Theater & Live Performance (Lighting design).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: Typed cue families and a consistent intensity grade support fast cue-sheet organization without inventing lighting instructions.

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": <Script excerpts, cue notes, and the production's lighting vocabulary>, "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)
{
  "cue_route": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which lighting cue family best matches this cue?",
    "criteria": {
      "state_change": "A change in the overall stage lighting state",
      "special": "A focused special, practical, or isolated area",
      "effect": "A flash, blackout, movement, or other timed effect",
      "transition": "A gradual fade, crossfade, or transitional shift"
    }
  },
  "transition_intensity": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How pronounced is the lighting change described?",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Subtle adjustment",
      "2: Noticeable but restrained",
      "3: Strong visual shift",
      "4: Dramatic or abrupt change"
    ]
  },
  "timed_to_action": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is this cue explicitly tied to a beat, line, or action?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "A specific timing trigger is stated",
      "false": "No specific timing trigger is stated"
    }
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0804. Prop Continuity Checker

ID: theater-prop-continuity-checker
Sub-discipline: Props design
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: A props lead pastes scene breakdowns and prop lists, and Jev routes each item to carry, preset, handoff, or reset handling.

Why typed decisions: A finite handling decision makes continuity lists immediately actionable and reduces ambiguity between departments.

TAM: Global live-performance props and production supplies: $2B–$5B
SAM: Theater props coordination tools: $150M–$500M
SOM: Regional and touring theater companies: $3M–$15M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Prop Continuity Checker" 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
A props lead pastes scene breakdowns and prop lists, and Jev routes each item to carry, preset, handoff, or reset handling.
Discipline: Theater & Live Performance (Props design).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: A finite handling decision makes continuity lists immediately actionable and reduces ambiguity between departments.

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": <Prop list, scene breakdowns, and performer handoff 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)
{
  "prop_route": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "How should this prop be handled at the relevant transition?",
    "criteria": {
      "carry": "A performer or crew member carries it into place",
      "preset": "Place it before the scene begins",
      "handoff": "Transfer it between people during action",
      "reset": "Return or restore it for a later scene"
    }
  },
  "continuity_risk": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How difficult is this prop's continuity to maintain?",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Stable, one-scene use",
      "2: Simple repeat use",
      "3: Multiple scenes or handoffs",
      "4: Complex tracking or critical timing"
    ]
  },
  "onstage_visible": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the item need to remain visible to the audience?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The notes require it to be seen onstage",
      "false": "The notes do not require it to be seen"
    }
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0805. Play Submission Sorter

ID: theater-play-submission-sorter
Sub-discipline: Playwriting
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: A literary manager pastes play synopses and submission criteria, and Jev routes each script to a reading lane and rates its programming fit.

Why typed decisions: A defined reading lane and fit score enable consistent triage across many submissions without replacing human literary judgment.

TAM: Global play publishing and development: $5B–$12B
SAM: Theater literary-management tools: $200M–$700M
SOM: Professional and nonprofit theaters: $5M–$20M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Play Submission Sorter" 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
A literary manager pastes play synopses and submission criteria, and Jev routes each script to a reading lane and rates its programming fit.
Discipline: Theater & Live Performance (Playwriting).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: A defined reading lane and fit score enable consistent triage across many submissions without replacing human literary 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": <Synopsis, submission guidelines, and season priorities>, "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)
{
  "reading_route": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which review lane best fits this submission?",
    "criteria": {
      "priority": "Advance for prompt full review",
      "standard": "Place in the regular reading queue",
      "specialist": "Route to a reviewer for a specific subject or form",
      "decline": "Does not meet the stated submission criteria"
    }
  },
  "season_fit": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How closely does the script match the stated season priorities?",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Little alignment",
      "2: Some relevant elements",
      "3: Strong alignment",
      "4: Direct and distinctive fit"
    ]
  },
  "criteria_met": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the submission satisfy all listed eligibility requirements?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "All stated requirements are met",
      "false": "At least one stated requirement is not 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
a paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0806. Rehearsal Note Router

ID: theater-rehearsal-note-router
Sub-discipline: Rehearsal management
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: A director pastes rehearsal notes, and Jev routes each note to acting, blocking, design, or follow-up while grading urgency.

Why typed decisions: Typed ownership and urgency let teams turn qualitative notes into accountable tasks without generating a second layer of prose.

TAM: Global rehearsal and production coordination: $3B–$8B
SAM: Performing-arts rehearsal workflow tools: $250M–$800M
SOM: Independent theater companies: $5M–$25M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Rehearsal Note Router" 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
A director pastes rehearsal notes, and Jev routes each note to acting, blocking, design, or follow-up while grading urgency.
Discipline: Theater & Live Performance (Rehearsal management).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: Typed ownership and urgency let teams turn qualitative notes into accountable tasks without generating a second layer of prose.

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": <Rehearsal notes, scene references, and department roster>, "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)
{
  "note_route": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which team should own this rehearsal note?",
    "criteria": {
      "acting": "Performance, intention, or character work",
      "blocking": "Movement, spacing, or stage traffic",
      "design": "A scenic, costume, lighting, sound, or props issue",
      "follow_up": "A question or coordination task needing later resolution"
    }
  },
  "note_urgency": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How urgent is this note for the next rehearsal?",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Optional refinement",
      "2: Address when convenient",
      "3: Needed soon to progress",
      "4: Blocks rehearsal or affects safety"
    ]
  },
  "actionable": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the note state a clear action or decision to make?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "A specific action or decision is identifiable",
      "false": "The note needs clarification before action"
    }
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0807. Costume Change Planner

ID: theater-costume-change-planner
Sub-discipline: Costume design
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: A costume designer pastes costume plots and scene transitions, and Jev routes each change to quick-change, offstage change, or no-change handling.

Why typed decisions: A clear change category and difficulty grade help teams plan fittings and crew assignments more reliably than open-ended advice.

TAM: Global costume and wardrobe operations: $10B–$20B
SAM: Theater wardrobe planning tools: $300M–$900M
SOM: Touring and regional productions: $5M–$25M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Costume Change Planner" 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
A costume designer pastes costume plots and scene transitions, and Jev routes each change to quick-change, offstage change, or no-change handling.
Discipline: Theater & Live Performance (Costume design).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: A clear change category and difficulty grade help teams plan fittings and crew assignments more reliably than open-ended advice.

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": <Costume plot, transition timing, and performer movement 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)
{
  "change_route": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which costume-change setup best fits this transition?",
    "criteria": {
      "quick_change": "Change occurs rapidly near or onstage",
      "offstage_change": "Performer has time and space to change offstage",
      "no_change": "No costume change is needed for this transition"
    }
  },
  "change_difficulty": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How demanding is the costume change?",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Simple single-item adjustment",
      "2: Several straightforward items",
      "3: Multiple layers or tight timing",
      "4: Complex, assisted, or safety-sensitive change"
    ]
  },
  "assistance_needed": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Do the notes indicate that crew assistance is needed?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "A helper is required for the stated change",
      "false": "The performer can complete the change without help"
    }
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0808. Sound Cue Classifier

ID: theater-sound-cue-classifier
Sub-discipline: Sound design
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: A sound designer pastes script moments and sound notes, and Jev routes each entry to playback, live effect, underscoring, or silence.

Why typed decisions: A stable cue class and prominence score are straightforward to filter and validate against a production's sound plan.

TAM: Global professional audio and sound design: $15B–$30B
SAM: Theater sound-design workflow tools: $300M–$1B
SOM: Small and midsize performance venues: $5M–$20M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Sound Cue Classifier" 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
A sound designer pastes script moments and sound notes, and Jev routes each entry to playback, live effect, underscoring, or silence.
Discipline: Theater & Live Performance (Sound design).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: A stable cue class and prominence score are straightforward to filter and validate against a production's sound plan.

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": <Script moments, sound notes, and available playback or live-effect resources>, "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)
{
  "sound_route": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "What kind of sound treatment is indicated?",
    "criteria": {
      "playback": "A recorded or sampled sound cue",
      "live_effect": "A sound produced live onstage or backstage",
      "underscoring": "Music or sustained sound beneath action",
      "silence": "An intentional absence of sound"
    }
  },
  "sound_prominence": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How prominent should this sound be in the moment?",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Barely perceptible",
      "2: Supporting texture",
      "3: Clearly noticeable",
      "4: Dominant or attention-grabbing"
    ]
  },
  "exact_trigger": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is a specific trigger for the sound stated?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "A line, action, or timed event is identified",
      "false": "No exact trigger is identified"
    }
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0809. Dance Call Organizer

ID: theater-dance-call-organizer
Sub-discipline: Choreography
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: A choreographer pastes movement notes and rehearsal constraints, and Jev routes each passage to learn, clean, spacing, or stamina work.

Why typed decisions: Typed rehearsal goals help prioritize limited studio time without relying on generated interpretations of movement notes.

TAM: Global dance and choreography services: $8B–$18B
SAM: Professional dance rehearsal tools: $200M–$600M
SOM: Dance companies and theater choreographers: $3M–$15M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Dance Call Organizer" 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
A choreographer pastes movement notes and rehearsal constraints, and Jev routes each passage to learn, clean, spacing, or stamina work.
Discipline: Theater & Live Performance (Choreography).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: Typed rehearsal goals help prioritize limited studio time without relying on generated interpretations of movement notes.

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": <Movement notes, cast availability, and rehearsal time constraints>, "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)
{
  "dance_route": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "What is the main rehearsal focus for this passage?",
    "criteria": {
      "learn": "Teach or memorize new movement",
      "clean": "Refine timing, technique, or precision",
      "spacing": "Adjust formations, pathways, or sightlines",
      "stamina": "Build endurance or manage physical load"
    }
  },
  "readiness": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How ready is the passage for a full run?",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Not yet learned",
      "2: Partially learned; frequent stops needed",
      "3: Mostly ready with targeted cleanup",
      "4: Run-ready"
    ]
  },
  "safety_flag": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Do the notes identify a physical safety concern?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "A specific strain, hazard, or safety issue is noted",
      "false": "No physical safety concern is noted"
    }
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0810. Venue Advance Desk

ID: theater-venue-advance-desk
Sub-discipline: Production management
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: A production manager pastes venue specifications and touring needs, and Jev routes each requirement to power, rigging, access, or schedule review.

Why typed decisions: A fixed department assignment and severity grade make technical advances easy to distribute and track.

TAM: Global live-event production services: $30B–$60B
SAM: Theater technical-advance software: $500M–$1.5B
SOM: Touring productions and venues: $10M–$50M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Venue Advance Desk" 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
A production manager pastes venue specifications and touring needs, and Jev routes each requirement to power, rigging, access, or schedule review.
Discipline: Theater & Live Performance (Production management).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: A fixed department assignment and severity grade make technical advances easy to distribute and track.

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": <Venue specification, touring requirements, and production schedule>, "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)
{
  "advance_route": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which venue department should review this requirement?",
    "criteria": {
      "power": "Electrical supply, circuits, or distribution",
      "rigging": "Loads, points, flown scenery, or overhead equipment",
      "access": "Loading, backstage access, or accessibility",
      "schedule": "Call times, changeovers, or venue availability"
    }
  },
  "requirement_severity": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How serious is the consequence if this requirement is unmet?",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Minor convenience issue",
      "2: Workaround likely available",
      "3: Significant operational impact",
      "4: Show, safety, or compliance blocker"
    ]
  },
  "specification_present": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the venue information explicitly confirm this requirement?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The venue specification confirms it",
      "false": "The specification does not confirm it"
    }
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0811. Fight Call Risk Sorter

ID: theater-fight-call-risk-sorter
Sub-discipline: Stage combat
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: A fight director pastes choreography notes and rehearsal observations, and Jev routes each sequence to weapons, falls, contact, or non-contact review.

Why typed decisions: A fixed safety category and risk grade direct human review to the right expertise instead of producing unverified safety prose.

TAM: Global stage combat and performance safety: $1B–$3B
SAM: Theater fight-call and safety tools: $100M–$300M
SOM: Professional and educational theater: $2M–$10M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Fight Call Risk Sorter" 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
A fight director pastes choreography notes and rehearsal observations, and Jev routes each sequence to weapons, falls, contact, or non-contact review.
Discipline: Theater & Live Performance (Stage combat).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: A fixed safety category and risk grade direct human review to the right expertise instead of producing unverified safety prose.

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": <Fight choreography notes, performer experience, and rehearsal observations>, "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)
{
  "fight_route": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which specialist review category best fits this sequence?",
    "criteria": {
      "weapons": "Props or weapons are involved",
      "falls": "Falls, lifts, or floor impacts are involved",
      "contact": "Physical contact or strikes are involved",
      "non_contact": "Movement suggests combat without physical contact"
    }
  },
  "sequence_risk": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How much additional safety attention does this sequence need?",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Familiar, low-complexity movement",
      "2: Routine sequence needing standard checks",
      "3: Complex timing or performer coordination",
      "4: High-impact or unusually hazardous sequence"
    ]
  },
  "qualified_review": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Has a qualified fight professional reviewed the sequence?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "A qualified professional's review is documented",
      "false": "No qualified professional review is documented"
    }
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0812. Accessibility Cue Planner

ID: theater-accessibility-cue-planner
Sub-discipline: Access design
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: An access coordinator pastes performance plans and audience needs, and Jev routes each item to captioning, audio description, sensory access, or mobility access.

Why typed decisions: Typed service routing helps teams meet stated access needs consistently without treating generated text as accessibility verification.

TAM: Global accessibility services and technology: $15B–$30B
SAM: Performing-arts accessibility tools: $300M–$900M
SOM: Theaters and performing-arts centers: $5M–$25M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Accessibility Cue Planner" 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
An access coordinator pastes performance plans and audience needs, and Jev routes each item to captioning, audio description, sensory access, or mobility access.
Discipline: Theater & Live Performance (Access design).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: Typed service routing helps teams meet stated access needs consistently without treating generated text as accessibility verification.

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": <Performance plan, requested accommodations, and venue access details>, "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)
{
  "access_route": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which access service should handle this need?",
    "criteria": {
      "captioning": "Spoken or sung content needs visual text access",
      "audio_description": "Visual action needs spoken description",
      "sensory": "Sensory environment or content needs adjustment",
      "mobility": "Movement, seating, or physical access needs attention"
    }
  },
  "access_impact": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How much does this need affect audience participation?",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Minor preference",
      "2: Improves comfort or clarity",
      "3: Enables meaningful participation",
      "4: Essential access requirement"
    ]
  },
  "provision_confirmed": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is a concrete provision for this need documented?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "A specific provision is documented",
      "false": "No specific provision is documented"
    }
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0813. Scene Mood Index

ID: theater-scene-mood-index
Sub-discipline: Dramaturgy
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: A dramaturg pastes scenes and production themes, and Jev routes each scene to tension, intimacy, spectacle, or reflection for rehearsal planning.

Why typed decisions: A bounded dramatic-mode label and intensity grade create a consistent index without reducing the scene to generated interpretation.

TAM: Global theater research and development: $2B–$6B
SAM: Dramaturgy and rehearsal-planning tools: $100M–$400M
SOM: Playhouses and university theaters: $2M–$10M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Scene Mood Index" 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
A dramaturg pastes scenes and production themes, and Jev routes each scene to tension, intimacy, spectacle, or reflection for rehearsal planning.
Discipline: Theater & Live Performance (Dramaturgy).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: A bounded dramatic-mode label and intensity grade create a consistent index without reducing the scene to generated interpretation.

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": <Scene excerpts, director's concept, and dramaturgical themes>, "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)
{
  "mood_route": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which dramatic mode is most prominent in this scene?",
    "criteria": {
      "tension": "Conflict, suspense, or pressure drives the scene",
      "intimacy": "Close personal connection dominates",
      "spectacle": "Scale, visual event, or heightened action dominates",
      "reflection": "Contemplation, exposition, or inward thought dominates"
    }
  },
  "emotional_intensity": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How intense is the scene's emotional charge?",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Restrained",
      "2: Noticeable but controlled",
      "3: Strong and sustained",
      "4: Extreme or rapidly escalating"
    ]
  },
  "turning_point": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the scene contain a clear change in stakes or relationship?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "A consequential shift is apparent",
      "false": "No clear consequential shift is apparent"
    }
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0814. Monologue Matchboard

ID: theater-monologue-matchboard
Sub-discipline: Actor training
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: An acting coach pastes audition sides and performer goals, and Jev routes each monologue to comic, dramatic, classical, or contemporary practice.

Why typed decisions: A stable repertoire category and challenge rating help coaches assign material consistently without generating scripts.

TAM: Global acting education and coaching: $10B–$20B
SAM: Digital tools for actor training: $300M–$1B
SOM: Drama schools and independent coaches: $5M–$20M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Monologue Matchboard" 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
An acting coach pastes audition sides and performer goals, and Jev routes each monologue to comic, dramatic, classical, or contemporary practice.
Discipline: Theater & Live Performance (Actor training).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: A stable repertoire category and challenge rating help coaches assign material consistently without generating scripts.

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": <Monologue excerpt, performer goals, and casting context>, "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)
{
  "monologue_route": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which practice category best fits this monologue?",
    "criteria": {
      "comic": "Humor or comic timing is central",
      "dramatic": "Emotional conflict or dramatic stakes dominate",
      "classical": "Language or style is from a classical tradition",
      "contemporary": "Modern language and contemporary context dominate"
    }
  },
  "performance_challenge": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How demanding is this material for the stated performer goal?",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Comfortable practice",
      "2: Modest stretch",
      "3: Significant stretch",
      "4: Major technical or emotional challenge"
    ]
  },
  "audition_suitable": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the excerpt appear suitable for the stated audition context?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Length and content fit the stated context",
      "false": "Length or content conflicts with the stated context"
    }
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0815. Set Piece Feasibility

ID: theater-set-piece-feasibility
Sub-discipline: Scenic design
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: A scenic designer pastes set-piece descriptions and venue limits, and Jev routes each piece to build, rent, adapt, or omit review.

Why typed decisions: A discrete feasibility route and complexity grade support early production decisions more cleanly than open-ended generated recommendations.

TAM: Global scenic production and fabrication: $8B–$16B
SAM: Theater scenic-planning tools: $250M–$800M
SOM: Regional theaters and design studios: $5M–$25M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Set Piece Feasibility" 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
A scenic designer pastes set-piece descriptions and venue limits, and Jev routes each piece to build, rent, adapt, or omit review.
Discipline: Theater & Live Performance (Scenic design).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: A discrete feasibility route and complexity grade support early production decisions more cleanly than open-ended generated recommendations.

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": <Set-piece description, venue limits, budget range, and build resources>, "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)
{
  "piece_route": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which production path best fits this set piece?",
    "criteria": {
      "build": "Construct a purpose-made piece",
      "rent": "Source an existing piece externally",
      "adapt": "Modify an existing stock or found piece",
      "omit": "Do not include the piece as described"
    }
  },
  "build_complexity": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How demanding is this piece to realize under the stated constraints?",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Simple and readily achievable",
      "2: Moderate effort or sourcing",
      "3: Significant labor or technical coordination",
      "4: Major feasibility concern"
    ]
  },
  "venue_compatible": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the piece fit the stated venue constraints?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "No stated venue limit prevents its use",
      "false": "At least one venue limit conflicts with its use"
    }
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0816. Understudy Coverage Map

ID: theater-understudy-coverage-map
Sub-discipline: Company management
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: A company manager pastes role requirements and performer availability, and Jev routes each role to covered, partial-cover, or uncovered status.

Why typed decisions: A clear coverage state and readiness score reveal operational gaps faster and more consistently than free-form summaries.

TAM: Global performing-arts workforce operations: $5B–$12B
SAM: Theater company-management software: $300M–$900M
SOM: Producing theaters and touring companies: $5M–$25M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Understudy Coverage Map" 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
A company manager pastes role requirements and performer availability, and Jev routes each role to covered, partial-cover, or uncovered status.
Discipline: Theater & Live Performance (Company management).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: A clear coverage state and readiness score reveal operational gaps faster and more consistently than free-form summaries.

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": <Role requirements, cast availability, and understudy rehearsal records>, "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)
{
  "coverage_route": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "What is the current coverage status for this role?",
    "criteria": {
      "covered": "A ready performer is available to cover",
      "partial_cover": "Some requirements or availability remain unresolved",
      "uncovered": "No viable cover is identified"
    }
  },
  "cover_readiness": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How ready is the available cover to perform the role?",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Not prepared",
      "2: Knows some material but needs substantial rehearsal",
      "3: Nearly ready with limited gaps",
      "4: Ready to perform"
    ]
  },
  "availability_confirmed": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is the cover's availability explicitly confirmed?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Availability is confirmed in the provided information",
      "false": "Availability is not confirmed"
    }
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0817. Audience Response Sorter

ID: theater-audience-response-sorter
Sub-discipline: Audience development
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: An audience team pastes post-show survey comments, and Jev routes each response to programming, access, facilities, or marketing follow-up.

Why typed decisions: Routing feedback into fixed owners and a severity level makes qualitative responses actionable while retaining human review of nuance.

TAM: Global audience research and engagement: $10B–$25B
SAM: Performing-arts audience feedback tools: $250M–$800M
SOM: Theaters and arts organizations: $5M–$20M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Audience Response Sorter" 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
An audience team pastes post-show survey comments, and Jev routes each response to programming, access, facilities, or marketing follow-up.
Discipline: Theater & Live Performance (Audience development).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: Routing feedback into fixed owners and a severity level makes qualitative responses actionable while retaining human review of nuance.

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": <Survey comment, show context, and department ownership map>, "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)
{
  "response_route": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which department should review this audience response?",
    "criteria": {
      "programming": "Content, repertoire, or artistic experience",
      "access": "Accessibility, accommodations, or inclusion",
      "facilities": "Venue comfort, navigation, or service",
      "marketing": "Discovery, ticketing communication, or audience information"
    }
  },
  "response_severity": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How serious is the issue described?",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Positive comment or minor preference",
      "2: Small concern with limited impact",
      "3: Significant dissatisfaction or barrier",
      "4: Urgent concern or serious access issue"
    ]
  },
  "follow_up_needed": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the response call for an individual follow-up?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "A direct reply or case review appears warranted",
      "false": "No individual follow-up appears necessary"
    }
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0818. Festival Slot Sorter

ID: theater-festival-slot-sorter
Sub-discipline: Festival programming
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: A festival programmer pastes show submissions and slot constraints, and Jev routes each entry to prime, standard, late, or waitlist consideration.

Why typed decisions: A fixed scheduling lane plus fit grade speeds shortlist formation while keeping final artistic selection with the programmer.

TAM: Global live festivals and performing arts: $20B–$40B
SAM: Theater festival programming tools: $300M–$1B
SOM: Regional and independent festivals: $5M–$25M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Festival Slot Sorter" 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
A festival programmer pastes show submissions and slot constraints, and Jev routes each entry to prime, standard, late, or waitlist consideration.
Discipline: Theater & Live Performance (Festival programming).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: A fixed scheduling lane plus fit grade speeds shortlist formation while keeping final artistic selection with the programmer.

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": <Show synopsis, technical requirements, slot availability, and festival priorities>, "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)
{
  "slot_route": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which programming lane best suits this submission?",
    "criteria": {
      "prime": "Strong contender for a high-demand slot",
      "standard": "Fits a regular program slot",
      "late": "Best suited to a late or fringe slot",
      "waitlist": "Keep in reserve pending availability"
    }
  },
  "festival_fit": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How well does the submission fit the stated festival priorities?",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Weak fit",
      "2: Some relevant fit",
      "3: Strong fit",
      "4: Standout fit"
    ]
  },
  "technical_feasible": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Can the stated technical requirements be met by this venue?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Requirements fit the provided venue capabilities",
      "false": "A requirement exceeds or conflicts with venue capabilities"
    }
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0819. Script Revision Tracker

ID: theater-script-revision-tracker
Sub-discipline: Play development
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: A playwright pastes revision notes and scene changes, and Jev routes each change to character, structure, dialogue, or staging review.

Why typed decisions: A consistent revision category and impact grade make drafts easier to compare without generating replacement text.

TAM: Global play development and publishing: $5B–$12B
SAM: Digital play-development tools: $200M–$700M
SOM: Playwrights and new-play programs: $3M–$15M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Script Revision Tracker" 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
A playwright pastes revision notes and scene changes, and Jev routes each change to character, structure, dialogue, or staging review.
Discipline: Theater & Live Performance (Play development).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: A consistent revision category and impact grade make drafts easier to compare without generating replacement text.

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": <Revision notes, before-and-after scene excerpts, and playwright goals>, "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)
{
  "revision_route": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "What kind of revision is most central here?",
    "criteria": {
      "character": "Motivation, relationship, or character arc",
      "structure": "Scene order, pacing, or dramatic shape",
      "dialogue": "Voice, wording, or conversational rhythm",
      "staging": "Action, setting, or performance practicality"
    }
  },
  "revision_impact": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How much does this change affect the play as a whole?",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Local detail",
      "2: Noticeable scene-level change",
      "3: Significant effect across scenes",
      "4: Fundamental change to the play's shape"
    ]
  },
  "goal_aligned": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the change support the stated revision goal?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The change appears aligned with the stated goal",
      "false": "The change appears misaligned or its alignment is unclear"
    }
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0820. Touring Load-In Sorter

ID: theater-touring-load-in-sorter
Sub-discipline: Touring production
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: A touring production manager pastes equipment lists and venue schedules, and Jev routes each load-in task to dock, rigging, stage, or sound-check operations.

Why typed decisions: Fixed operational assignments and task-pressure grades help touring crews coordinate fast turnarounds without relying on prose summaries.

TAM: Global touring live-production operations: $10B–$25B
SAM: Touring theater logistics tools: $300M–$900M
SOM: Touring companies and receiving venues: $5M–$25M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Touring Load-In Sorter" 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
A touring production manager pastes equipment lists and venue schedules, and Jev routes each load-in task to dock, rigging, stage, or sound-check operations.
Discipline: Theater & Live Performance (Touring production).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: Fixed operational assignments and task-pressure grades help touring crews coordinate fast turnarounds without relying on prose summaries.

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": <Equipment manifest, venue schedule, crew call, and load-in restrictions>, "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)
{
  "loadin_route": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which operation should handle this load-in task?",
    "criteria": {
      "dock": "Unload, access, and delivery coordination",
      "rigging": "Overhead points, flown items, or hoisting",
      "stage": "Scenery, props, and stage-floor placement",
      "sound_check": "Audio setup, patching, or system checks"
    }
  },
  "time_pressure": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How much schedule pressure does this task carry?",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Ample time and few dependencies",
      "2: Routine timing",
      "3: Tight window or coordination needed",
      "4: Critical path or likely schedule blocker"
    ]
  },
  "venue_confirmed": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Has the venue confirmed the needed facility or resource?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The venue explicitly confirms availability",
      "false": "Availability is not confirmed"
    }
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0821. Scene Change Sentinel

ID: theater-scene-change-sentinel
Sub-discipline: Stage management
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste scene text and changeover notes; Jev independently checks for unsafe, impractical, and under-specified transitions, and code flags a changeover if any check fails.

Why typed decisions: Separate yes/no checks make risks explicit and consistently actionable without relying on generated advice.

TAM: Global theatre production software: ~$2B/yr
SAM: Stage-management tools: ~$250M/yr
SOM: Indie venue pilots: ~$1M/yr

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Scene Change Sentinel" 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 scene text and changeover notes; Jev independently checks for unsafe, impractical, and under-specified transitions, and code flags a changeover if any check fails.
Discipline: Theater & Live Performance (Stage management).
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: Separate yes/no checks make risks explicit and consistently actionable without relying on generated advice.

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": <Scene excerpts plus changeover crew, props, and timing 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)
{
  "unsafe_movement": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does this transition create a plausible performer collision or unsafe movement path?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "A collision or unsafe path is plausible.",
      "false": "No plausible collision or unsafe path is present."
    }
  },
  "impractical_timing": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is the stated transition likely impossible within the available time?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The changeover appears to exceed the time available.",
      "false": "The changeover appears feasible within the time available."
    }
  },
  "missing_cue": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is an essential cue or crew handoff missing from the notes?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "A necessary cue or handoff is not specified.",
      "false": "The notes specify the necessary cues and handoffs."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0822. Subtext Signal Board

ID: theater-subtext-signal-board
Sub-discipline: Playwriting
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste a scene and character objectives; Jev independently checks whether each objective is legible in the dialogue, contradicted by action, or shared by multiple characters, and code flags scenes meeting chosen conditions.

Why typed decisions: Independent semantic checks expose specific dramatic issues while leaving interpretation and rewriting to the playwright.

TAM: Playwriting and script-development software: ~$1B/yr
SAM: Dramaturgy and script analysis: ~$120M/yr
SOM: Playwriting program pilots: ~$600K/yr

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Subtext Signal Board" 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 scene and character objectives; Jev independently checks whether each objective is legible in the dialogue, contradicted by action, or shared by multiple characters, and code flags scenes meeting chosen conditions.
Discipline: Theater & Live Performance (Playwriting).
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: Independent semantic checks expose specific dramatic issues while leaving interpretation and rewriting to the playwright.

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": <Scene dialogue with character objectives and action 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)
{
  "objective_legible": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Can a reader infer this character's stated objective from the scene?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Dialogue or action provides discernible evidence of the objective.",
      "false": "The stated objective is not discernible from the scene."
    }
  },
  "action_conflict": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the character's behavior materially contradict the stated objective?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Behavior conflicts with the stated objective.",
      "false": "Behavior does not materially conflict with it."
    }
  },
  "objective_overlap": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does another character appear to pursue substantially the same objective here?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Another character shares substantially the same objective.",
      "false": "The objective is meaningfully distinct."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0823. Prop Continuity Ledger

ID: theater-prop-continuity-ledger
Sub-discipline: Props management
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste a script excerpt and prop tracking notes; Jev independently checks for untracked entrances, unexplained prop transfers, and inconsistent prop states, and code creates a continuity alert when any check is true.

Why typed decisions: Typed checks can catch discrete continuity failures without inventing prop details.

TAM: Theatre production and inventory software: ~$1.5B/yr
SAM: Prop-continuity tools: ~$180M/yr
SOM: Regional theatre pilots: ~$750K/yr

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Prop Continuity Ledger" 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 script excerpt and prop tracking notes; Jev independently checks for untracked entrances, unexplained prop transfers, and inconsistent prop states, and code creates a continuity alert when any check is true.
Discipline: Theater & Live Performance (Props management).
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: Typed checks can catch discrete continuity failures without inventing prop details.

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": <Script excerpt with prop list, entrances, exits, and handling 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)
{
  "untracked_entrance": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does a prop appear in the excerpt without a tracked entrance or starting location?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "A prop appears without a documented starting point or entrance.",
      "false": "Appearing props have documented starting points or entrances."
    }
  },
  "unexplained_transfer": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does a prop change hands without an indicated transfer?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "A change of holder lacks an indicated transfer.",
      "false": "Transfers are indicated or no holder change occurs."
    }
  },
  "state_inconsistency": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the prop's described state conflict with an earlier state in the notes?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The prop's states conflict across the supplied material.",
      "false": "No state conflict is apparent."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0824. Cue Sheet Compass

ID: theater-cue-sheet-compass
Sub-discipline: Lighting design
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste a script beat sheet and lighting cue list; Jev independently checks whether cues match beat changes, have clear triggers, and conflict with blackout or scene timing, and code routes flagged cues for review.

Why typed decisions: Separate semantic checks let designers pinpoint cue-sheet risks without receiving generated design directions.

TAM: Lighting and show-control software: ~$2B/yr
SAM: Lighting cue-planning tools: ~$220M/yr
SOM: Design-team pilots: ~$900K/yr

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Cue Sheet Compass" 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 script beat sheet and lighting cue list; Jev independently checks whether cues match beat changes, have clear triggers, and conflict with blackout or scene timing, and code routes flagged cues for review.
Discipline: Theater & Live Performance (Lighting 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: Separate semantic checks let designers pinpoint cue-sheet risks without receiving generated design directions.

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": <Beat sheet with cue list, trigger notes, and timing>, "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)
{
  "beat_alignment": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does each supplied cue correspond to a meaningful shift in the beat sheet?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "A cue lacks an evident meaningful beat change.",
      "false": "Cues correspond to meaningful beat changes."
    }
  },
  "trigger_clear": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is any cue trigger too ambiguous for an operator to identify consistently?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "At least one trigger is ambiguous in context.",
      "false": "Triggers are identifiable in context."
    }
  },
  "timing_conflict": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does a cue conflict with the stated scene or blackout timing?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "A cue conflicts with stated timing.",
      "false": "No timing conflict is apparent."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0825. Blocking Access Check

ID: theater-blocking-access-check
Sub-discipline: Accessible staging
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste blocking notes and access requirements; Jev independently checks for obstructed routes, inaccessible acting positions, and unplanned level changes, and code flags any relevant issue for the director.

Why typed decisions: Independent condition checks turn access requirements into reviewable signals rather than vague generated recommendations.

TAM: Performing-arts access and production tools: ~$900M/yr
SAM: Accessible-staging review tools: ~$90M/yr
SOM: Inclusive theatre pilots: ~$500K/yr

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Blocking Access Check" 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 blocking notes and access requirements; Jev independently checks for obstructed routes, inaccessible acting positions, and unplanned level changes, and code flags any relevant issue for the director.
Discipline: Theater & Live Performance (Accessible staging).
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: Independent condition checks turn access requirements into reviewable signals rather than vague generated recommendations.

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": <Blocking notes, stage layout, and access requirements>, "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)
{
  "route_obstructed": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the blocking obstruct a required accessible route?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Blocking appears to obstruct a required route.",
      "false": "No required route appears obstructed."
    }
  },
  "position_inaccessible": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does a required performer position appear inaccessible under the supplied requirements?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "A required position appears inaccessible.",
      "false": "Required positions appear accessible."
    }
  },
  "unplanned_level_change": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the blocking include an unaddressed level change relevant to access?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "A relevant level change has no access provision.",
      "false": "No unaddressed relevant level change is apparent."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0826. Rehearsal Risk Radar

ID: theater-rehearsal-risk-radar
Sub-discipline: Rehearsal planning
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste a rehearsal schedule, scene list, and performer constraints; Jev independently checks for missing preparation, overload, and conflicting assignments, and code marks the schedule for adjustment if any check is true.

Why typed decisions: Explicit checks surface scheduling risks consistently without generating or reshuffling the plan.

TAM: Performing-arts scheduling software: ~$1.2B/yr
SAM: Rehearsal-planning tools: ~$140M/yr
SOM: Company pilots: ~$700K/yr

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Rehearsal Risk Radar" 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 rehearsal schedule, scene list, and performer constraints; Jev independently checks for missing preparation, overload, and conflicting assignments, and code marks the schedule for adjustment if any check is true.
Discipline: Theater & Live Performance (Rehearsal planning).
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 checks surface scheduling risks consistently without generating or reshuffling the plan.

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": <Rehearsal schedule, scene requirements, and performer constraints>, "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)
{
  "prep_missing": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is a scene scheduled before a required preparation or prerequisite rehearsal?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "A required preparation step is missing or scheduled later.",
      "false": "Prerequisites appear scheduled before the scene."
    }
  },
  "workload_overload": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the schedule create an unusually concentrated workload for a performer?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "A performer has an apparent workload concentration risk.",
      "false": "No unusual workload concentration is apparent."
    }
  },
  "assignment_conflict": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Are any performer assignments scheduled at overlapping times?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Assignments overlap for at least one performer.",
      "false": "No performer assignment overlap is apparent."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0827. Dramaturgy Source Sieve

ID: theater-dramaturgy-source-sieve
Sub-discipline: Dramaturgy
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste research citations alongside a scene's historical claims; Jev independently checks source relevance, claim support, and period consistency, and code prioritizes claims that fail any check.

Why typed decisions: Typed flags help dramaturgs review evidence efficiently without fabricating research or citations.

TAM: Script research and dramaturgy software: ~$700M/yr
SAM: Historical script-review tools: ~$75M/yr
SOM: University theatre pilots: ~$350K/yr

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Dramaturgy Source Sieve" 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 research citations alongside a scene's historical claims; Jev independently checks source relevance, claim support, and period consistency, and code prioritizes claims that fail any check.
Discipline: Theater & Live Performance (Dramaturgy).
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: Typed flags help dramaturgs review evidence efficiently without fabricating research or citations.

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": <Scene claims, citation excerpts, and setting period>, "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)
{
  "source_relevant": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is the supplied source relevant to the specific historical claim?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The source does not clearly address the claim.",
      "false": "The source is relevant to the claim."
    }
  },
  "claim_supported": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the supplied source excerpt support the stated claim?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The excerpt does not support the claim.",
      "false": "The excerpt supports the claim."
    }
  },
  "period_consistent": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the claim appear consistent with the stated period?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The claim appears anachronistic or inconsistent.",
      "false": "The claim appears period-consistent."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0828. Costume Continuity Keeper

ID: theater-costume-continuity-keeper
Sub-discipline: Costume design
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste costume breakdowns and scene order; Jev independently checks for unexplained costume changes, character continuity conflicts, and quick-change timing risks, and code generates a review list from failed checks.

Why typed decisions: Distinct binary checks make continuity review easier to verify than open-ended costume commentary.

TAM: Costume and wardrobe production software: ~$1B/yr
SAM: Theatre costume-continuity tools: ~$110M/yr
SOM: Wardrobe department pilots: ~$550K/yr

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Costume Continuity Keeper" 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 costume breakdowns and scene order; Jev independently checks for unexplained costume changes, character continuity conflicts, and quick-change timing risks, and code generates a review list from failed checks.
Discipline: Theater & Live Performance (Costume 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: Distinct binary checks make continuity review easier to verify than open-ended costume commentary.

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": <Costume breakdown, scene order, and changeover timings>, "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)
{
  "change_explained": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is every costume change explained by the scene sequence or change notes?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "A change lacks an explanation in the supplied material.",
      "false": "Changes are explained or none occur."
    }
  },
  "character_conflict": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does a costume assignment conflict with the character's stated continuity?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "An assignment conflicts with character continuity.",
      "false": "No character continuity conflict is apparent."
    }
  },
  "quick_change_risk": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does a quick change appear infeasible within its available interval?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The available interval appears insufficient.",
      "false": "The interval appears feasible."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0829. Sound Motif Mapper

ID: theater-sound-motif-mapper
Sub-discipline: Sound design
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste scene summaries and a sound cue list; Jev independently checks motif continuity, cue-to-beat relevance, and unintended repetition, and code highlights cues that meet the designer's review rules.

Why typed decisions: Typed semantic checks reveal pattern and continuity issues while preserving the sound designer's authorship.

TAM: Audio and live sound-design software: ~$1.6B/yr
SAM: Theatre sound cue tools: ~$160M/yr
SOM: Sound-design studio pilots: ~$650K/yr

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Sound Motif Mapper" 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 scene summaries and a sound cue list; Jev independently checks motif continuity, cue-to-beat relevance, and unintended repetition, and code highlights cues that meet the designer's review rules.
Discipline: Theater & Live Performance (Sound 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: Typed semantic checks reveal pattern and continuity issues while preserving the sound designer's authorship.

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": <Scene summaries, sound cues, and motif 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)
{
  "motif_continuity": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does a recurring motif remain consistent with its supplied dramatic meaning?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "A recurring use conflicts with the motif notes.",
      "false": "Recurring uses align with the motif notes."
    }
  },
  "cue_beat_fit": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does each cue fit the stated dramatic beat?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "A cue appears mismatched to its beat.",
      "false": "Cues appear consistent with their beats."
    }
  },
  "unintended_repeat": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is a cue repeated in a way that conflicts with the supplied repetition plan?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "A repetition conflicts with the plan.",
      "false": "Repetition follows the plan or is not an issue."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0830. Audition Fit Signals

ID: theater-audition-fit-signals
Sub-discipline: Casting
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste role requirements and anonymized audition notes; Jev independently checks for requirement evidence, material contradictions, and insufficient observation, and code applies the casting team's own review thresholds.

Why typed decisions: Independent typed judgments support structured review without replacing human casting decisions or producing candidate narratives.

TAM: Casting and talent assessment software: ~$1.8B/yr
SAM: Performing-arts casting tools: ~$170M/yr
SOM: Casting office pilots: ~$800K/yr

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Audition Fit Signals" 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 role requirements and anonymized audition notes; Jev independently checks for requirement evidence, material contradictions, and insufficient observation, and code applies the casting team's own review thresholds.
Discipline: Theater & Live Performance (Casting).
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: Independent typed judgments support structured review without replacing human casting decisions or producing candidate narratives.

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": <Role criteria and anonymized audition observations>, "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)
{
  "requirement_evidence": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Do the notes contain observable evidence relevant to this role requirement?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Relevant observable evidence is present.",
      "false": "Relevant observable evidence is absent."
    }
  },
  "evidence_conflict": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Do the observations materially conflict with this requirement?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Observations materially conflict with the requirement.",
      "false": "No material conflict is apparent."
    }
  },
  "observation_sufficient": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Are the notes sufficient to assess this requirement?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The notes are insufficient to assess it.",
      "false": "The notes provide enough relevant observation."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0831. Audience Journey Audit

ID: theater-audience-journey-audit
Sub-discipline: Front of house
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste a venue journey description and audience access needs; Jev independently checks for confusing instructions, missing arrival information, and barriers at key steps, and code flags journeys that violate venue rules.

Why typed decisions: Separate yes/no checks produce auditable service signals without generating audience-facing copy.

TAM: Venue operations and ticketing software: ~$2.5B/yr
SAM: Theatre audience-experience tools: ~$200M/yr
SOM: Venue pilots: ~$900K/yr

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Audience Journey Audit" 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 venue journey description and audience access needs; Jev independently checks for confusing instructions, missing arrival information, and barriers at key steps, and code flags journeys that violate venue rules.
Discipline: Theater & Live Performance (Front of house).
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: Separate yes/no checks produce auditable service signals without generating audience-facing copy.

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": <Venue journey text, audience needs, and house policies>, "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)
{
  "instructions_confusing": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Are the supplied instructions likely to leave a first-time visitor unsure what to do?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "A key instruction is ambiguous or confusing.",
      "false": "Key instructions appear clear."
    }
  },
  "arrival_info_missing": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is essential arrival information missing from the journey?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Essential arrival information is absent.",
      "false": "Essential arrival information is provided."
    }
  },
  "access_barrier": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does a stated journey step conflict with a supplied access need?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "A step appears to create an access barrier.",
      "false": "No conflict with the supplied access needs is apparent."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0832. Stage Geometry Watch

ID: theater-stage-geometry-watch
Sub-discipline: Scenic design
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste a stage plan description, scenic dimensions, and blocking notes; Jev independently checks for spatial conflicts, obstructed sightlines, and impossible placements, and code returns a plan-review flag when a check fails.

Why typed decisions: Typed geometry-related judgments help identify semantic inconsistencies before teams commit to a build.

TAM: Scenic and CAD production software: ~$2B/yr
SAM: Theatre stage-plan review tools: ~$180M/yr
SOM: Scenic shop pilots: ~$700K/yr

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Stage Geometry Watch" 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 stage plan description, scenic dimensions, and blocking notes; Jev independently checks for spatial conflicts, obstructed sightlines, and impossible placements, and code returns a plan-review flag when a check fails.
Discipline: Theater & Live Performance (Scenic 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: Typed geometry-related judgments help identify semantic inconsistencies before teams commit to a build.

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": <Stage plan dimensions, scenic elements, and blocking 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)
{
  "spatial_conflict": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Do any scenic elements occupy conflicting locations in the supplied plan?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The description places elements in conflicting locations.",
      "false": "No location conflict is apparent."
    }
  },
  "sightline_obstructed": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does a scenic element appear to obstruct a stated audience sightline?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "A stated sightline appears obstructed.",
      "false": "No stated sightline appears obstructed."
    }
  },
  "placement_impossible": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does an element appear incompatible with the stated stage dimensions?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "An element appears not to fit the stated dimensions.",
      "false": "Elements appear compatible with the dimensions."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0833. Understudy Readiness Grid

ID: theater-understudy-readiness-grid
Sub-discipline: Company management
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste role requirements, understudy rehearsal records, and coverage notes; Jev independently checks for missing scene coverage, unpracticed technical demands, and unresolved handoffs, and code identifies roles needing follow-up.

Why typed decisions: Multiple narrow decisions give managers an explainable readiness checklist without an unsupported overall verdict.

TAM: Company and workforce planning software: ~$1.4B/yr
SAM: Theatre understudy-management tools: ~$100M/yr
SOM: Company pilots: ~$450K/yr

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Understudy Readiness Grid" 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 role requirements, understudy rehearsal records, and coverage notes; Jev independently checks for missing scene coverage, unpracticed technical demands, and unresolved handoffs, and code identifies roles needing follow-up.
Discipline: Theater & Live Performance (Company management).
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: Multiple narrow decisions give managers an explainable readiness checklist without an unsupported overall verdict.

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": <Role requirements, understudy rehearsal records, and coverage plan>, "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)
{
  "scene_coverage": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Has the understudy rehearsed every required scene listed in the coverage plan?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "At least one required scene lacks rehearsal evidence.",
      "false": "Every required scene has rehearsal evidence."
    }
  },
  "technical_practice": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Are role-specific technical demands missing from the rehearsal record?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "A technical demand lacks practice evidence.",
      "false": "Relevant technical demands have practice evidence."
    }
  },
  "handoff_resolved": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Are all required coverage handoffs explicitly assigned?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "A required handoff is unresolved.",
      "false": "Required handoffs are assigned or none apply."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0834. Playbill Fact Gate

ID: theater-playbill-fact-gate
Sub-discipline: Production communications
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste program copy and a verified production fact sheet; Jev independently checks names, credits, and dates against the source, and code holds any item that fails verification.

Why typed decisions: Typed verification decisions reduce factual errors without having a model rewrite publication copy.

TAM: Publishing and arts administration software: ~$1.3B/yr
SAM: Theatre program-production tools: ~$85M/yr
SOM: Company pilots: ~$400K/yr

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Playbill Fact 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 program copy and a verified production fact sheet; Jev independently checks names, credits, and dates against the source, and code holds any item that fails verification.
Discipline: Theater & Live Performance (Production communications).
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: Typed verification decisions reduce factual errors without having a model rewrite publication copy.

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": <Playbill draft alongside verified names, credits, and dates>, "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)
{
  "name_matches": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Do all names in the copy match the verified fact sheet?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "At least one name does not match or is not verified.",
      "false": "Names match the supplied fact sheet."
    }
  },
  "credit_matches": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Do the stated production credits match the verified record?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "A credit conflicts with or is absent from the record.",
      "false": "Credits match the verified record."
    }
  },
  "date_matches": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Do all production dates match the supplied schedule?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "A date conflicts with or is absent from the schedule.",
      "false": "Dates match the supplied schedule."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0835. Scene Rhythm Review

ID: theater-scene-rhythm-review
Sub-discipline: Playwriting
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste a scene and intended pacing notes; Jev independently checks for long stretches without a beat shift, abrupt transitions, and dialogue patterns that conflict with the stated rhythm, and code flags scenes for table-read review.

Why typed decisions: Discrete signals make pacing questions testable while avoiding prescriptive generated edits.

TAM: Scriptwriting and rehearsal-analysis software: ~$1B/yr
SAM: Dramatic pacing review tools: ~$100M/yr
SOM: Playwright workshop pilots: ~$450K/yr

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Scene Rhythm Review" 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 scene and intended pacing notes; Jev independently checks for long stretches without a beat shift, abrupt transitions, and dialogue patterns that conflict with the stated rhythm, and code flags scenes for table-read review.
Discipline: Theater & Live Performance (Playwriting).
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: Discrete signals make pacing questions testable while avoiding prescriptive generated edits.

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": <Scene text with intended pacing and beat 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)
{
  "beat_stagnation": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the scene contain a substantial stretch without a discernible beat shift?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "A substantial stretch appears to lack a beat shift.",
      "false": "Beat movement is discernible throughout."
    }
  },
  "transition_abrupt": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is a transition abrupt relative to the supplied scene context?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "A transition lacks a discernible dramatic or structural bridge.",
      "false": "Transitions appear supported by context."
    }
  },
  "rhythm_conflict": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the dialogue rhythm conflict with the stated pacing intention?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The dialogue appears inconsistent with the intended rhythm.",
      "false": "The dialogue appears compatible with the intended rhythm."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0836. Safety Cue Crosscheck

ID: theater-safety-cue-crosscheck
Sub-discipline: Stage safety
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste fight choreography notes, prop specifications, and cue sequences; Jev independently checks for missing safety controls, prop mismatches, and unclear stop signals, and code blocks rehearsal approval until flagged items are reviewed.

Why typed decisions: Independent safety checks produce traceable warnings rather than unsafe improvised instructions.

TAM: Workplace safety and production software: ~$2B/yr
SAM: Live-performance safety tools: ~$120M/yr
SOM: Production safety pilots: ~$600K/yr

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Safety Cue Crosscheck" 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 fight choreography notes, prop specifications, and cue sequences; Jev independently checks for missing safety controls, prop mismatches, and unclear stop signals, and code blocks rehearsal approval until flagged items are reviewed.
Discipline: Theater & Live Performance (Stage safety).
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: Independent safety checks produce traceable warnings rather than unsafe improvised instructions.

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": <Fight notes, prop specifications, and rehearsal cue sequence>, "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)
{
  "control_missing": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is a stated high-risk action missing its required safety control?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "A required control is absent from the notes.",
      "false": "Required controls are specified."
    }
  },
  "prop_mismatch": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does a prop specification conflict with the choreography notes?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "A prop detail conflicts with the action described.",
      "false": "Prop details appear consistent with the choreography."
    }
  },
  "stop_signal_unclear": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is the stop signal unclear or inconsistent across the supplied notes?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The stop signal is unclear or inconsistent.",
      "false": "The stop signal is clear and consistent."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0837. Touring Loadout Auditor

ID: theater-touring-loadout-auditor
Sub-discipline: Touring production
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste venue specs and a touring equipment loadout; Jev independently checks for venue incompatibility, missing essential equipment, and transport constraints, and code creates a stop-and-review alert for any failure.

Why typed decisions: Typed compatibility decisions catch logistics mismatches without generating speculative packing instructions.

TAM: Live event and touring logistics software: ~$2B/yr
SAM: Theatre touring loadout tools: ~$150M/yr
SOM: Touring company pilots: ~$650K/yr

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Touring Loadout Auditor" 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 venue specs and a touring equipment loadout; Jev independently checks for venue incompatibility, missing essential equipment, and transport constraints, and code creates a stop-and-review alert for any failure.
Discipline: Theater & Live Performance (Touring production).
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: Typed compatibility decisions catch logistics mismatches without generating speculative packing instructions.

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": <Venue technical specifications and touring equipment list>, "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)
{
  "venue_incompatible": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does any listed item conflict with the venue's stated technical limits?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "At least one item conflicts with a venue limit.",
      "false": "No listed item conflicts with venue limits."
    }
  },
  "essential_missing": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is equipment required by the production absent from the loadout?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Required equipment is missing.",
      "false": "Required equipment is present or not specified."
    }
  },
  "transport_constraint": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the loadout appear to violate a stated transport constraint?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The loadout conflicts with a transport constraint.",
      "false": "No transport conflict is apparent."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0838. Lighting Power Guard

ID: theater-lighting-power-guard
Sub-discipline: Technical direction
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste a lighting instrument schedule, circuit limits, and cue plan; Jev independently checks for overloaded circuits, incompatible fixture assignments, and power changes missing from cues, and code flags any failed condition.

Why typed decisions: Explicit independent checks make technical risks reviewable before equipment is patched or powered.

TAM: Lighting control and electrical planning software: ~$1.7B/yr
SAM: Theatre lighting technical tools: ~$130M/yr
SOM: Venue technical-team pilots: ~$550K/yr

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Lighting Power Guard" 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 lighting instrument schedule, circuit limits, and cue plan; Jev independently checks for overloaded circuits, incompatible fixture assignments, and power changes missing from cues, and code flags any failed condition.
Discipline: Theater & Live Performance (Technical direction).
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 independent checks make technical risks reviewable before equipment is patched or powered.

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": <Instrument schedule, circuit limits, and lighting cues>, "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)
{
  "circuit_overload": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the stated instrument load exceed any circuit limit?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "A circuit's stated load exceeds its limit.",
      "false": "No stated circuit load exceeds its limit."
    }
  },
  "fixture_incompatible": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is a fixture assigned to a circuit or control setup described as incompatible?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "An assignment conflicts with stated compatibility.",
      "false": "Assignments appear compatible with the supplied setup."
    }
  },
  "power_change_uncued": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does a cue require a power-state change that is not represented in the plan?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "A required power-state change appears unplanned.",
      "false": "Power-state changes are represented or not required."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0839. Rights Window Monitor

ID: theater-rights-window-monitor
Sub-discipline: Producing
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste performance dates, license terms, and planned recording uses; Jev independently checks for date-window conflicts, unauthorized capture, and territory mismatches, and code flags items for rights-holder review.

Why typed decisions: Separate typed checks identify concrete contract mismatches without generating legal interpretations or replacing counsel.

TAM: Rights and licensing management software: ~$1.5B/yr
SAM: Performing-arts license compliance tools: ~$100M/yr
SOM: Producer pilots: ~$500K/yr

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Rights Window Monitor" 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 performance dates, license terms, and planned recording uses; Jev independently checks for date-window conflicts, unauthorized capture, and territory mismatches, and code flags items for rights-holder review.
Discipline: Theater & Live Performance (Producing).
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: Separate typed checks identify concrete contract mismatches without generating legal interpretations or replacing counsel.

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": <License terms with performance dates, territories, and recording plans>, "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)
{
  "date_window_conflict": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Do the planned performance dates fall outside the supplied license window?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "At least one planned date appears outside the window.",
      "false": "Planned dates fall within the supplied window."
    }
  },
  "capture_authorized": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is each planned recording or capture use explicitly permitted by the supplied terms?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "A planned use lacks explicit permission in the supplied terms.",
      "false": "Planned uses are explicitly permitted or none are planned."
    }
  },
  "territory_match": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Do planned performance locations fit the licensed territory?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "A location appears outside the licensed territory.",
      "false": "Locations fit the supplied territory."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0840. Ensemble Equity Scan

ID: theater-ensemble-equity-scan
Sub-discipline: Casting and rehearsal
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste a rehearsal assignment plan and performer workload records; Jev independently checks speaking-time distribution, repeated understudy exclusion, and concentrated technical burden, and code routes patterns to a human review.

Why typed decisions: Transparent conditions surface patterns for discussion without reducing performers to generated rankings.

TAM: Workforce scheduling and analytics software: ~$2B/yr
SAM: Performing-arts ensemble planning tools: ~$100M/yr
SOM: Theatre company pilots: ~$450K/yr

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Ensemble Equity Scan" 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 rehearsal assignment plan and performer workload records; Jev independently checks speaking-time distribution, repeated understudy exclusion, and concentrated technical burden, and code routes patterns to a human review.
Discipline: Theater & Live Performance (Casting and rehearsal).
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: Transparent conditions surface patterns for discussion without reducing performers to generated rankings.

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": <Assignment plan with speaking time, coverage, and workload records>, "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)
{
  "speaking_imbalance": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the plan show a substantial speaking-time imbalance against the stated distribution goal?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The plan materially departs from its stated goal.",
      "false": "The plan is consistent with its stated goal."
    }
  },
  "coverage_exclusion": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is a performer repeatedly omitted from eligible coverage assignments?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "An eligible performer is repeatedly omitted.",
      "false": "No repeated omission is apparent."
    }
  },
  "burden_concentration": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is technical or rehearsal burden concentrated on the same performer without a stated reason?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Burden appears concentrated without a stated reason.",
      "false": "No unexplained concentration is apparent."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0841. Audition Callback Sorter

ID: theater-audition-callback-sorter
Sub-discipline: Casting
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste audition sides and performer profiles, and Jev scores each performer for role fit, emotional range, and ensemble balance before your adjustable weights rank callbacks.

Why typed decisions: Comparable typed scores make a transparent shortlist easier to review than generated casting commentary.

TAM: Global casting and talent software: ~$2B/year
SAM: Theater casting tools: ~$250M/year
SOM: Early theater customers: ~$1M/year

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Audition Callback Sorter" 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 audition sides and performer profiles, and Jev scores each performer for role fit, emotional range, and ensemble balance before your adjustable weights rank callbacks.
Discipline: Theater & Live Performance (Casting).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: Comparable typed scores make a transparent shortlist easier to review than generated casting commentary.

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": <Role brief, sides, performer profiles>, "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)
{
  "role_fit": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "For each performer, score how well their demonstrated choices fit the role's stated demands.",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Little evidence of fit",
      "2 — Some relevant evidence",
      "3 — Strong, specific fit",
      "4 — Exceptional fit across demands"
    ]
  },
  "emotional_range": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "For each performer, score the range and control of emotion shown in the audition.",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Narrow or uncontrolled",
      "2 — Some range, uneven control",
      "3 — Convincing range and control",
      "4 — Distinctive, precise range"
    ]
  },
  "ensemble_balance": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "For each performer, score how well their style could complement the described company.",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Likely clashes with ensemble",
      "2 — Unclear or limited complement",
      "3 — Likely complements ensemble",
      "4 — Adds a notably valuable contrast"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0842. Scene Cut Compass

ID: theater-scene-cut-compass
Sub-discipline: Dramaturgy
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste a script and proposed cut points, and Jev scores each cut for plot clarity, character continuity, and playable rhythm for a weighted ranking.

Why typed decisions: Dimension-by-dimension scores expose tradeoffs between runtime and story coherence without substituting opaque prose advice.

TAM: Global script and dramaturgy tools: ~$1.5B/year
SAM: Professional theater script tools: ~$180M/year
SOM: Early theater customers: ~$800K/year

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Scene Cut Compass" 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 script and proposed cut points, and Jev scores each cut for plot clarity, character continuity, and playable rhythm for a weighted ranking.
Discipline: Theater & Live Performance (Dramaturgy).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: Dimension-by-dimension scores expose tradeoffs between runtime and story coherence without substituting opaque prose advice.

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": <Script excerpt, cut ranges, production goals>, "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)
{
  "plot_clarity": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "For each proposed cut, score how well the remaining scenes preserve causal plot clarity.",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Major confusion or missing cause",
      "2 — Important links become unclear",
      "3 — Plot remains mostly clear",
      "4 — Plot remains crisp and complete"
    ]
  },
  "character_continuity": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "For each proposed cut, score whether character motivations and changes remain legible.",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Key character logic breaks",
      "2 — A motivation or turn weakens",
      "3 — Character arcs remain legible",
      "4 — Arcs remain fully compelling"
    ]
  },
  "playable_rhythm": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "For each proposed cut, score the likely improvement to stage rhythm and runtime.",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Rhythm worsens or barely changes",
      "2 — Small, uneven improvement",
      "3 — Clear improvement",
      "4 — Strong improvement with no dead air"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0843. Light Cue Prioritizer

ID: theater-light-cue-prioritizer
Sub-discipline: Lighting design
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste a cue list, scene notes, and venue constraints, and Jev scores each cue for dramatic impact, transition smoothness, and technical feasibility for weighted prioritization.

Why typed decisions: Consistent scores help designers compare cues against shared production priorities while keeping final decisions in human hands.

TAM: Global lighting design software: ~$1.2B/year
SAM: Theater lighting workflow tools: ~$150M/year
SOM: Early theater customers: ~$700K/year

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Light Cue Prioritizer" 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 cue list, scene notes, and venue constraints, and Jev scores each cue for dramatic impact, transition smoothness, and technical feasibility for weighted prioritization.
Discipline: Theater & Live Performance (Lighting design).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: Consistent scores help designers compare cues against shared production priorities while keeping final decisions in human hands.

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": <Cue list, scene notes, venue and rig limits>, "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)
{
  "dramatic_impact": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "For each cue, score its importance to the dramatic event it serves.",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Little discernible dramatic purpose",
      "2 — Useful but not essential",
      "3 — Strongly supports the moment",
      "4 — Defines or transforms the moment"
    ]
  },
  "transition_smoothness": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "For each cue, score how naturally it can transition from the preceding look.",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Abrupt or disruptive",
      "2 — Noticeably awkward",
      "3 — Mostly smooth",
      "4 — Seamless and expressive"
    ]
  },
  "technical_feasibility": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "For each cue, score feasibility given the supplied venue and equipment constraints.",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Not feasible as specified",
      "2 — Major changes required",
      "3 — Feasible with minor adjustments",
      "4 — Clearly achievable with available resources"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0844. Set Change Planner

ID: theater-set-change-planner
Sub-discipline: Stage management
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste scene transitions, set pieces, and crew availability, and Jev scores each transition plan for safety, speed, and crew practicality for weighted ranking.

Why typed decisions: Typed scores let teams compare concrete plans against operational priorities without relying on free-form recommendations.

TAM: Global production management software: ~$3B/year
SAM: Theater stage-management tools: ~$300M/year
SOM: Early theater customers: ~$1M/year

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Set Change Planner" 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 scene transitions, set pieces, and crew availability, and Jev scores each transition plan for safety, speed, and crew practicality for weighted ranking.
Discipline: Theater & Live Performance (Stage management).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: Typed scores let teams compare concrete plans against operational priorities without relying on free-form recommendations.

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": <Scene sequence, set pieces, crew and stage constraints>, "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)
{
  "changeover_safety": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "For each plan, score the safety of the described movement and handling.",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Serious unresolved hazards",
      "2 — Significant risks remain",
      "3 — Generally safe with precautions",
      "4 — Clear, well-controlled movement"
    ]
  },
  "changeover_speed": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "For each plan, score how quickly the change can be completed in the stated conditions.",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Unlikely to meet timing",
      "2 — Tight or inconsistent timing",
      "3 — Likely to meet timing",
      "4 — Fast with comfortable margin"
    ]
  },
  "crew_practicality": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "For each plan, score whether the assigned crew can execute it reliably.",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Roles or sequence are unworkable",
      "2 — Significant coordination burden",
      "3 — Roles and sequence are workable",
      "4 — Clear, robust, low-friction execution"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0845. Monologue Matchboard

ID: theater-monologue-matchboard-1
Sub-discipline: Performer development
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste performer goals and a collection of monologues, and Jev scores each piece for vocal fit, emotional opportunity, and audition suitability for weighted selection.

Why typed decisions: Comparable criteria narrow a repertoire without producing or rewriting performance material.

TAM: Global performer development tools: ~$1B/year
SAM: Theater audition and repertoire tools: ~$120M/year
SOM: Early theater customers: ~$500K/year

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Monologue Matchboard" 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 performer goals and a collection of monologues, and Jev scores each piece for vocal fit, emotional opportunity, and audition suitability for weighted selection.
Discipline: Theater & Live Performance (Performer development).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: Comparable criteria narrow a repertoire without producing or rewriting performance material.

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": <Performer profile, goals, monologue excerpts>, "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)
{
  "vocal_fit": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "For each monologue, score its fit with the performer's stated vocal range and delivery strengths.",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Poor fit",
      "2 — Some mismatch",
      "3 — Good fit",
      "4 — Exceptional fit"
    ]
  },
  "emotional_opportunity": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "For each monologue, score the variety and depth of playable emotional turns.",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Few playable turns",
      "2 — Limited opportunities",
      "3 — Several strong turns",
      "4 — Rich, nuanced opportunities"
    ]
  },
  "audition_suitability": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "For each monologue, score its suitability for the stated audition context and time limit.",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Unsuitable for context",
      "2 — Requires substantial adaptation",
      "3 — Suitable with minor preparation",
      "4 — Ideally suited to context"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0846. Prop Table Sorter

ID: theater-prop-table-sorter
Sub-discipline: Props design
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste a prop list, scene breakdown, and inventory, and Jev scores each sourcing or substitution option for story fit, availability, and handling practicality for weighted ranking.

Why typed decisions: Typed comparisons help prop teams make repeatable choices across many options under real production constraints.

TAM: Global creative production tools: ~$2B/year
SAM: Theater props and inventory tools: ~$160M/year
SOM: Early theater customers: ~$600K/year

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Prop Table Sorter" 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 prop list, scene breakdown, and inventory, and Jev scores each sourcing or substitution option for story fit, availability, and handling practicality for weighted ranking.
Discipline: Theater & Live Performance (Props design).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: Typed comparisons help prop teams make repeatable choices across many options under real production constraints.

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": <Prop needs, scene breakdown, inventory and budget>, "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)
{
  "story_fit": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "For each prop option, score how well it serves the character and story as described.",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Contradicts the intended story",
      "2 — Weak or generic fit",
      "3 — Clear story fit",
      "4 — Deeply specific and expressive fit"
    ]
  },
  "availability": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "For each option, score its likelihood of being obtained by the stated deadline and budget.",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Unavailable or over budget",
      "2 — Significant sourcing risk",
      "3 — Likely obtainable",
      "4 — Already available or readily secured"
    ]
  },
  "handling_practicality": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "For each option, score how practical it is for repeated onstage handling.",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Unsafe or unworkable",
      "2 — Awkward to handle",
      "3 — Practical with minor care",
      "4 — Reliable and easy to use"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0847. Play Submission Triage

ID: theater-play-submission-triage
Sub-discipline: Play development
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste a season brief and submitted play synopses or excerpts, and Jev scores each play for season fit, cast practicality, and programming distinction for weighted review.

Why typed decisions: Ranked scores give artistic teams consistent first-pass comparisons while preserving final reading and selection decisions.

TAM: Global play development platforms: ~$1B/year
SAM: Theater play selection tools: ~$100M/year
SOM: Early theater customers: ~$500K/year

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Play Submission Triage" 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 season brief and submitted play synopses or excerpts, and Jev scores each play for season fit, cast practicality, and programming distinction for weighted review.
Discipline: Theater & Live Performance (Play development).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: Ranked scores give artistic teams consistent first-pass comparisons while preserving final reading and selection decisions.

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": <Season brief, play metadata, synopsis or excerpt>, "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)
{
  "season_fit": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "For each play, score alignment with the season's stated themes and programming aims.",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Little alignment",
      "2 — Partial alignment",
      "3 — Strong alignment",
      "4 — Central to the season's aims"
    ]
  },
  "cast_practicality": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "For each play, score fit with the company's cast size and performer resources.",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Major resource mismatch",
      "2 — Significant casting strain",
      "3 — Manageable with available resources",
      "4 — Excellent company fit"
    ]
  },
  "programming_distinction": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "For each play, score the distinct contribution it makes alongside the proposed season titles.",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Redundant or undifferentiated",
      "2 — Some distinctiveness",
      "3 — Clear contribution",
      "4 — Uniquely strengthens the season"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0848. Blocking Option Evaluator

ID: theater-blocking-option-evaluator
Sub-discipline: Direction
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste a scene, stage dimensions, and alternative blocking plans, and Jev scores each plan for sightlines, dramatic focus, and performer movement for weighted ranking.

Why typed decisions: Comparable scores help directors assess staging alternatives against explicit goals rather than generated blocking instructions.

TAM: Global directing and rehearsal tools: ~$1B/year
SAM: Theater blocking and rehearsal tools: ~$100M/year
SOM: Early theater customers: ~$450K/year

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Blocking Option Evaluator" 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 scene, stage dimensions, and alternative blocking plans, and Jev scores each plan for sightlines, dramatic focus, and performer movement for weighted ranking.
Discipline: Theater & Live Performance (Direction).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: Comparable scores help directors assess staging alternatives against explicit goals rather than generated blocking instructions.

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": <Scene, stage dimensions, audience layout, blocking options>, "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)
{
  "sightline_quality": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "For each plan, score how well important action remains visible from the supplied audience layout.",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Key action often obscured",
      "2 — Several sightline problems",
      "3 — Mostly clear visibility",
      "4 — Clear visibility throughout"
    ]
  },
  "dramatic_focus": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "For each plan, score how effectively it directs attention to the scene's key moments.",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Focus is consistently unclear",
      "2 — Some moments lack focus",
      "3 — Focus is generally effective",
      "4 — Focus is precise and expressive"
    ]
  },
  "movement_feasibility": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "For each plan, score movement feasibility given performer count and stage dimensions.",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Not feasible",
      "2 — Difficult or crowded",
      "3 — Feasible with minor adjustments",
      "4 — Natural, safe, and spacious"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0849. Costume Rack Matcher

ID: theater-costume-rack-matcher
Sub-discipline: Costume design
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste character needs, scene changes, and available garments, and Jev scores each costume option for character fit, continuity, and changeover practicality for weighted selection.

Why typed decisions: Dimensioned ranking surfaces practical tradeoffs without replacing the designer's visual judgment.

TAM: Global costume and wardrobe software: ~$1B/year
SAM: Theater costume workflow tools: ~$120M/year
SOM: Early theater customers: ~$500K/year

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Costume Rack Matcher" 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 character needs, scene changes, and available garments, and Jev scores each costume option for character fit, continuity, and changeover practicality for weighted selection.
Discipline: Theater & Live Performance (Costume design).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: Dimensioned ranking surfaces practical tradeoffs without replacing the designer's visual 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": <Character briefs, scene sequence, garment inventory>, "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)
{
  "character_fit": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "For each option, score how well the costume supports the character brief and production world.",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Conflicts with the brief",
      "2 — Weak or generic fit",
      "3 — Strong fit",
      "4 — Exceptionally specific fit"
    ]
  },
  "continuity_fit": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "For each option, score compatibility with the character's described look across scenes.",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Creates major continuity issues",
      "2 — Requires difficult workarounds",
      "3 — Mostly consistent",
      "4 — Consistent and easy to maintain"
    ]
  },
  "changeover_practicality": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "For each option, score practicality for the stated quick changes and backstage setup.",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Cannot meet change needs",
      "2 — High changeover risk",
      "3 — Workable with preparation",
      "4 — Reliable and fast to change"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0850. Sound Cue Selector

ID: theater-sound-cue-selector
Sub-discipline: Sound design
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste scene notes, candidate sound cues, and playback constraints, and Jev scores each cue for emotional fit, audibility, and transition compatibility for weighted ranking.

Why typed decisions: A consistent scorecard compares cues against the production's intent without generating audio or descriptive copy.

TAM: Global sound design software: ~$1.5B/year
SAM: Theater sound workflow tools: ~$140M/year
SOM: Early theater customers: ~$600K/year

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Sound Cue Selector" 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 scene notes, candidate sound cues, and playback constraints, and Jev scores each cue for emotional fit, audibility, and transition compatibility for weighted ranking.
Discipline: Theater & Live Performance (Sound design).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: A consistent scorecard compares cues against the production's intent without generating audio or descriptive copy.

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": <Scene notes, sound cue candidates, playback setup>, "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)
{
  "emotional_fit": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "For each cue, score how well it supports the scene's intended emotional effect.",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Undermines the intended effect",
      "2 — Weak or uncertain support",
      "3 — Supports the effect",
      "4 — Intensifies it precisely"
    ]
  },
  "audibility": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "For each cue, score expected clarity in the stated venue and mix conditions.",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Likely inaudible or unclear",
      "2 — Significant masking risk",
      "3 — Likely clear",
      "4 — Clear with strong headroom"
    ]
  },
  "transition_compatibility": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "For each cue, score how naturally it enters and exits alongside adjacent stage action.",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Disruptive transition",
      "2 — Noticeable mismatch",
      "3 — Mostly compatible",
      "4 — Seamless and well-timed"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0851. Festival Slot Matcher

ID: theater-festival-slot-matcher
Sub-discipline: Festival programming
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste a festival brief, schedule, and show submissions, and Jev scores each show for theme fit, audience variety, and slot practicality for weighted programming.

Why typed decisions: Comparable scores make a complex slate easier to balance while leaving curation decisions with festival staff.

TAM: Global arts festival management: ~$2B/year
SAM: Performing arts festival programming: ~$220M/year
SOM: Early festival customers: ~$700K/year

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Festival Slot Matcher" 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 festival brief, schedule, and show submissions, and Jev scores each show for theme fit, audience variety, and slot practicality for weighted programming.
Discipline: Theater & Live Performance (Festival programming).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: Comparable scores make a complex slate easier to balance while leaving curation decisions with festival staff.

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": <Festival brief, schedule, show summaries, venue limits>, "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)
{
  "theme_fit": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "For each show, score alignment with the festival's stated curatorial focus.",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — No meaningful alignment",
      "2 — Partial alignment",
      "3 — Strong alignment",
      "4 — Exemplary alignment"
    ]
  },
  "audience_variety": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "For each show, score the distinct audience experience it adds to the proposed slate.",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Duplicates existing experiences",
      "2 — Adds little variety",
      "3 — Adds a useful contrast",
      "4 — Broadens the slate substantially"
    ]
  },
  "slot_practicality": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "For each show, score feasibility for the proposed slot, venue, and technical resources.",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Incompatible",
      "2 — Major constraints",
      "3 — Feasible with adjustments",
      "4 — Excellent operational fit"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0852. Rehearsal Priority Board

ID: theater-rehearsal-priority-board
Sub-discipline: Rehearsal planning
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste rehearsal notes, scene readiness, and remaining call hours, and Jev scores each scene for risk, ensemble dependency, and readiness impact for a weighted rehearsal queue.

Why typed decisions: Typed scores help stage teams allocate scarce rehearsal time consistently instead of relying on an unstructured priority list.

TAM: Global rehearsal and production tools: ~$1.5B/year
SAM: Theater rehearsal planning tools: ~$160M/year
SOM: Early theater customers: ~$650K/year

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Rehearsal Priority Board" 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 rehearsal notes, scene readiness, and remaining call hours, and Jev scores each scene for risk, ensemble dependency, and readiness impact for a weighted rehearsal queue.
Discipline: Theater & Live Performance (Rehearsal planning).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: Typed scores help stage teams allocate scarce rehearsal time consistently instead of relying on an unstructured priority list.

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": <Rehearsal notes, scene readiness, cast availability>, "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)
{
  "readiness_risk": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "For each scene, score the risk that it will not be performance-ready by the stated deadline.",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Low risk",
      "2 — Some unresolved issues",
      "3 — Significant readiness risk",
      "4 — Critical risk requiring attention"
    ]
  },
  "ensemble_dependency": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "For each scene, score how many other scenes or performers depend on resolving its issues.",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Isolated issue",
      "2 — Limited dependencies",
      "3 — Several dependencies",
      "4 — Blocks multiple major elements"
    ]
  },
  "rehearsal_impact": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "For each scene, score the likely improvement from spending the next rehearsal block on it.",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Little benefit now",
      "2 — Modest benefit",
      "3 — Strong benefit",
      "4 — Essential, high-leverage work"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0853. Venue Fit Ledger

ID: theater-venue-fit-ledger
Sub-discipline: Venue selection
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste a production's technical rider and venue profiles, and Jev scores each venue for stage compatibility, technical capacity, and audience access for weighted comparison.

Why typed decisions: Normalized scores make venue tradeoffs comparable even when each space has different strengths and limitations.

TAM: Global venue and event management: ~$3B/year
SAM: Performing arts venue selection tools: ~$250M/year
SOM: Early theater customers: ~$800K/year

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Venue Fit Ledger" 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 production's technical rider and venue profiles, and Jev scores each venue for stage compatibility, technical capacity, and audience access for weighted comparison.
Discipline: Theater & Live Performance (Venue selection).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: Normalized scores make venue tradeoffs comparable even when each space has different strengths and limitations.

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": <Production rider, venue specifications, access details>, "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)
{
  "stage_compatibility": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "For each venue, score fit with the production's stage dimensions and staging needs.",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Incompatible",
      "2 — Major compromises needed",
      "3 — Good fit with adjustments",
      "4 — Excellent fit"
    ]
  },
  "technical_capacity": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "For each venue, score whether its equipment and crew can support the technical rider.",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Cannot support requirements",
      "2 — Significant gaps",
      "3 — Mostly supports requirements",
      "4 — Fully supports requirements"
    ]
  },
  "audience_access": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "For each venue, score fit with the production's stated audience access needs.",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Major access barriers",
      "2 — Several limitations",
      "3 — Most needs supported",
      "4 — Strong, comprehensive access fit"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0854. Understudy Readiness Index

ID: theater-understudy-readiness-index
Sub-discipline: Company management
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste role requirements, understudy rehearsal notes, and schedule constraints, and Jev scores each understudy-role pairing for coverage, preparation, and handoff readiness for weighted review.

Why typed decisions: Consistent scores reveal coverage gaps without turning sensitive performer evaluations into generated judgments.

TAM: Global workforce and scheduling software: ~$5B/year
SAM: Theater company management tools: ~$200M/year
SOM: Early theater customers: ~$700K/year

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Understudy Readiness Index" 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 role requirements, understudy rehearsal notes, and schedule constraints, and Jev scores each understudy-role pairing for coverage, preparation, and handoff readiness for weighted review.
Discipline: Theater & Live Performance (Company management).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: Consistent scores reveal coverage gaps without turning sensitive performer evaluations into generated judgments.

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": <Role requirements, rehearsal records, understudy schedule>, "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)
{
  "role_coverage": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "For each pairing, score evidence that the understudy can cover the role's essential demands.",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Major demands uncovered",
      "2 — Several gaps remain",
      "3 — Most demands covered",
      "4 — Essential demands confidently covered"
    ]
  },
  "preparation_level": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "For each pairing, score readiness based on the supplied rehearsal and preparation records.",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Little preparation evidence",
      "2 — Partial preparation",
      "3 — Substantial preparation",
      "4 — Fully prepared for the stated demands"
    ]
  },
  "handoff_readiness": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "For each pairing, score how smoothly the understudy could integrate with the current company and staging.",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Handoff likely to fail",
      "2 — Significant coordination needed",
      "3 — Manageable handoff",
      "4 — Ready for a smooth handoff"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0855. Poster Concept Sorter

ID: theater-poster-concept-sorter
Sub-discipline: Theater marketing
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste a show's synopsis, audience brief, and candidate poster concepts, and Jev scores each concept for thematic fit, legibility, and audience appeal for weighted selection.

Why typed decisions: Structured scores help creative teams compare visual directions without asking a model to invent campaign copy or artwork.

TAM: Global creative marketing software: ~$5B/year
SAM: Performing arts marketing tools: ~$300M/year
SOM: Early theater customers: ~$900K/year

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Poster Concept Sorter" 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 show's synopsis, audience brief, and candidate poster concepts, and Jev scores each concept for thematic fit, legibility, and audience appeal for weighted selection.
Discipline: Theater & Live Performance (Theater marketing).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: Structured scores help creative teams compare visual directions without asking a model to invent campaign copy or artwork.

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": <Show synopsis, audience brief, poster concept descriptions>, "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)
{
  "thematic_fit": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "For each concept, score how well its described visual idea reflects the show's themes.",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Misrepresents the show",
      "2 — Loose thematic connection",
      "3 — Strong thematic connection",
      "4 — Distinctive and accurate expression"
    ]
  },
  "legibility": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "For each concept, score likely title and key-information legibility at intended display sizes.",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Key information unreadable",
      "2 — Several legibility risks",
      "3 — Mostly legible",
      "4 — Clear at all stated sizes"
    ]
  },
  "audience_appeal": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "For each concept, score its suitability for the stated target audience and venue context.",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Poor audience fit",
      "2 — Limited appeal",
      "3 — Good audience fit",
      "4 — Particularly compelling fit"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0856. Dance Transition Finder

ID: theater-dance-transition-finder
Sub-discipline: Choreography
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste a running order, movement notes, and transition options, and Jev scores each transition for thematic continuity, performer feasibility, and pacing for weighted ranking.

Why typed decisions: Comparable ratings help choreographers assess connective moments without generating choreography or movement instructions.

TAM: Global dance and performance management: ~$1B/year
SAM: Theater choreography workflow tools: ~$80M/year
SOM: Early theater customers: ~$350K/year

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Dance Transition Finder" 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 running order, movement notes, and transition options, and Jev scores each transition for thematic continuity, performer feasibility, and pacing for weighted ranking.
Discipline: Theater & Live Performance (Choreography).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: Comparable ratings help choreographers assess connective moments without generating choreography or movement instructions.

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": <Running order, movement notes, transition options>, "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)
{
  "thematic_continuity": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "For each transition, score continuity with the themes and movement language of adjacent pieces.",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Feels disconnected",
      "2 — Weak connection",
      "3 — Clear connection",
      "4 — Deeply coherent transition"
    ]
  },
  "performer_feasibility": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "For each transition, score feasibility for the stated cast, space, and changeover conditions.",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Not feasible",
      "2 — Significant difficulty",
      "3 — Feasible with preparation",
      "4 — Natural and reliable"
    ]
  },
  "show_pacing": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "For each transition, score its likely contribution to the full performance's pacing.",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Disrupts pacing",
      "2 — Some pacing drag",
      "3 — Supports pacing",
      "4 — Creates an especially effective flow"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0857. Accessibility Cue Planner

ID: theater-accessibility-cue-planner-1
Sub-discipline: Performance access
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste a script, access requirements, and candidate caption or audio-description cue placements, and Jev scores each placement for clarity, timing, and action coverage for weighted review.

Why typed decisions: Typed dimensions make accessibility planning auditable and comparable while keeping access decisions with qualified practitioners.

TAM: Global accessibility technology: ~$2B/year
SAM: Performing arts access tools: ~$120M/year
SOM: Early theater customers: ~$500K/year

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Accessibility Cue Planner" 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 script, access requirements, and candidate caption or audio-description cue placements, and Jev scores each placement for clarity, timing, and action coverage for weighted review.
Discipline: Theater & Live Performance (Performance access).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: Typed dimensions make accessibility planning auditable and comparable while keeping access decisions with qualified practitioners.

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": <Script, access brief, candidate cue placements>, "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)
{
  "meaning_clarity": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "For each placement, score how well it conveys essential meaning to the intended audience.",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Essential meaning omitted or unclear",
      "2 — Important gaps remain",
      "3 — Meaning mostly clear",
      "4 — Essential meaning conveyed precisely"
    ]
  },
  "timing_fit": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "For each placement, score timing compatibility with dialogue, music, and stage action.",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Timing obstructs the performance",
      "2 — Noticeable conflicts",
      "3 — Generally well-timed",
      "4 — Fits naturally without distraction"
    ]
  },
  "action_coverage": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "For each placement, score coverage of significant action or information in the supplied scene.",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Major action unaccounted for",
      "2 — Several notable omissions",
      "3 — Main action covered",
      "4 — Essential action comprehensively covered"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0858. Stage Risk Radar

ID: theater-stage-risk-radar
Sub-discipline: Production safety
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste a scene's movement plan, set hazards, and rehearsal conditions, and Jev scores each staging option for hazard exposure, controllability, and repeatability for weighted review.

Why typed decisions: Comparable safety-oriented scores support structured review and documentation rather than informal, inconsistent impressions.

TAM: Global workplace safety software: ~$15B/year
SAM: Performing arts production safety tools: ~$150M/year
SOM: Early theater customers: ~$500K/year

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Stage Risk Radar" 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 scene's movement plan, set hazards, and rehearsal conditions, and Jev scores each staging option for hazard exposure, controllability, and repeatability for weighted review.
Discipline: Theater & Live Performance (Production safety).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: Comparable safety-oriented scores support structured review and documentation rather than informal, inconsistent impressions.

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": <Movement plans, set details, rehearsal and safety constraints>, "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)
{
  "hazard_exposure": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "For each option, score the level of performer exposure to the described hazards.",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Severe exposure",
      "2 — Elevated exposure",
      "3 — Limited, managed exposure",
      "4 — Minimal exposure"
    ]
  },
  "risk_controllability": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "For each option, score how effectively the supplied controls address identified risks.",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Controls inadequate",
      "2 — Important controls missing",
      "3 — Controls mostly adequate",
      "4 — Clear, effective controls"
    ]
  },
  "repeatability": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "For each option, score whether the action can be performed consistently across rehearsals and shows.",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Highly inconsistent",
      "2 — Requires substantial correction",
      "3 — Generally repeatable",
      "4 — Reliably repeatable"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0859. Scene Partner Pairer

ID: theater-scene-partner-pairer
Sub-discipline: Casting and rehearsal
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste scene excerpts, performer profiles, and rehearsal goals, and Jev scores each performer pairing for chemistry potential, timing compatibility, and interpretive contrast for weighted casting review.

Why typed decisions: Typed comparative scores help teams assess pairing options against specific scene needs without claiming to predict chemistry with certainty.

TAM: Global casting and talent software: ~$2B/year
SAM: Theater casting tools: ~$250M/year
SOM: Early theater customers: ~$1M/year

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Scene Partner Pairer" 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 scene excerpts, performer profiles, and rehearsal goals, and Jev scores each performer pairing for chemistry potential, timing compatibility, and interpretive contrast for weighted casting review.
Discipline: Theater & Live Performance (Casting and rehearsal).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: Typed comparative scores help teams assess pairing options against specific scene needs without claiming to predict chemistry with certainty.

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": <Scene excerpts, performer profiles, pairing goals>, "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)
{
  "chemistry_potential": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "For each pairing, score evidence of responsive, believable interaction for the supplied scene.",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Little evidence of connection",
      "2 — Uneven interaction potential",
      "3 — Strong interaction potential",
      "4 — Rich, responsive potential"
    ]
  },
  "timing_compatibility": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "For each pairing, score compatibility of the performers' demonstrated pace and cue responsiveness.",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Likely timing conflict",
      "2 — Some mismatch",
      "3 — Mostly compatible",
      "4 — Highly complementary timing"
    ]
  },
  "interpretive_contrast": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "For each pairing, score whether differences in approach could illuminate the scene's relationship.",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Contrast works against scene",
      "2 — Limited useful contrast",
      "3 — Productive contrast",
      "4 — Exceptionally revealing contrast"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0860. Scene Order Balancer

ID: theater-scene-order-balancer
Sub-discipline: Playwriting
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Paste a draft's scene summaries and alternative running orders, and Jev scores each order for narrative momentum, emotional variation, and production practicality for weighted comparison.

Why typed decisions: Separate scores make structural tradeoffs legible without generating or rewriting scenes.

TAM: Global script and dramaturgy tools: ~$1.5B/year
SAM: Professional theater script tools: ~$180M/year
SOM: Early theater customers: ~$800K/year

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Scene Order Balancer" 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 draft's scene summaries and alternative running orders, and Jev scores each order for narrative momentum, emotional variation, and production practicality for weighted comparison.
Discipline: Theater & Live Performance (Playwriting).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: Separate scores make structural tradeoffs legible without generating or rewriting scenes.

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": <Scene summaries, candidate orders, production constraints>, "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)
{
  "narrative_momentum": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "For each order, score how effectively events build and sustain narrative momentum.",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Momentum repeatedly stalls",
      "2 — Uneven progression",
      "3 — Strong overall progression",
      "4 — Compelling, sustained escalation"
    ]
  },
  "emotional_variation": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "For each order, score variation and balance in the emotional experience across scenes.",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Monotonous or jarring",
      "2 — Limited variation",
      "3 — Effective variation",
      "4 — Particularly well-shaped emotional arc"
    ]
  },
  "production_practicality": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "For each order, score fit with stated set, cast, and transition constraints.",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Operationally impractical",
      "2 — Significant complications",
      "3 — Workable with adjustments",
      "4 — Smooth operational fit"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0861. Audition Beat Finder

ID: theater-audition-beat-finder
Sub-discipline: Casting and performance
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: A casting director pastes audition sides and a performer’s marked script, and Jev selects the exact candidate line that best matches the requested audition beat or none.

Why typed decisions: Selecting an existing line preserves the playwright’s wording and gives performers a reliable, traceable cue.

TAM: Global casting and rehearsal software: $1B+
SAM: Digital audition and script tools: $100M–$300M
SOM: Early product target: $1M–$5M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Audition Beat Finder" 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
A casting director pastes audition sides and a performer’s marked script, and Jev selects the exact candidate line that best matches the requested audition beat or none.
Discipline: Theater & Live Performance (Casting and performance).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: Selecting an existing line preserves the playwright’s wording and gives performers a reliable, traceable cue.

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": <Audition brief, candidate lines, scene context>, "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)
{
  "best_beat_line": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which candidate line most clearly plays the requested beat?",
    "criteria": {
      "candidate_a": "Directly expresses the requested beat",
      "candidate_b": "Suggests the beat indirectly",
      "candidate_c": "Fits the scene but not the beat",
      "none": "No candidate line fits"
    }
  },
  "beat_is_explicit": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is the requested beat explicit in the selected line?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The line clearly states or performs it",
      "false": "The line only implies it"
    }
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0862. Cue Phrase Locator

ID: theater-cue-phrase-locator
Sub-discipline: Stage management
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: A stage manager pastes a script and a cue description, and Jev selects the exact candidate phrase that should trigger the cue or none.

Why typed decisions: A typed selection ties a cue to verifiable script text instead of risking an invented or misquoted trigger.

TAM: Global live-event production tools: $2B+
SAM: Theater stage-management software: $50M–$150M
SOM: Early product target: $500K–$3M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Cue Phrase Locator" 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
A stage manager pastes a script and a cue description, and Jev selects the exact candidate phrase that should trigger the cue or none.
Discipline: Theater & Live Performance (Stage management).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: A typed selection ties a cue to verifiable script text instead of risking an invented or misquoted trigger.

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": <Cue description, candidate phrases, nearby dialogue>, "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)
{
  "trigger_phrase": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which candidate phrase best marks the requested cue point?",
    "criteria": {
      "candidate_a": "Exact intended trigger",
      "candidate_b": "Strong nearby trigger",
      "candidate_c": "Possible but ambiguous trigger",
      "none": "No suitable trigger"
    }
  },
  "trigger_unambiguous": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Would a stage manager identify this trigger unambiguously in performance?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Distinct and easy to catch",
      "false": "Could be confused or missed"
    }
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0863. Prop Callboard Match

ID: theater-prop-callboard-match
Sub-discipline: Props and stage management
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: A props lead pastes scene text and an inventory list, and Jev selects the existing inventory item that matches each prop reference or none.

Why typed decisions: Selecting from the actual inventory avoids hallucinated props and makes sourcing decisions auditable.

TAM: Global theater production supplies and software: $1B+
SAM: Digital props and inventory workflows: $50M–$150M
SOM: Early product target: $500K–$2M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Prop Callboard Match" 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
A props lead pastes scene text and an inventory list, and Jev selects the existing inventory item that matches each prop reference or none.
Discipline: Theater & Live Performance (Props and stage management).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: Selecting from the actual inventory avoids hallucinated props and makes sourcing decisions auditable.

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": <Scene excerpts, prop inventory, scene numbers>, "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)
{
  "inventory_match": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which listed item matches the prop reference in this scene?",
    "criteria": {
      "candidate_a": "Same prop and compatible details",
      "candidate_b": "Same prop with a detail mismatch",
      "candidate_c": "Related item but not the requested prop",
      "none": "No inventory item matches"
    }
  },
  "onstage_use": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is the matched item required onstage in this scene?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Handled, seen, or used onstage",
      "false": "Mentioned only or not needed onstage"
    }
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0864. Lighting State Scout

ID: theater-lighting-state-scout
Sub-discipline: Lighting design
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: A lighting designer pastes a scene and a list of existing lighting states, and Jev selects the state that best fits the marked dramatic moment or none.

Why typed decisions: Choosing a tested state from the designer’s own palette is safer than generating an unbuildable lighting prescription.

TAM: Global lighting and live-event control: $2B+
SAM: Theater lighting design software: $100M–$300M
SOM: Early product target: $1M–$5M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Lighting State Scout" 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
A lighting designer pastes a scene and a list of existing lighting states, and Jev selects the state that best fits the marked dramatic moment or none.
Discipline: Theater & Live Performance (Lighting design).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: Choosing a tested state from the designer’s own palette is safer than generating an unbuildable lighting prescription.

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": <Scene moment, candidate states, cue 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)
{
  "dramatic_state": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which existing state best fits this moment’s dramatic function?",
    "criteria": {
      "candidate_a": "Strong match to mood and action",
      "candidate_b": "Matches mood but not action",
      "candidate_c": "Technically usable but weakly matched",
      "none": "No state fits"
    }
  },
  "state_transition": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How suitable is the selected state as a transition from the previous cue?",
    "criteria": [
      "Poor: abrupt or contradictory",
      "Fair: workable with noticeable mismatch",
      "Good: coherent transition",
      "Excellent: smooth and dramatically motivated"
    ]
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0865. Blocking Note Retriever

ID: theater-blocking-note-retriever
Sub-discipline: Direction and blocking
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: A director pastes rehearsal notes and a scene, and Jev selects the existing note that applies to each beat or none.

Why typed decisions: Retrieving the director’s exact prior instruction prevents a tool from silently rewriting blocking intent.

TAM: Global rehearsal and production management: $1B+
SAM: Digital directing and blocking tools: $50M–$150M
SOM: Early product target: $500K–$2M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Blocking Note Retriever" 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
A director pastes rehearsal notes and a scene, and Jev selects the existing note that applies to each beat or none.
Discipline: Theater & Live Performance (Direction and blocking).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: Retrieving the director’s exact prior instruction prevents a tool from silently rewriting blocking intent.

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": <Scene beat, candidate rehearsal notes, character names>, "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)
{
  "applicable_note": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which note applies to this beat and character?",
    "criteria": {
      "candidate_a": "Direct match to beat and character",
      "candidate_b": "Match to beat, uncertain character",
      "candidate_c": "Related but applies elsewhere",
      "none": "No note applies"
    }
  },
  "note_still_valid": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the selected note still fit the current scene text?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Consistent with current text and staging",
      "false": "Contradicted or outdated"
    }
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0866. Dramaturgy Evidence Shelf

ID: theater-dramaturgy-evidence-shelf
Sub-discipline: Dramaturgy
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: A dramaturg pastes a research question and source excerpts, and Jev selects the excerpt that directly supports or challenges the question or none.

Why typed decisions: Evidence selection keeps dramaturgical claims anchored to quotations rather than generated summaries.

TAM: Global research and reference tools: $10B+
SAM: Performing-arts dramaturgy research tools: $20M–$80M
SOM: Early product target: $250K–$1M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Dramaturgy Evidence Shelf" 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
A dramaturg pastes a research question and source excerpts, and Jev selects the excerpt that directly supports or challenges the question or none.
Discipline: Theater & Live Performance (Dramaturgy).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: Evidence selection keeps dramaturgical claims anchored to quotations rather than generated summaries.

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": <Research question, candidate excerpts, source labels>, "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)
{
  "supporting_excerpt": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which excerpt most directly addresses the research question?",
    "criteria": {
      "candidate_a": "Directly supports the claim",
      "candidate_b": "Directly challenges the claim",
      "candidate_c": "Provides relevant context only",
      "none": "No excerpt is relevant"
    }
  },
  "quote_direct": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the selected excerpt directly state the relevant fact?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Explicitly stated in the excerpt",
      "false": "Requires inference or outside context"
    }
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0867. Costume Continuity Pin

ID: theater-costume-continuity-pin
Sub-discipline: Costume design
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: A costume designer pastes scene descriptions and a costume plot, and Jev selects the existing costume entry that fits the character and moment or none.

Why typed decisions: Matching approved costume records preserves continuity without inventing garments or changing design choices.

TAM: Global apparel and costume management: $5B+
SAM: Theater costume and wardrobe tools: $50M–$150M
SOM: Early product target: $500K–$2M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Costume Continuity Pin" 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
A costume designer pastes scene descriptions and a costume plot, and Jev selects the existing costume entry that fits the character and moment or none.
Discipline: Theater & Live Performance (Costume design).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: Matching approved costume records preserves continuity without inventing garments or changing design choices.

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": <Character and scene, candidate costume entries, continuity 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)
{
  "costume_entry": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which costume entry matches this character at this moment?",
    "criteria": {
      "candidate_a": "Exact character and scene match",
      "candidate_b": "Character match with scene uncertainty",
      "candidate_c": "Similar costume but wrong continuity",
      "none": "No entry matches"
    }
  },
  "change_required": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the text indicate a costume change at this point?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "A change is explicit or strongly indicated",
      "false": "No change is indicated"
    }
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0868. Scene Shift Mapper

ID: theater-scene-shift-mapper-1
Sub-discipline: Scenic design
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: A scenic designer pastes script transitions and a list of set configurations, and Jev selects the existing configuration that fits each transition or none.

Why typed decisions: Selecting a documented configuration supports feasible planning and avoids made-up scenic elements.

TAM: Global scenic and event production: $2B+
SAM: Theater scenic-planning tools: $50M–$150M
SOM: Early product target: $500K–$2M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Scene Shift Mapper" 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
A scenic designer pastes script transitions and a list of set configurations, and Jev selects the existing configuration that fits each transition or none.
Discipline: Theater & Live Performance (Scenic design).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: Selecting a documented configuration supports feasible planning and avoids made-up scenic elements.

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": <Transition passage, candidate configurations, scene list>, "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)
{
  "set_configuration": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which existing configuration best serves this transition?",
    "criteria": {
      "candidate_a": "Fits location and action",
      "candidate_b": "Fits location but limits action",
      "candidate_c": "Can be adapted with significant change",
      "none": "No configuration fits"
    }
  },
  "transition_onstage": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the text require the transition to happen in view of the audience?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Visible change is stated or clearly implied",
      "false": "No visible change is required"
    }
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0869. Sound Motif Matcher

ID: theater-sound-motif-matcher
Sub-discipline: Sound design
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: A sound designer pastes scene passages and a library of existing sound cues, and Jev selects the cue that best fits the moment or none.

Why typed decisions: Selecting from the actual sound library ensures a cue is available and keeps the design grounded in approved assets.

TAM: Global audio production and sound libraries: $2B+
SAM: Theater sound-design tools: $100M–$300M
SOM: Early product target: $1M–$4M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Sound Motif Matcher" 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
A sound designer pastes scene passages and a library of existing sound cues, and Jev selects the cue that best fits the moment or none.
Discipline: Theater & Live Performance (Sound design).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: Selecting from the actual sound library ensures a cue is available and keeps the design grounded in approved assets.

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": <Scene passage, cue descriptions, cue tags>, "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)
{
  "sound_cue": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which existing cue best fits the dramatic moment?",
    "criteria": {
      "candidate_a": "Direct dramatic and practical match",
      "candidate_b": "Strong mood match, weaker action match",
      "candidate_c": "Related sound but poor fit",
      "none": "No cue fits"
    }
  },
  "sound_source": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the script identify an in-world source for the sound?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "A source is stated or clearly implied",
      "false": "Sound is not tied to an in-world source"
    }
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0870. Line Pickup Ledger

ID: theater-line-pickup-ledger
Sub-discipline: Rehearsal and performance
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: A performer pastes a script and rehearsal annotations, and Jev selects the exact candidate line associated with a pickup or missed cue or none.

Why typed decisions: Exact retrieval helps performers practice the real text and avoids introducing inaccurate line variants.

TAM: Global rehearsal and performance tools: $1B+
SAM: Digital actor rehearsal aids: $50M–$150M
SOM: Early product target: $500K–$2M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Line Pickup Ledger" 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
A performer pastes a script and rehearsal annotations, and Jev selects the exact candidate line associated with a pickup or missed cue or none.
Discipline: Theater & Live Performance (Rehearsal and performance).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: Exact retrieval helps performers practice the real text and avoids introducing inaccurate line variants.

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": <Scene excerpt, candidate lines, rehearsal annotations>, "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)
{
  "pickup_line": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which candidate line is the intended pickup?",
    "criteria": {
      "candidate_a": "Correct preceding cue and response",
      "candidate_b": "Correct response but uncertain cue",
      "candidate_c": "Nearby line, not the pickup",
      "none": "No candidate is the pickup"
    }
  },
  "line_complete": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the selected line contain the full spoken response?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Complete response is present",
      "false": "Response is partial or cut off"
    }
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0871. Role Split Finder

ID: theater-role-split-finder
Sub-discipline: Casting and production
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: A producer pastes a cast list and character entrances, and Jev selects the existing character grouping that best matches the requested doubling opportunity or none.

Why typed decisions: A typed match surfaces practical options from real roles without fabricating characters or casting facts.

TAM: Global casting and production management: $1B+
SAM: Independent theater casting tools: $50M–$150M
SOM: Early product target: $500K–$2M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Role Split Finder" 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
A producer pastes a cast list and character entrances, and Jev selects the existing character grouping that best matches the requested doubling opportunity or none.
Discipline: Theater & Live Performance (Casting and production).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: A typed match surfaces practical options from real roles without fabricating characters or casting facts.

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": <Cast list, entrance excerpts, doubling constraints>, "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)
{
  "doubling_pair": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which candidate role pair is most compatible for doubling?",
    "criteria": {
      "candidate_a": "No overlapping stage time and workable changes",
      "candidate_b": "No overlap but difficult changes",
      "candidate_c": "Potential overlap or major conflict",
      "none": "No pair is suitable"
    }
  },
  "stage_overlap": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Are both roles required onstage at the same time?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Text indicates simultaneous presence",
      "false": "No simultaneous presence is indicated"
    }
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0872. Rights Clause Finder

ID: theater-rights-clause-finder
Sub-discipline: Theater administration
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: A producer pastes a licensing agreement and a production question, and Jev selects the exact candidate clause that addresses it or none.

Why typed decisions: Selecting source language supports careful review while avoiding generated legal wording that could be mistaken for contract text.

TAM: Global contract and rights-management software: $10B+
SAM: Performing-arts licensing workflow tools: $30M–$100M
SOM: Early product target: $250K–$1M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Rights Clause Finder" 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
A producer pastes a licensing agreement and a production question, and Jev selects the exact candidate clause that addresses it or none.
Discipline: Theater & Live Performance (Theater administration).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: Selecting source language supports careful review while avoiding generated legal wording that could be mistaken for contract text.

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": <Production question, candidate clauses, agreement sections>, "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)
{
  "relevant_clause": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which clause most directly addresses the question?",
    "criteria": {
      "candidate_a": "Directly governs the issue",
      "candidate_b": "Relevant but conditional",
      "candidate_c": "Mentions the topic without governing it",
      "none": "No clause addresses it"
    }
  },
  "restriction_explicit": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is the relevant restriction explicit in the selected clause?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Restriction is directly stated",
      "false": "Restriction would require interpretation"
    }
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0873. Understudy Entry Match

ID: theater-understudy-entry-match
Sub-discipline: Company management
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: A company manager pastes a performance report and understudy roster, and Jev selects the roster entry matching the reported role and performance or none.

Why typed decisions: Choosing a recorded roster entry preserves accurate company records instead of guessing who covered a role.

TAM: Global workforce and event operations software: $5B+
SAM: Theater company-management tools: $30M–$100M
SOM: Early product target: $250K–$1M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Understudy Entry Match" 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
A company manager pastes a performance report and understudy roster, and Jev selects the roster entry matching the reported role and performance or none.
Discipline: Theater & Live Performance (Company management).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: Choosing a recorded roster entry preserves accurate company records instead of guessing who covered a role.

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": <Performance report, candidate roster entries, role list>, "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)
{
  "cover_entry": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which roster entry matches the reported cover?",
    "criteria": {
      "candidate_a": "Exact performer and role match",
      "candidate_b": "Role match with performer uncertainty",
      "candidate_c": "Performer listed but role mismatch",
      "none": "No roster entry matches"
    }
  },
  "cover_confirmed": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the report explicitly confirm the performer went on?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Performance is confirmed",
      "false": "Only a planned or possible cover is mentioned"
    }
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0874. Dance Cue Anchor

ID: theater-dance-cue-anchor
Sub-discipline: Choreography
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: A choreographer pastes scene text and rehearsal cue notes, and Jev selects the exact spoken or scripted moment that anchors an existing movement sequence or none.

Why typed decisions: Anchoring choreography to actual text makes rehearsal timing repeatable and avoids invented dialogue cues.

TAM: Global dance and performance tools: $2B+
SAM: Theater choreography and rehearsal tools: $30M–$100M
SOM: Early product target: $250K–$1M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Dance Cue Anchor" 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
A choreographer pastes scene text and rehearsal cue notes, and Jev selects the exact spoken or scripted moment that anchors an existing movement sequence or none.
Discipline: Theater & Live Performance (Choreography).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: Anchoring choreography to actual text makes rehearsal timing repeatable and avoids invented dialogue cues.

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": <Movement note, candidate text spans, sequence labels>, "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)
{
  "movement_anchor": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which candidate moment best anchors this movement sequence?",
    "criteria": {
      "candidate_a": "Clear, repeatable cue for the sequence",
      "candidate_b": "Usable cue with timing ambiguity",
      "candidate_c": "Related moment but weak timing link",
      "none": "No candidate anchors it"
    }
  },
  "repeatable_cue": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Can this cue be identified consistently across performances?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Stable textual or action cue",
      "false": "Timing depends on an inconsistent event"
    }
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0875. Program Credit Resolver

ID: theater-program-credit-resolver
Sub-discipline: Production and marketing
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: A producer pastes contributor records and draft program text, and Jev selects the existing credit entry that matches each mention or none.

Why typed decisions: Selecting from approved records reduces credit errors and never invents names, titles, or affiliations.

TAM: Global event and marketing management: $5B+
SAM: Performing-arts program and credit tools: $20M–$80M
SOM: Early product target: $200K–$800K

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Program Credit Resolver" 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
A producer pastes contributor records and draft program text, and Jev selects the existing credit entry that matches each mention or none.
Discipline: Theater & Live Performance (Production and marketing).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: Selecting from approved records reduces credit errors and never invents names, titles, or affiliations.

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": <Program mentions, contributor records, approved credit formats>, "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)
{
  "credit_record": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which approved record matches this program mention?",
    "criteria": {
      "candidate_a": "Name and role both match",
      "candidate_b": "Name matches, role needs review",
      "candidate_c": "Similar name but identity uncertain",
      "none": "No approved record matches"
    }
  },
  "credit_complete": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the selected record include the required credit details?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "All requested details are present",
      "false": "One or more details are missing"
    }
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0876. Safety Note Matcher

ID: theater-safety-note-matcher
Sub-discipline: Production safety
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: A production manager pastes a rehearsal or scene note and approved safety procedures, and Jev selects the procedure that applies or none.

Why typed decisions: A typed match points teams to approved language rather than generating unreviewed safety instructions.

TAM: Global workplace safety software: $5B+
SAM: Live-performance safety tools: $20M–$80M
SOM: Early product target: $200K–$800K

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Safety Note Matcher" 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
A production manager pastes a rehearsal or scene note and approved safety procedures, and Jev selects the procedure that applies or none.
Discipline: Theater & Live Performance (Production safety).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: A typed match points teams to approved language rather than generating unreviewed safety instructions.

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": <Incident or action note, approved procedure excerpts>, "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)
{
  "safety_procedure": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which approved procedure applies to this situation?",
    "criteria": {
      "candidate_a": "Directly covers the hazard or action",
      "candidate_b": "Related procedure with a possible gap",
      "candidate_c": "General guidance but not specific",
      "none": "No procedure matches"
    }
  },
  "procedure_mandatory": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the selected procedure explicitly require this action?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Requirement is clearly stated",
      "false": "Requirement is not explicit"
    }
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0877. Translation Line Pairer

ID: theater-translation-line-pairer
Sub-discipline: Multilingual performance
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: A dramaturg pastes an approved source script and translated draft, and Jev selects the candidate translated line that best corresponds to each source line or none.

Why typed decisions: Selection preserves the translator’s actual wording and flags uncertain matches instead of creating replacement dialogue.

TAM: Global translation and localization services: $50B+
SAM: Performing-arts translation workflow tools: $20M–$80M
SOM: Early product target: $200K–$800K

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Translation Line Pairer" 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
A dramaturg pastes an approved source script and translated draft, and Jev selects the candidate translated line that best corresponds to each source line or none.
Discipline: Theater & Live Performance (Multilingual performance).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: Selection preserves the translator’s actual wording and flags uncertain matches instead of creating replacement dialogue.

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": <Source line, candidate translated lines, scene context>, "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)
{
  "translation_match": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which candidate line corresponds most closely to the source line?",
    "criteria": {
      "candidate_a": "Meaning and speaker intent align",
      "candidate_b": "Core meaning aligns with nuance shift",
      "candidate_c": "Shared topic but meaning differs",
      "none": "No candidate corresponds"
    }
  },
  "stage_speakable": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How readily can the selected line be spoken in performance?",
    "criteria": [
      "Poor: difficult to speak or time",
      "Fair: speakable with notable strain",
      "Good: clear and workable aloud",
      "Excellent: natural and performance-ready"
    ]
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0878. Audience Response Sorter

ID: theater-audience-response-sorter-1
Sub-discipline: Audience research
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: A theater marketer pastes audience comments and a set of feedback themes, and Jev selects the theme that best fits each comment or none.

Why typed decisions: A closed-set classification makes feedback measurable without rewriting audience members’ own words.

TAM: Global customer feedback analytics: $10B+
SAM: Performing-arts audience insight tools: $20M–$80M
SOM: Early product target: $200K–$800K

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Audience Response Sorter" 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
A theater marketer pastes audience comments and a set of feedback themes, and Jev selects the theme that best fits each comment or none.
Discipline: Theater & Live Performance (Audience research).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: A closed-set classification makes feedback measurable without rewriting audience members’ own words.

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": <Audience comment, candidate feedback themes, show identifier>, "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)
{
  "feedback_theme": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which existing theme best classifies this comment?",
    "criteria": {
      "candidate_a": "Primary meaning is a clear match",
      "candidate_b": "One meaningful aspect matches",
      "candidate_c": "Theme is only loosely related",
      "none": "No theme fits"
    }
  },
  "actionable_feedback": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the comment contain a specific production-related observation?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Names a concrete experience or issue",
      "false": "General reaction without a specific observation"
    }
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0879. Rehearsal Prop Handoff

ID: theater-rehearsal-prop-handoff
Sub-discipline: Stage management
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: A stage manager pastes a scene’s action and a prop handoff list, and Jev selects the existing handoff entry that matches the text or none.

Why typed decisions: Matching recorded handoffs to script action creates dependable tracking without inferring nonexistent transfers.

TAM: Global live-event operations software: $2B+
SAM: Theater prop and stage-management tools: $30M–$100M
SOM: Early product target: $250K–$1M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Rehearsal Prop Handoff" 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
A stage manager pastes a scene’s action and a prop handoff list, and Jev selects the existing handoff entry that matches the text or none.
Discipline: Theater & Live Performance (Stage management).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: Matching recorded handoffs to script action creates dependable tracking without inferring nonexistent transfers.

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": <Action excerpt, candidate handoffs, prop identifiers>, "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)
{
  "handoff_entry": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which recorded handoff matches this action?",
    "criteria": {
      "candidate_a": "Prop, giver, and receiver match",
      "candidate_b": "Prop and one participant match",
      "candidate_c": "Prop matches but action differs",
      "none": "No handoff matches"
    }
  },
  "handoff_onstage": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the text show the handoff occurring onstage?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Transfer is visibly performed",
      "false": "Transfer occurs offstage or is only implied"
    }
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0880. Playwright Draft Diff

ID: theater-playwright-draft-diff
Sub-discipline: Playwriting and editing
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: A playwright pastes two draft passages and a list of extracted line pairs, and Jev selects the pair that represents the meaningful revision or none.

Why typed decisions: Selecting actual draft lines makes revision review precise and preserves authorship rather than proposing replacement prose.

TAM: Global writing and publishing software: $10B+
SAM: Playwriting collaboration tools: $30M–$100M
SOM: Early product target: $250K–$1M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Playwright Draft Diff" 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
A playwright pastes two draft passages and a list of extracted line pairs, and Jev selects the pair that represents the meaningful revision or none.
Discipline: Theater & Live Performance (Playwriting and editing).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: Selecting actual draft lines makes revision review precise and preserves authorship rather than proposing replacement prose.

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": <Revision question, candidate old-new line pairs, draft labels>, "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)
{
  "revision_pair": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which candidate pair best represents the requested revision?",
    "criteria": {
      "candidate_a": "Directly reflects the targeted change",
      "candidate_b": "Related change with a different emphasis",
      "candidate_c": "Minor wording change only",
      "none": "No candidate reflects the revision"
    }
  },
  "meaning_changed": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the selected revision change the line’s meaning or dramatic intent?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Meaning or intent materially shifts",
      "false": "Meaning and intent remain substantially the same"
    }
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0881. Audition Evidence Desk

ID: theater-audition-evidence-desk
Sub-discipline: Casting
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: A casting director pastes role requirements and audition packets, and Jev checks evidence for each requirement, classifies fit, and scores confidence for human review when confidence is low or mid.

Why typed decisions: Typed, evidence-linked fit decisions let casting teams review uncertain matches without treating generated prose as an audition verdict.

TAM: $2B global casting services
SAM: $300M performing-arts casting
SOM: $3M reachable theater teams

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Audition Evidence Desk" 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
A casting director pastes role requirements and audition packets, and Jev checks evidence for each requirement, classifies fit, and scores confidence for human review when confidence is low or mid.
Discipline: Theater & Live Performance (Casting).
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 fit decisions let casting teams review uncertain matches without treating generated prose as an audition verdict.

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": <Role criteria and audition excerpts>, "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)
{
  "requirement_supported": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the packet provide evidence for each stated role requirement?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Every requirement has relevant evidence in the packet",
      "false": "One or more requirements lack relevant evidence"
    }
  },
  "fit_category": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which evidence-backed fit category best applies?",
    "criteria": {
      "strong": "Evidence supports most essential requirements",
      "partial": "Evidence supports some but not all essentials",
      "unclear": "Packet is insufficient to determine fit"
    }
  },
  "evidence_strength": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How strong is the evidence for the fit decision?",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Little or no relevant evidence",
      "2: Some evidence, with major gaps",
      "3: Strong evidence with minor gaps",
      "4: Direct, consistent evidence"
    ]
  }
}

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

---

## 0882. Cue Sheet Sentinel

ID: theater-cue-sheet-sentinel
Sub-discipline: Stage management
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: A stage manager pastes a cue sheet and rehearsal notes, and Jev verifies each cue trigger against its cited note, labels the mismatch type, and routes uncertain checks to human review.

Why typed decisions: Typed verification flags missing or conflicting triggers directly, which is safer than a generated summary of a live cue sequence.

TAM: $5B live-event production software
SAM: $400M theater stage-management tools
SOM: $4M reachable venues

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Cue Sheet Sentinel" 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
A stage manager pastes a cue sheet and rehearsal notes, and Jev verifies each cue trigger against its cited note, labels the mismatch type, and routes uncertain checks to human review.
Discipline: Theater & Live Performance (Stage management).
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 verification flags missing or conflicting triggers directly, which is safer than a generated summary of a live cue sequence.

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": <Cue rows and rehearsal-note excerpts>, "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)
{
  "trigger_supported": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is each cue trigger supported by the cited rehearsal note?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The note clearly supports the cue trigger",
      "false": "The note is missing, ambiguous, or conflicts"
    }
  },
  "mismatch_type": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "What best describes the evidence issue?",
    "criteria": {
      "none": "No evidence issue found",
      "missing": "Trigger lacks cited support",
      "conflict": "Note contradicts the trigger",
      "ambiguous": "Evidence permits multiple readings"
    }
  },
  "sequence_risk": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How consequential is the unresolved cue issue?",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Cosmetic discrepancy",
      "2: Minor timing or continuity risk",
      "3: Significant performance disruption risk",
      "4: Safety-critical or show-stopping risk"
    ]
  }
}

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

---

## 0883. Prop Continuity Check

ID: theater-prop-continuity-check
Sub-discipline: Props
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: A props lead pastes scene breakdowns and continuity notes, and Jev checks each prop-state claim against the notes, classifies discrepancies, and escalates uncertain states for review.

Why typed decisions: A typed state check exposes specific continuity gaps without asking staff to trust a prose recap.

TAM: $1.5B theater props and operations
SAM: $180M professional theater props teams
SOM: $2M reachable companies

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Prop Continuity Check" 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
A props lead pastes scene breakdowns and continuity notes, and Jev checks each prop-state claim against the notes, classifies discrepancies, and escalates uncertain states for review.
Discipline: Theater & Live Performance (Props).
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: A typed state check exposes specific continuity gaps without asking staff to trust a prose recap.

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": <Scene prop lists and continuity excerpts>, "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)
{
  "prop_state_verified": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is the stated prop state supported for this scene by the notes?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Notes support the stated presence, condition, and placement",
      "false": "At least one state detail is unsupported or contradicted"
    }
  },
  "discrepancy_kind": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which discrepancy best matches the evidence?",
    "criteria": {
      "none": "No discrepancy detected",
      "presence": "Prop presence or absence differs",
      "condition": "Prop condition differs",
      "placement": "Prop location or handoff differs"
    }
  },
  "continuity_impact": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How much could the discrepancy affect the production?",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Negligible continuity effect",
      "2: Minor visible inconsistency",
      "3: Disrupts a beat or handoff",
      "4: Blocks a scene or creates a safety concern"
    ]
  }
}

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

---

## 0884. Lighting Plot Auditor

ID: theater-lighting-plot-auditor
Sub-discipline: Lighting design
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: A lighting designer pastes a cue plot and script annotations, and Jev verifies each cue's stated dramatic trigger against the annotations, categorizes evidence gaps, and escalates uncertain findings.

Why typed decisions: Typed checks make unsupported cue-to-script links reviewable without generating interpretive lighting notes.

TAM: $3B theatrical lighting systems and services
SAM: $350M theater lighting design workflows
SOM: $3M reachable lighting teams

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Lighting Plot Auditor" 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
A lighting designer pastes a cue plot and script annotations, and Jev verifies each cue's stated dramatic trigger against the annotations, categorizes evidence gaps, and escalates uncertain findings.
Discipline: Theater & Live Performance (Lighting design).
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 checks make unsupported cue-to-script links reviewable without generating interpretive lighting notes.

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": <Cue plot rows and script annotations>, "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)
{
  "dramatic_trigger_verified": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the cited annotation support the cue's stated dramatic trigger?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The annotation supports the stated trigger",
      "false": "Support is absent, ambiguous, or contradictory"
    }
  },
  "evidence_issue": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "What is the primary evidence issue?",
    "criteria": {
      "supported": "No issue found",
      "uncited": "No relevant annotation cited",
      "ambiguous": "Annotation has multiple plausible meanings",
      "contradictory": "Annotation conflicts with the trigger"
    }
  },
  "review_priority": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How urgently should a designer review this cue?",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Low priority",
      "2: Review during normal cue check",
      "3: Resolve before technical rehearsal",
      "4: Resolve before the next performance"
    ]
  }
}

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

---

## 0885. Script Rights Radar

ID: theater-script-rights-radar
Sub-discipline: Play licensing
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: A producer pastes a script excerpt and license terms, and Jev checks each proposed use against the supplied terms, classifies the use, and sends uncertain interpretations to human review.

Why typed decisions: Typed permission and uncertainty decisions are safer than generated legal-sounding explanations of license scope.

TAM: $2B global performing-rights licensing
SAM: $250M small-venue and theater licensing
SOM: $2M reachable producing organizations

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Script Rights Radar" 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
A producer pastes a script excerpt and license terms, and Jev checks each proposed use against the supplied terms, classifies the use, and sends uncertain interpretations to human review.
Discipline: Theater & Live Performance (Play licensing).
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 permission and uncertainty decisions are safer than generated legal-sounding explanations of license scope.

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": <Proposed use and supplied license clauses>, "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)
{
  "use_permitted": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Do the supplied terms clearly permit this proposed use?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Terms explicitly cover the proposed use",
      "false": "Terms exclude it or do not establish permission"
    }
  },
  "use_category": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which category best describes the proposed use?",
    "criteria": {
      "performance": "Live public performance",
      "adaptation": "Alteration, translation, or adaptation",
      "recording": "Recording or streaming",
      "promotion": "Excerpt use in promotional material"
    }
  },
  "terms_clarity": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How clearly do the supplied terms address this use?",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Silent or conflicting terms",
      "2: Indirect or ambiguous coverage",
      "3: Mostly clear with a limited ambiguity",
      "4: Explicit and directly applicable terms"
    ]
  }
}

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

---

## 0886. Blocking Continuity Map

ID: theater-blocking-continuity-map
Sub-discipline: Direction
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: A director pastes blocking notes and scene revisions, and Jev verifies each claimed movement change against the revision evidence, labels the change type, and escalates uncertain continuity issues.

Why typed decisions: Typed comparisons pinpoint which blocking claims lack support without inventing staging instructions.

TAM: $4B theater production services
SAM: $300M director and stage-management workflows
SOM: $3M reachable companies

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Blocking Continuity Map" 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
A director pastes blocking notes and scene revisions, and Jev verifies each claimed movement change against the revision evidence, labels the change type, and escalates uncertain continuity issues.
Discipline: Theater & Live Performance (Direction).
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 comparisons pinpoint which blocking claims lack support without inventing staging instructions.

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": <Blocking notes and revision excerpts>, "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)
{
  "movement_change_supported": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the revision evidence support the claimed movement change?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Evidence directly supports the claimed change",
      "false": "Evidence is absent, ambiguous, or contradictory"
    }
  },
  "change_type": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "What kind of blocking change is evidenced?",
    "criteria": {
      "entrance_exit": "Entrance or exit changed",
      "position": "Stage position changed",
      "interaction": "Actor-to-actor interaction changed",
      "none_unclear": "No change or insufficient evidence"
    }
  },
  "continuity_severity": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How consequential is the unresolved movement discrepancy?",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Minor notation issue",
      "2: Small staging inconsistency",
      "3: Affects a transition or scene beat",
      "4: Creates a collision or safety risk"
    ]
  }
}

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

---

## 0887. Wardrobe Change Ledger

ID: theater-wardrobe-change-ledger
Sub-discipline: Costume design
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: A costume supervisor pastes costume plots and scene notes, and Jev checks each garment and change claim against the notes, identifies discrepancy types, and queues uncertain claims for review.

Why typed decisions: Typed evidence checks help prevent missed changes while leaving aesthetic judgments with the costume team.

TAM: $2B costume and wardrobe operations
SAM: $220M performing-arts wardrobe teams
SOM: $2M reachable theaters

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Wardrobe Change Ledger" 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
A costume supervisor pastes costume plots and scene notes, and Jev checks each garment and change claim against the notes, identifies discrepancy types, and queues uncertain claims for review.
Discipline: Theater & Live Performance (Costume design).
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 checks help prevent missed changes while leaving aesthetic judgments with the costume team.

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": <Costume plot fields and scene-note excerpts>, "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)
{
  "costume_claim_verified": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is the garment or change claim supported by the scene notes?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Notes support the garment and change details",
      "false": "A detail is unsupported or contradicted"
    }
  },
  "wardrobe_issue": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which issue best describes the evidence?",
    "criteria": {
      "none": "Claim is supported",
      "garment": "Garment identity differs",
      "timing": "Change timing differs",
      "handoff": "Change handoff or responsible person is unclear"
    }
  },
  "change_risk": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How disruptive could an unresolved wardrobe issue be?",
    "criteria": [
      "1: No practical impact",
      "2: Minor appearance continuity issue",
      "3: Risks a missed or delayed change",
      "4: Threatens performer safety or scene execution"
    ]
  }
}

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

---

## 0888. Set Load Review

ID: theater-set-load-review
Sub-discipline: Scenic design
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: A scenic designer pastes set specifications and venue limits, and Jev checks each stated load or dimension against the supplied evidence, classifies the discrepancy, and escalates uncertain checks.

Why typed decisions: Typed comparisons surface unsupported constraints for expert review rather than offering unreliable generated engineering advice.

TAM: $6B scenic construction and theater operations
SAM: $450M venue-specific scenic planning
SOM: $3M reachable production teams

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Set Load Review" 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
A scenic designer pastes set specifications and venue limits, and Jev checks each stated load or dimension against the supplied evidence, classifies the discrepancy, and escalates uncertain checks.
Discipline: Theater & Live Performance (Scenic design).
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 comparisons surface unsupported constraints for expert review rather than offering unreliable generated engineering advice.

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": <Set specifications and venue-limit fields>, "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)
{
  "constraint_supported": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the supplied venue evidence support this set constraint?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "A matching limit is explicitly provided",
      "false": "The limit is absent, conflicting, or not comparable"
    }
  },
  "constraint_issue": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "What best describes the comparison?",
    "criteria": {
      "within": "Stated value is within the supplied limit",
      "exceeds": "Stated value exceeds the limit",
      "incompatible": "Units or definitions cannot be compared",
      "missing": "Required venue limit is not supplied"
    }
  },
  "review_level": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How urgently does this constraint need expert review?",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Administrative clarification",
      "2: Check before design sign-off",
      "3: Resolve before build",
      "4: Potential structural or life-safety concern"
    ]
  }
}

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

---

## 0889. Caption Fidelity Queue

ID: theater-caption-fidelity-queue
Sub-discipline: Accessibility
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: An accessibility coordinator pastes approved script lines and draft captions, and Jev checks each caption against its source line, classifies the mismatch, and escalates uncertain matches for human correction.

Why typed decisions: Typed alignment decisions catch omissions and altered meaning without generating replacement captions.

TAM: $1.2B live accessibility services
SAM: $160M theater captioning workflows
SOM: $1.5M reachable venues

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Caption Fidelity Queue" 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
An accessibility coordinator pastes approved script lines and draft captions, and Jev checks each caption against its source line, classifies the mismatch, and escalates uncertain matches for human correction.
Discipline: Theater & Live Performance (Accessibility).
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 alignment decisions catch omissions and altered meaning without generating replacement captions.

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": <Approved lines and corresponding draft captions>, "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)
{
  "caption_faithful": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the caption preserve the meaning of its approved source line?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Meaning is preserved without material omission",
      "false": "Meaning is changed, omitted, or unsupported"
    }
  },
  "caption_issue": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "What is the principal mismatch?",
    "criteria": {
      "none": "Meaning is faithful",
      "omission": "Material content is missing",
      "addition": "Unsupported content is added",
      "attribution": "Speaker or sound attribution is wrong"
    }
  },
  "audience_impact": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How much could the mismatch affect audience access?",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Minor punctuation or formatting issue",
      "2: Small meaning or timing loss",
      "3: Important story information is affected",
      "4: Critical meaning or speaker identification is lost"
    ]
  }
}

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

---

## 0890. Rehearsal Note Sorter

ID: theater-rehearsal-note-sorter
Sub-discipline: Rehearsal management
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: A stage manager pastes rehearsal notes with their cited moments, and Jev verifies each note's evidence, assigns an action category, and sends ambiguous items to human review.

Why typed decisions: Typed categories turn messy notes into accountable work items without generating interpretations or actions.

TAM: $3B rehearsal and production software
SAM: $250M rehearsal-management tools
SOM: $2M reachable companies

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Rehearsal Note Sorter" 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
A stage manager pastes rehearsal notes with their cited moments, and Jev verifies each note's evidence, assigns an action category, and sends ambiguous items to human review.
Discipline: Theater & Live Performance (Rehearsal management).
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 categories turn messy notes into accountable work items without generating interpretations or actions.

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": <Rehearsal notes and cited scene moments>, "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)
{
  "note_evidence_present": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the cited moment support the note's factual claim?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The cited moment supports the claim",
      "false": "The citation is missing or does not support it"
    }
  },
  "action_category": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which workflow category best fits the supported note?",
    "criteria": {
      "blocking": "Actor movement or staging",
      "technical": "Lighting, sound, or scenic cue",
      "text": "Script or line issue",
      "follow_up": "Needs clarification or owner assignment"
    }
  },
  "action_urgency": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How soon should the team address this item?",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Optional follow-up",
      "2: Resolve before next relevant rehearsal",
      "3: Resolve before technical rehearsal",
      "4: Resolve before performance"
    ]
  }
}

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

---

## 0891. Dance Spacing Verifier

ID: theater-dance-spacing-verifier
Sub-discipline: Choreography
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: A choreographer pastes spacing plans and rehearsal observations, and Jev checks each stated spacing condition against the observations, categorizes the issue, and escalates uncertain or risky findings.

Why typed decisions: Typed evidence and risk decisions flag review needs without attempting to choreograph movement.

TAM: $2B dance and live-performance production
SAM: $180M choreography rehearsal workflows
SOM: $1.5M reachable dance companies

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Dance Spacing Verifier" 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
A choreographer pastes spacing plans and rehearsal observations, and Jev checks each stated spacing condition against the observations, categorizes the issue, and escalates uncertain or risky findings.
Discipline: Theater & Live Performance (Choreography).
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 and risk decisions flag review needs without attempting to choreograph movement.

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": <Spacing plan fields and rehearsal observations>, "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)
{
  "spacing_claim_verified": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Do observations support the stated spacing condition?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Observations confirm the stated spacing",
      "false": "Observations are missing, unclear, or conflict"
    }
  },
  "spacing_issue": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which condition best describes the evidence?",
    "criteria": {
      "clear": "Spacing condition is supported",
      "crowding": "Evidence indicates insufficient clearance",
      "alignment": "Evidence indicates formation mismatch",
      "unknown": "Evidence is insufficient to classify"
    }
  },
  "movement_risk": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "What is the severity of the unresolved spacing concern?",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Negligible effect",
      "2: Minor visual inconsistency",
      "3: Could disrupt movement or timing",
      "4: Possible collision or injury risk"
    ]
  }
}

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

---

## 0892. Sound Cue Evidence

ID: theater-sound-cue-evidence
Sub-discipline: Sound design
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: A sound designer pastes a cue list and script references, and Jev verifies each cue's claimed trigger against its cited reference, tags evidence problems, and escalates uncertain cues.

Why typed decisions: Typed trigger validation makes unsupported cues visible without generating sound design choices.

TAM: $4B professional audio production
SAM: $300M theater sound-design workflows
SOM: $2.5M reachable sound teams

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Sound Cue Evidence" 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
A sound designer pastes a cue list and script references, and Jev verifies each cue's claimed trigger against its cited reference, tags evidence problems, and escalates uncertain cues.
Discipline: Theater & Live Performance (Sound design).
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 trigger validation makes unsupported cues visible without generating sound design choices.

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": <Sound cue rows and script references>, "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)
{
  "cue_trigger_supported": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the reference support the cue's stated trigger?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The reference directly supports the trigger",
      "false": "The reference is absent, unclear, or contradictory"
    }
  },
  "trigger_issue": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which evidence condition applies?",
    "criteria": {
      "supported": "Trigger is supported",
      "missing": "No usable reference provided",
      "ambiguous": "More than one trigger is plausible",
      "conflict": "Reference contradicts the trigger"
    }
  },
  "cue_consequence": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How serious is a potential trigger error?",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Minor texture inconsistency",
      "2: Noticeable but recoverable timing issue",
      "3: Obscures a story beat or transition",
      "4: Creates a safety or show-stop concern"
    ]
  }
}

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

---

## 0893. Translation Stage Check

ID: theater-translation-stage-check
Sub-discipline: Dramaturgy
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: A dramaturg pastes source and translated script passages with approved glossaries, and Jev verifies key term choices against the glossary, classifies discrepancies, and routes uncertain meanings to bilingual review.

Why typed decisions: Typed term-level checks reliably locate review candidates without pretending to replace a translator's judgment.

TAM: $1.5B translation and localization services
SAM: $120M performing-arts translation workflows
SOM: $1M reachable multilingual theaters

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Translation Stage Check" 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
A dramaturg pastes source and translated script passages with approved glossaries, and Jev verifies key term choices against the glossary, classifies discrepancies, and routes uncertain meanings to bilingual review.
Discipline: Theater & Live Performance (Dramaturgy).
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 term-level checks reliably locate review candidates without pretending to replace a translator's 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": <Source passages, translations, and glossary entries>, "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)
{
  "term_matches_glossary": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the translated key term match the approved glossary meaning in context?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Usage matches the approved meaning",
      "false": "Usage conflicts, is unsupported, or cannot be established"
    }
  },
  "translation_issue": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "What kind of term issue is present?",
    "criteria": {
      "none": "Term use is supported",
      "inconsistent": "Glossary term is applied inconsistently",
      "meaning_shift": "Context suggests a meaning shift",
      "missing_entry": "Glossary lacks the relevant term"
    }
  },
  "review_need": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How important is bilingual review for this passage?",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Minor stylistic check",
      "2: Review if time permits",
      "3: Review before rehearsal",
      "4: Review before public performance"
    ]
  }
}

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

---

## 0894. Safety Plan Crosscheck

ID: theater-safety-plan-crosscheck
Sub-discipline: Production safety
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: A production manager pastes a venue safety plan and planned stage actions, and Jev checks each action against cited controls, classifies the gap, and sends uncertain or high-risk items to a human safety lead.

Why typed decisions: Typed evidence flags missing controls without giving automated clearance for hazardous activity.

TAM: $8B workplace safety software
SAM: $500M live-event safety planning
SOM: $3M reachable performing-arts venues

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Safety Plan Crosscheck" 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
A production manager pastes a venue safety plan and planned stage actions, and Jev checks each action against cited controls, classifies the gap, and sends uncertain or high-risk items to a human safety lead.
Discipline: Theater & Live Performance (Production safety).
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 flags missing controls without giving automated clearance for hazardous activity.

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": <Planned actions and cited safety-plan controls>, "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)
{
  "control_covers_action": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the cited control explicitly address the planned action?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "A relevant control is clearly stated",
      "false": "Control is absent, ambiguous, or in conflict"
    }
  },
  "safety_gap": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "What is the best evidence-based status?",
    "criteria": {
      "covered": "Relevant control is documented",
      "missing": "No relevant control is documented",
      "conflict": "Plan contains conflicting controls",
      "unclear": "Action or control is insufficiently specified"
    }
  },
  "hazard_severity": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "What is the potential severity if the gap is real?",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Minimal operational concern",
      "2: Minor injury or delay potential",
      "3: Significant injury potential",
      "4: Severe injury or life-safety potential"
    ]
  }
}

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

---

## 0895. Royalty Credit Checker

ID: theater-royalty-credit-checker
Sub-discipline: Playwriting
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: A producer pastes program credits, contributor agreements, and script metadata, and Jev checks each credit claim against its evidence, categorizes discrepancies, and escalates uncertain attribution.

Why typed decisions: Typed claim checks make attribution gaps actionable while avoiding generated legal or editorial judgments.

TAM: $2B creative rights administration
SAM: $180M theater credit and royalty workflows
SOM: $1.5M reachable producers

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Royalty Credit Checker" 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
A producer pastes program credits, contributor agreements, and script metadata, and Jev checks each credit claim against its evidence, categorizes discrepancies, and escalates uncertain attribution.
Discipline: Theater & Live Performance (Playwriting).
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 claim checks make attribution gaps actionable while avoiding generated legal or editorial judgments.

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": <Credit fields and agreement excerpts>, "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)
{
  "credit_supported": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the supplied evidence support this contributor credit?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Agreement or metadata supports the credit",
      "false": "Evidence is absent, inconsistent, or contradictory"
    }
  },
  "credit_issue": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "What best describes the credit record?",
    "criteria": {
      "supported": "Credit is supported",
      "missing": "Required contributor is not evidenced",
      "role_mismatch": "Credited role differs from evidence",
      "conflict": "Sources disagree about attribution"
    }
  },
  "correction_priority": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How urgently should this credit be reviewed?",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Internal metadata cleanup",
      "2: Confirm before program proof",
      "3: Resolve before publication",
      "4: Resolve before contractual or royalty processing"
    ]
  }
}

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

---

## 0896. Scene Transition Audit

ID: theater-scene-transition-audit
Sub-discipline: Technical direction
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: A technical director pastes scene-transition plans and equipment limits, and Jev checks each transition claim against the supplied limits, classifies the issue, and escalates uncertain or risky moves.

Why typed decisions: Typed comparisons expose unsupported transition assumptions without generating mechanical instructions.

TAM: $5B live-event stage production
SAM: $350M theater transition-planning tools
SOM: $2M reachable technical teams

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Scene Transition Audit" 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
A technical director pastes scene-transition plans and equipment limits, and Jev checks each transition claim against the supplied limits, classifies the issue, and escalates uncertain or risky moves.
Discipline: Theater & Live Performance (Technical direction).
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 comparisons expose unsupported transition assumptions without generating mechanical instructions.

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": <Transition steps and equipment-limit fields>, "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)
{
  "transition_within_limits": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the documented move fit the supplied equipment limits?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The stated move fits the documented limits",
      "false": "Limits are missing, exceeded, or unclear"
    }
  },
  "transition_issue": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "What issue best describes the evidence?",
    "criteria": {
      "within": "Move is supported within limits",
      "over": "A stated limit is exceeded",
      "unknown": "Required limit or move detail is missing",
      "conflict": "Plan and equipment records disagree"
    }
  },
  "transition_risk": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How serious could an unresolved issue be?",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Minor timing concern",
      "2: Likely transition delay",
      "3: Could damage equipment or disrupt performance",
      "4: Could cause injury or an unsafe move"
    ]
  }
}

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

---

## 0897. Program Fact Ledger

ID: theater-program-fact-ledger
Sub-discipline: Marketing and communications
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: A theater marketer pastes program copy and approved production records, and Jev verifies each factual claim against its cited record, labels claim types, and escalates unsupported or uncertain facts.

Why typed decisions: Typed claim-level verification reduces public errors without generating replacement marketing copy.

TAM: $2B theater marketing software and services
SAM: $200M performing-arts content operations
SOM: $2M reachable theaters

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Program Fact Ledger" 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
A theater marketer pastes program copy and approved production records, and Jev verifies each factual claim against its cited record, labels claim types, and escalates unsupported or uncertain facts.
Discipline: Theater & Live Performance (Marketing and communications).
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 claim-level verification reduces public errors without generating replacement marketing copy.

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": <Program claims and approved production records>, "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)
{
  "program_claim_supported": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the cited record support this program claim?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Record directly supports the claim",
      "false": "Record is missing, ambiguous, or contradictory"
    }
  },
  "claim_type": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "What kind of claim is being checked?",
    "criteria": {
      "personnel": "Cast or creative-team detail",
      "schedule": "Date, time, or run information",
      "production": "Venue, format, or production detail",
      "award": "Award, review, or historical claim"
    }
  },
  "publication_risk": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How consequential would publishing this claim incorrectly be?",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Minor copy correction",
      "2: Audience confusion likely",
      "3: Reputational or accessibility impact",
      "4: Contractual, financial, or major public impact"
    ]
  }
}

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

---

## 0898. Festival Submission Triage

ID: theater-festival-submission-triage
Sub-discipline: Festival programming
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: A festival programmer pastes submission forms and eligibility rules, and Jev verifies each eligibility claim against the submitted evidence, assigns a fit category, and escalates uncertain cases.

Why typed decisions: Typed eligibility checks provide consistent screening while reserving borderline decisions for programmers.

TAM: $3B festivals and performing-arts events
SAM: $250M festival submission platforms
SOM: $2M reachable theater festivals

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Festival Submission Triage" 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
A festival programmer pastes submission forms and eligibility rules, and Jev verifies each eligibility claim against the submitted evidence, assigns a fit category, and escalates uncertain cases.
Discipline: Theater & Live Performance (Festival programming).
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 eligibility checks provide consistent screening while reserving borderline decisions for programmers.

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": <Submission fields and festival eligibility rules>, "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)
{
  "eligibility_evidenced": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the submission provide evidence for each claimed eligibility requirement?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Evidence supports every applicable requirement",
      "false": "A requirement is unsupported, missing, or contradicted"
    }
  },
  "eligibility_status": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "What evidence-based screening status applies?",
    "criteria": {
      "eligible": "All checked requirements are supported",
      "ineligible": "Evidence conflicts with a stated requirement",
      "borderline": "Evidence is incomplete or ambiguous"
    }
  },
  "program_fit": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How strongly does the submission match the stated program criteria?",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Little evidence of a match",
      "2: Partial match with major gaps",
      "3: Good match with some uncertainty",
      "4: Strong match across stated criteria"
    ]
  }
}

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

---

## 0899. Instrument Change Watch

ID: theater-instrument-change-watch
Sub-discipline: Music direction
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: A music director pastes score annotations and rehearsal reports, and Jev checks each claimed cut or change against the evidence, classifies the change, and routes uncertain edits for review.

Why typed decisions: Typed comparisons help teams catch score-version drift without producing musical arrangements.

TAM: $3B music production and performance software
SAM: $180M theater music-direction workflows
SOM: $1.5M reachable musical productions

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Instrument Change Watch" 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
A music director pastes score annotations and rehearsal reports, and Jev checks each claimed cut or change against the evidence, classifies the change, and routes uncertain edits for review.
Discipline: Theater & Live Performance (Music direction).
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 comparisons help teams catch score-version drift without producing musical arrangements.

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": <Score change fields and rehearsal reports>, "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)
{
  "score_change_supported": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the supplied evidence support the claimed score change?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The annotation or report confirms the change",
      "false": "Evidence is absent, unclear, or contradictory"
    }
  },
  "change_kind": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which change category best applies?",
    "criteria": {
      "cut": "Material removed",
      "transpose": "Pitch or key changed",
      "timing": "Tempo or duration changed",
      "none_unclear": "No supported change or evidence unclear"
    }
  },
  "ensemble_impact": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How much could an unresolved change affect the ensemble?",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Negligible effect",
      "2: Minor rehearsal adjustment",
      "3: Likely performance inconsistency",
      "4: Prevents reliable execution"
    ]
  }
}

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

---

## 0900. Green Room Access Check

ID: theater-green-room-access-check
Sub-discipline: Performer services
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: A company manager pastes performer access requests and venue accommodation records, and Jev checks each logistical claim against documented venue evidence, categorizes the gap, and escalates uncertain needs to staff.

Why typed decisions: Typed evidence checks help coordinate accommodations without making assumptions about performers or their needs.

TAM: $1.5B event accessibility operations
SAM: $130M performing-arts access coordination
SOM: $1M reachable companies

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Green Room Access Check" 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
A company manager pastes performer access requests and venue accommodation records, and Jev checks each logistical claim against documented venue evidence, categorizes the gap, and escalates uncertain needs to staff.
Discipline: Theater & Live Performance (Performer services).
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 checks help coordinate accommodations without making assumptions about performers or their needs.

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": <Access requests and venue accommodation records>, "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)
{
  "access_provision_confirmed": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the venue record confirm the requested provision?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "A matching provision is documented",
      "false": "Provision is missing, ambiguous, or contradicted"
    }
  },
  "access_gap": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "What best describes the documented status?",
    "criteria": {
      "confirmed": "Provision is confirmed",
      "unconfirmed": "No confirmation is recorded",
      "partial": "Only some requested elements are covered",
      "conflict": "Records disagree about availability"
    }
  },
  "resolution_urgency": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How urgently should staff resolve the access question?",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Can be handled in routine planning",
      "2: Confirm before arrival",
      "3: Resolve before rehearsal",
      "4: Resolve before performer can safely participate"
    ]
  }
}

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

---

# Discipline: Fashion & Textile Design

Audience: fashion designers, textile artists, costume designers, stylists
Market anchor: the fashion design software market (~$1.2B) within a $2.5T global fashion industry

## 0901. Fabric Match Desk

ID: fashion-fabric-match-desk
Sub-discipline: Material sourcing
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: Designers paste a garment brief and fabric swatch notes, and Jev routes the request to a material family while assessing suitability and match strength.

Why typed decisions: Typed material categories and suitability scores make sourcing decisions filterable and consistent across a team.

TAM: Global textiles: ~$1.8T
SAM: Apparel material sourcing: ~$250B
SOM: Initial design teams: ~$5M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Fabric Match Desk" 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
Designers paste a garment brief and fabric swatch notes, and Jev routes the request to a material family while assessing suitability and match strength.
Discipline: Fashion & Textile Design (Material sourcing).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: Typed material categories and suitability scores make sourcing decisions filterable and consistent across a team.

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": <Garment brief, swatch descriptions, budget, and use case>, "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)
{
  "material_route": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which material family best fits the brief?",
    "criteria": {
      "natural_fiber": "Cotton, linen, wool, silk, or other plant or animal fibers",
      "regenerated_fiber": "Viscose, lyocell, modal, or other regenerated cellulose",
      "synthetic_fiber": "Polyester, nylon, acrylic, or elastane-led materials",
      "coated_composite": "Laminated, coated, bonded, or composite materials"
    }
  },
  "use_case_fit": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "For the routed family, is the material suitable for the stated garment use and care needs?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "It meets the stated wear, construction, and care requirements",
      "false": "It conflicts with at least one stated requirement"
    }
  },
  "brief_match": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How closely does the routed family match the design brief?",
    "criteria": [
      "Weak: major requirements are unmet",
      "Fair: some needs fit, with clear tradeoffs",
      "Strong: most needs fit well",
      "Excellent: all key needs align"
    ]
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0902. Pattern Risk Sorter

ID: fashion-pattern-risk-sorter
Sub-discipline: Pattern engineering
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: Patternmakers paste pattern-piece notes and garment specifications, and Jev routes each piece to a construction risk while checking whether it needs review and scoring severity.

Why typed decisions: A fixed risk label plus severity level supports dependable work queues better than a paragraph of advice.

TAM: Global apparel design software: ~$10B
SAM: Pattern and fit tools: ~$2B
SOM: Independent studios: ~$4M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Pattern Risk Sorter" 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
Patternmakers paste pattern-piece notes and garment specifications, and Jev routes each piece to a construction risk while checking whether it needs review and scoring severity.
Discipline: Fashion & Textile Design (Pattern engineering).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: A fixed risk label plus severity level supports dependable work queues better than a paragraph of advice.

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": <Piece notes, fabric behavior, garment type, and tolerance limits>, "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)
{
  "risk_route": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which construction risk best describes this pattern piece?",
    "criteria": {
      "fit_balance": "Proportion, ease, balance, or movement concerns",
      "seam_join": "Seam alignment, junction, or assembly concerns",
      "fabric_behavior": "Stretch, drape, thickness, or distortion concerns",
      "closure_detail": "Fastening, opening, or edge-finish concerns"
    }
  },
  "review_needed": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "For the routed risk, does this piece need a human pattern review before cutting?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Unresolved risk could affect fit, assembly, or wear",
      "false": "The notes indicate an adequately controlled risk"
    }
  },
  "risk_severity": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How severe is the routed construction risk?",
    "criteria": [
      "Low: minor adjustment or routine check",
      "Moderate: likely revision or extra fitting",
      "High: substantial rework risk",
      "Critical: likely to block production"
    ]
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0903. Drape Study Sorter

ID: fashion-drape-study-sorter
Sub-discipline: Draping and silhouette
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: Designers paste drape observations and silhouette goals, and Jev routes each study to a shape behavior while judging goal alignment and confidence of the match.

Why typed decisions: Named silhouette behaviors and a graded alignment level let teams compare studies without relying on generated interpretation.

TAM: Global apparel design tools: ~$10B
SAM: Draping and prototyping tools: ~$1B
SOM: Design studios: ~$3M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Drape Study Sorter" 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
Designers paste drape observations and silhouette goals, and Jev routes each study to a shape behavior while judging goal alignment and confidence of the match.
Discipline: Fashion & Textile Design (Draping and silhouette).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: Named silhouette behaviors and a graded alignment level let teams compare studies without relying on generated interpretation.

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": <Drape notes, mannequin or body context, and silhouette goal>, "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)
{
  "shape_route": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which shape behavior best describes the drape study?",
    "criteria": {
      "sculpted": "Holds a defined, structured contour",
      "fluid": "Falls in soft, continuous folds",
      "voluminous": "Creates fullness, gathers, or expanded volume",
      "asymmetric": "Creates directional or intentionally uneven form"
    }
  },
  "goal_alignment": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "For the routed behavior, does the observed drape support the intended silhouette?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Observed form supports the stated silhouette goal",
      "false": "Observed form conflicts with or obscures the goal"
    }
  },
  "shape_strength": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How clearly does the routed behavior appear in the study?",
    "criteria": [
      "Subtle: behavior is barely distinguishable",
      "Emerging: visible but inconsistent",
      "Clear: recognizable across the study",
      "Dominant: strongly defines the silhouette"
    ]
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0904. Print Placement Gate

ID: fashion-print-placement-gate
Sub-discipline: Surface pattern design
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: Textile artists paste print concepts, repeat specifications, and placement notes, and Jev routes each design to a repeat type while checking placement readiness and scoring repeat coherence.

Why typed decisions: A stable repeat category and readiness decision are easier to apply in production than free-form critique.

TAM: Global textile printing: ~$180B
SAM: Digital textile design tools: ~$3B
SOM: Print studios: ~$4M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Print Placement 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
Textile artists paste print concepts, repeat specifications, and placement notes, and Jev routes each design to a repeat type while checking placement readiness and scoring repeat coherence.
Discipline: Fashion & Textile Design (Surface pattern design).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: A stable repeat category and readiness decision are easier to apply in production than free-form critique.

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": <Print concept, repeat dimensions, placement notes, and garment panel>, "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)
{
  "repeat_route": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which repeat structure best matches the submitted design?",
    "criteria": {
      "straight": "Motifs align in a regular grid",
      "half_drop": "Alternate rows shift by half a repeat",
      "mirror": "Motifs reflect across an axis",
      "engineered": "Artwork is positioned for specific garment areas"
    }
  },
  "placement_ready": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "For the routed repeat type, is the design ready to place on the stated panels?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Scale, direction, and placement constraints are specified",
      "false": "A key placement or repeat constraint is unresolved"
    }
  },
  "repeat_coherence": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How well does the repeat structure support the design?",
    "criteria": [
      "Weak: visible breaks or awkward joins",
      "Fair: workable with noticeable compromises",
      "Strong: repeat reads consistently",
      "Excellent: repeat and placement feel fully resolved"
    ]
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0905. Costume Continuity Desk

ID: fashion-costume-continuity-desk
Sub-discipline: Costume design
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: Costume teams paste scene breakdowns and costume notes, and Jev routes each entry to a continuity change while flagging tracking needs and scoring change impact.

Why typed decisions: Typed continuity events and impact levels create actionable, sortable records for busy wardrobe teams.

TAM: Global film and TV production: ~$300B
SAM: Costume and wardrobe departments: ~$8B
SOM: Production teams: ~$3M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Costume Continuity Desk" 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
Costume teams paste scene breakdowns and costume notes, and Jev routes each entry to a continuity change while flagging tracking needs and scoring change impact.
Discipline: Fashion & Textile Design (Costume design).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: Typed continuity events and impact levels create actionable, sortable records for busy wardrobe teams.

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": <Scene notes, character, look number, and costume changes>, "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)
{
  "continuity_route": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which continuity event best describes the costume note?",
    "criteria": {
      "look_change": "A new or replaced costume look",
      "condition_change": "Wear, damage, dirt, or wetness changes",
      "accessory_change": "Accessory, footwear, or jewelry change",
      "no_change": "No visible costume continuity change"
    }
  },
  "tracking_required": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "For the routed event, does the note require explicit continuity tracking?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The event could affect another scene, take, or setup",
      "false": "The event is isolated or has no visible continuity consequence"
    }
  },
  "impact_level": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How much could the event affect continuity or the shoot?",
    "criteria": [
      "Low: negligible visual or schedule effect",
      "Moderate: needs a quick check between setups",
      "High: affects multiple scenes or resets",
      "Critical: threatens a planned shot or continuity match"
    ]
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0906. Wardrobe Pull Router

ID: fashion-wardrobe-pull-router
Sub-discipline: Styling and wardrobe
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: Stylists paste a client brief and wardrobe inventory notes, and Jev routes each item to a styling role while checking suitability and scoring brief alignment.

Why typed decisions: A discrete role and fit score make wardrobe pulls easy to shortlist and hand off consistently.

TAM: Global fashion retail: ~$1.7T
SAM: Styling services and tools: ~$15B
SOM: Independent stylists: ~$4M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Wardrobe Pull Router" 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
Stylists paste a client brief and wardrobe inventory notes, and Jev routes each item to a styling role while checking suitability and scoring brief alignment.
Discipline: Fashion & Textile Design (Styling and wardrobe).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: A discrete role and fit score make wardrobe pulls easy to shortlist and hand off consistently.

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": <Client brief, event context, inventory descriptions, and constraints>, "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)
{
  "styling_role": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "What role should this item play in the requested look?",
    "criteria": {
      "anchor": "Defines the main silhouette or visual direction",
      "layer": "Adds depth, warmth, or structure over another item",
      "accent": "Provides a focused color, texture, or detail",
      "practical": "Primarily serves comfort, weather, or movement needs"
    }
  },
  "client_suitable": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "For the routed role, is the item suitable for the client and event constraints?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "It fits the stated comfort, occasion, and preference needs",
      "false": "It conflicts with a stated constraint or preference"
    }
  },
  "brief_alignment": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How closely does the item support the styling brief?",
    "criteria": [
      "Low: little connection to the requested look",
      "Moderate: usable with significant styling support",
      "High: strong fit with minor tradeoffs",
      "Very high: directly fulfills the brief"
    ]
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0907. Colorway Review Router

ID: fashion-colorway-review-router
Sub-discipline: Color design
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: Color designers paste palette proposals and product context, and Jev routes each palette to a color strategy while checking accessibility needs and scoring coherence.

Why typed decisions: Fixed strategy labels and graded coherence help teams compare palettes objectively and preserve review decisions.

TAM: Global color cosmetics and fashion design: ~$30B
SAM: Digital color workflow tools: ~$2B
SOM: Design teams: ~$3M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Colorway Review Router" 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
Color designers paste palette proposals and product context, and Jev routes each palette to a color strategy while checking accessibility needs and scoring coherence.
Discipline: Fashion & Textile Design (Color design).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: Fixed strategy labels and graded coherence help teams compare palettes objectively and preserve review decisions.

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": <Palette values, product category, audience, and usage context>, "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)
{
  "color_strategy": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which color strategy best describes the palette?",
    "criteria": {
      "monochrome": "Variations of one hue",
      "analogous": "Neighboring hues create a related palette",
      "complementary": "Opposing hues create deliberate contrast",
      "neutral_accent": "Mostly neutrals with a focused accent"
    }
  },
  "contrast_adequate": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "For the routed strategy, is contrast adequate for the stated use and accessibility needs?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Contrast meets the stated legibility and use needs",
      "false": "Contrast may impair legibility or fails a stated requirement"
    }
  },
  "palette_coherence": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How coherent is the palette for the product and audience?",
    "criteria": [
      "Weak: hues feel disconnected or unsuitable",
      "Fair: partly coherent with notable tension",
      "Strong: consistent and appropriate",
      "Excellent: distinctive, cohesive, and purpose-fit"
    ]
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0908. Fiber Care Triage

ID: fashion-fiber-care-triage
Sub-discipline: Textile care and conservation
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: Textile conservators paste fiber descriptions and care instructions, and Jev routes each sample to a care class while flagging handling risk and scoring care confidence.

Why typed decisions: Conservators need consistent, cautious labels and risk levels rather than speculative prose.

TAM: Global textile care services: ~$20B
SAM: Conservation and specialist care: ~$3B
SOM: Museums and studios: ~$2M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Fiber Care Triage" 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
Textile conservators paste fiber descriptions and care instructions, and Jev routes each sample to a care class while flagging handling risk and scoring care confidence.
Discipline: Fashion & Textile Design (Textile care and conservation).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: Conservators need consistent, cautious labels and risk levels rather than speculative prose.

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": <Fiber description, finish, age, condition, and proposed care method>, "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)
{
  "care_route": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which care class best fits the described textile?",
    "criteria": {
      "gentle_wet": "Low-agitation wet cleaning may be appropriate",
      "solvent": "Solvent-based specialist cleaning is indicated",
      "surface_only": "Localized surface cleaning or vacuuming is preferred",
      "refer_specialist": "Available details are insufficient for routine treatment"
    }
  },
  "handling_risk": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "For the routed care class, is there a meaningful risk of damage from the proposed handling?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The description indicates vulnerability or uncertainty",
      "false": "No meaningful handling risk is indicated"
    }
  },
  "care_confidence": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How confident is the care-class match from the supplied details?",
    "criteria": [
      "Low: critical fiber or condition details are missing",
      "Moderate: tentative match with unresolved factors",
      "High: details support the selected class",
      "Very high: material and condition are well documented"
    ]
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0909. Sustainable Swap Finder

ID: fashion-sustainable-swap-finder
Sub-discipline: Circular fashion
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: Designers paste a material specification and sustainability target, and Jev routes the material to a substitution pathway while checking functional viability and scoring target fit.

Why typed decisions: Discrete substitution pathways and feasibility scores make alternatives comparable without overstating sustainability claims.

TAM: Global sustainable apparel: ~$300B
SAM: Material substitution tools: ~$5B
SOM: Emerging brands: ~$3M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Sustainable Swap Finder" 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
Designers paste a material specification and sustainability target, and Jev routes the material to a substitution pathway while checking functional viability and scoring target fit.
Discipline: Fashion & Textile Design (Circular fashion).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: Discrete substitution pathways and feasibility scores make alternatives comparable without overstating sustainability claims.

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": <Current material, target outcome, performance needs, and sourcing limits>, "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)
{
  "swap_route": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which substitution pathway is most relevant to the target?",
    "criteria": {
      "recycled_feedstock": "Replace virgin input with recycled content",
      "lower_impact_fiber": "Shift to a fiber with a lower stated impact profile",
      "mono_material": "Reduce fiber blends to aid recycling",
      "reuse_deadstock": "Use recovered surplus or deadstock material"
    }
  },
  "function_viable": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "For the routed pathway, can the alternative plausibly meet the stated performance needs?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The pathway appears compatible with key use requirements",
      "false": "A stated performance need is likely to be compromised"
    }
  },
  "target_fit": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How well does the pathway support the stated sustainability target?",
    "criteria": [
      "Low: little connection to the target",
      "Moderate: partial contribution with tradeoffs",
      "High: strong contribution if verified",
      "Very high: directly addresses the target with clear evidence"
    ]
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0910. Garment Repair Router

ID: fashion-garment-repair-router
Sub-discipline: Repair and upcycling
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: Repairers paste garment condition notes and desired outcome, and Jev routes each item to a repair method while checking whether repair is practical and scoring intervention complexity.

Why typed decisions: A repair-method category and complexity score support faster triage and clearer estimates.

TAM: Global clothing repair and resale: ~$100B
SAM: Repair services and platforms: ~$10B
SOM: Local repair networks: ~$2M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Garment Repair Router" 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
Repairers paste garment condition notes and desired outcome, and Jev routes each item to a repair method while checking whether repair is practical and scoring intervention complexity.
Discipline: Fashion & Textile Design (Repair and upcycling).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: A repair-method category and complexity score support faster triage and clearer estimates.

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": <Garment condition, fabric, damage location, and desired finish>, "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)
{
  "repair_route": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which repair method best fits the described garment issue?",
    "criteria": {
      "mending": "Reinforce or close a tear, hole, or worn area",
      "patching": "Cover or stabilize damage with an added piece",
      "alteration": "Change fit, length, or construction",
      "upcycle": "Transform the garment into a new use or design"
    }
  },
  "repair_practical": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "For the routed method, is repair practical given the condition and desired finish?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The garment can likely meet the stated outcome",
      "false": "Damage, construction, or constraints make the outcome impractical"
    }
  },
  "intervention_level": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How complex is the likely intervention?",
    "criteria": [
      "Simple: basic tools and a quick fix",
      "Moderate: skilled work or fitting is needed",
      "Complex: substantial reconstruction is likely",
      "Extensive: outcome is uncertain or near-rebuild"
    ]
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0911. Runway Look Sorter

ID: fashion-runway-look-sorter
Sub-discipline: Fashion show production
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: Show teams paste look descriptions and lineup requirements, and Jev routes each look to a runway role while checking lineup fit and scoring visual distinction.

Why typed decisions: Typed lineup roles and distinction scores help producers organize looks without subjective generated summaries.

TAM: Global fashion events: ~$15B
SAM: Runway production services: ~$3B
SOM: Show producers: ~$2M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Runway Look Sorter" 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
Show teams paste look descriptions and lineup requirements, and Jev routes each look to a runway role while checking lineup fit and scoring visual distinction.
Discipline: Fashion & Textile Design (Fashion show production).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: Typed lineup roles and distinction scores help producers organize looks without subjective generated summaries.

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": <Look notes, show theme, sequence constraints, and model assignments>, "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)
{
  "runway_role": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which role should this look play in the show sequence?",
    "criteria": {
      "opener": "Establishes the collection's visual language",
      "transition": "Connects contrasting sections or moods",
      "statement": "Creates a memorable focal moment",
      "closer": "Provides a strong final impression"
    }
  },
  "lineup_fit": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "For the routed role, does the look fit the sequence constraints?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "It supports the planned pacing and collection arc",
      "false": "It conflicts with sequence, cast, or production constraints"
    }
  },
  "visual_distinction": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How distinct is the look within the proposed lineup?",
    "criteria": [
      "Low: repeats several nearby looks",
      "Moderate: has one differentiating feature",
      "High: reads as a clear variation",
      "Very high: creates a standout moment"
    ]
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0912. Textile Defect Desk

ID: fashion-textile-defect-desk
Sub-discipline: Fabric quality control
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: Quality teams paste inspection notes and roll details, and Jev routes each observation to a defect class while checking release impact and scoring severity.

Why typed decisions: Consistent defect labels and severity levels enable reliable escalation and roll-level reporting.

TAM: Global textile manufacturing: ~$1.8T
SAM: Fabric inspection technology: ~$4B
SOM: Mills and converters: ~$5M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Textile Defect Desk" 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
Quality teams paste inspection notes and roll details, and Jev routes each observation to a defect class while checking release impact and scoring severity.
Discipline: Fashion & Textile Design (Fabric quality control).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: Consistent defect labels and severity levels enable reliable escalation and roll-level reporting.

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": <Inspection notes, fabric type, roll location, and tolerance policy>, "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_route": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which defect class best matches the observation?",
    "criteria": {
      "surface": "Stain, slub, hole, shade mark, or visible surface flaw",
      "structure": "Weave, knit, density, or yarn construction flaw",
      "color": "Shade variation, color cast, or dye inconsistency",
      "dimensional": "Width, skew, shrinkage, or measurement variation"
    }
  },
  "release_block": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "For the routed defect, should this roll be held from release pending review?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The defect may exceed tolerance or affect intended use",
      "false": "The defect appears within stated tolerance"
    }
  },
  "defect_severity": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How severe is the defect relative to the stated policy?",
    "criteria": [
      "Minor: cosmetic and within tolerance",
      "Moderate: visible but potentially usable",
      "Major: likely to affect quality or cutting",
      "Severe: likely to require rejection or rework"
    ]
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0913. Accessory Design Router

ID: fashion-accessory-design-router
Sub-discipline: Fashion accessories
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: Accessory designers paste concept specs and use-case notes, and Jev routes the design to a product type while checking functional suitability and scoring concept clarity.

Why typed decisions: A product-type decision paired with suitability and clarity levels helps triage concepts consistently.

TAM: Global fashion accessories: ~$500B
SAM: Accessory design and sourcing: ~$20B
SOM: Independent labels: ~$3M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Accessory Design Router" 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
Accessory designers paste concept specs and use-case notes, and Jev routes the design to a product type while checking functional suitability and scoring concept clarity.
Discipline: Fashion & Textile Design (Fashion accessories).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: A product-type decision paired with suitability and clarity levels helps triage concepts consistently.

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": <Concept notes, wearer, materials, and intended use>, "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)
{
  "accessory_route": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which accessory category best fits the concept?",
    "criteria": {
      "carry": "Bag, pouch, wallet, or carrying accessory",
      "wearable": "Jewelry, belt, scarf, or worn adornment",
      "headwear": "Hat, hood, or hair accessory",
      "footwear": "Shoe, boot, sandal, or shoe component"
    }
  },
  "use_suitable": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "For the routed category, is the concept suitable for its stated use?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Form and materials appear compatible with the use",
      "false": "A functional or comfort requirement appears unmet"
    }
  },
  "concept_clarity": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How clearly do the notes define the accessory concept?",
    "criteria": [
      "Low: product purpose is unclear",
      "Moderate: category is clear but details are sparse",
      "High: form and use are well specified",
      "Very high: concept, materials, and function align"
    ]
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0914. Knit Structure Selector

ID: fashion-knit-structure-selector
Sub-discipline: Knitwear design
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: Knitwear designers paste swatch notes and garment requirements, and Jev routes each sample to a knit structure while checking performance fit and scoring design alignment.

Why typed decisions: Structure labels and graded fit provide actionable decisions for swatch libraries and sampling workflows.

TAM: Global knitwear market: ~$70B
SAM: Knit design and sampling: ~$6B
SOM: Knit studios: ~$3M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Knit Structure Selector" 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
Knitwear designers paste swatch notes and garment requirements, and Jev routes each sample to a knit structure while checking performance fit and scoring design alignment.
Discipline: Fashion & Textile Design (Knitwear design).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: Structure labels and graded fit provide actionable decisions for swatch libraries and sampling workflows.

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": <Swatch notes, yarn details, gauge, and garment requirements>, "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)
{
  "knit_route": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which knit structure best describes the sample?",
    "criteria": {
      "jersey": "Single-knit, lightweight, or curled-edge structure",
      "rib": "Ribbed structure with stretch and recovery",
      "interlock": "Double-knit, stable, and relatively smooth structure",
      "cable_or_texture": "Raised, patterned, or textured structure"
    }
  },
  "performance_fit": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "For the routed structure, does it suit the stated garment performance needs?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Stretch, stability, and weight appear suitable",
      "false": "A stated wear or construction need is mismatched"
    }
  },
  "design_alignment": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How well does the structure support the design intent?",
    "criteria": [
      "Low: structure undermines the intended form",
      "Moderate: usable with notable adjustments",
      "High: supports most design goals",
      "Very high: strongly expresses the intended design"
    ]
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0915. Denim Wash Router

ID: fashion-denim-wash-router
Sub-discipline: Denim development
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: Denim teams paste wash recipes and target appearance notes, and Jev routes each sample to a wash effect while checking target match and scoring process risk.

Why typed decisions: Categorical wash outcomes and risk grades are easier to compare across sample rounds than generated recommendations.

TAM: Global denim apparel: ~$90B
SAM: Denim development services: ~$8B
SOM: Denim brands: ~$3M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Denim Wash Router" 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
Denim teams paste wash recipes and target appearance notes, and Jev routes each sample to a wash effect while checking target match and scoring process risk.
Discipline: Fashion & Textile Design (Denim development).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: Categorical wash outcomes and risk grades are easier to compare across sample rounds than generated recommendations.

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": <Recipe notes, denim composition, target appearance, and compliance limits>, "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)
{
  "wash_route": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which visual wash effect best matches the sample?",
    "criteria": {
      "clean_rinse": "Even, minimally altered denim appearance",
      "abrasion": "Localized fading or worn surface effect",
      "enzyme_or_stone": "Overall softened, faded, or textured wash",
      "overdyed": "Added color or tint layered over the denim"
    }
  },
  "target_match": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "For the routed effect, does the sample meet the stated appearance target?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The observed wash is consistent with the target",
      "false": "The observed wash differs materially from the target"
    }
  },
  "process_risk": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How much risk does the described process carry?",
    "criteria": [
      "Low: routine process with clear controls",
      "Moderate: some variation or compliance checks needed",
      "High: significant shade or durability uncertainty",
      "Very high: likely to exceed a stated limit or require rework"
    ]
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0916. Uniform Fit Triage

ID: fashion-uniform-fit-triage
Sub-discipline: Uniform and workwear design
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: Workwear designers paste wearer feedback and specification notes, and Jev routes each issue to a fit zone while checking safety relevance and scoring urgency.

Why typed decisions: Zone labels and urgency levels make wearer feedback actionable for technical design teams.

TAM: Global workwear: ~$50B
SAM: Uniform design and fit services: ~$7B
SOM: Workwear providers: ~$3M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Uniform Fit Triage" 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
Workwear designers paste wearer feedback and specification notes, and Jev routes each issue to a fit zone while checking safety relevance and scoring urgency.
Discipline: Fashion & Textile Design (Uniform and workwear design).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: Zone labels and urgency levels make wearer feedback actionable for technical design teams.

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": <Feedback, garment specification, wearer activity, and safety requirements>, "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)
{
  "fit_zone": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which area best routes the reported fit issue?",
    "criteria": {
      "upper_body": "Shoulder, chest, sleeve, or armhole",
      "lower_body": "Waist, hip, rise, thigh, or leg",
      "mobility": "Reach, bend, squat, or task movement",
      "closure_or_access": "Fastening, pocket access, or garment opening"
    }
  },
  "safety_relevant": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "For the routed zone, could the issue affect safety or required task performance?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Movement, coverage, visibility, or equipment access may be compromised",
      "false": "No safety or task-performance effect is indicated"
    }
  },
  "urgency": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How urgently should the fit issue be addressed?",
    "criteria": [
      "Low: preference issue with little functional impact",
      "Moderate: recurring discomfort or minor task friction",
      "High: clear movement or specification concern",
      "Critical: potential safety or essential task failure"
    ]
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0917. Embellishment Safety Gate

ID: fashion-embellishment-safety-gate
Sub-discipline: Embellishment and trims
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: Designers paste trim specifications and garment-use details, and Jev routes each embellishment to a construction class while checking use suitability and scoring attachment risk.

Why typed decisions: Typed construction categories and risk levels help teams screen trims consistently before sampling or production.

TAM: Global apparel trims: ~$60B
SAM: Trim design and sourcing: ~$8B
SOM: Fashion product teams: ~$3M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Embellishment Safety 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
Designers paste trim specifications and garment-use details, and Jev routes each embellishment to a construction class while checking use suitability and scoring attachment risk.
Discipline: Fashion & Textile Design (Embellishment and trims).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: Typed construction categories and risk levels help teams screen trims consistently before sampling or production.

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": <Trim description, attachment method, garment use, and care requirements>, "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)
{
  "trim_route": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which embellishment construction class best fits the trim?",
    "criteria": {
      "sewn": "Stitched bead, sequin, appliqué, or embroidery element",
      "bonded": "Adhesive, heat-transfer, or bonded embellishment",
      "mechanical": "Rivet, stud, clasp, or other mechanical attachment",
      "integrated": "Woven, knitted, or built-in decorative feature"
    }
  },
  "use_suitable": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "For the routed construction, is the trim suitable for the garment's use and care needs?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Attachment and care appear compatible with use",
      "false": "Care, wear, or use may compromise the trim"
    }
  },
  "attachment_risk": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How likely is attachment failure or a quality issue?",
    "criteria": [
      "Low: secure, routine construction",
      "Moderate: needs standard testing",
      "High: vulnerable to wear, laundering, or snagging",
      "Very high: likely to fail or conflict with requirements"
    ]
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0918. Moodboard Signal Sorter

ID: fashion-moodboard-signal-sorter
Sub-discipline: Fashion concept development
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: Design teams paste moodboard captions and reference notes, and Jev routes each reference to a design signal while checking relevance and scoring thematic strength.

Why typed decisions: Consistent signal tags and strength levels turn visual research notes into searchable, comparable inputs.

TAM: Global fashion design services: ~$50B
SAM: Creative research and moodboard tools: ~$5B
SOM: Fashion design teams: ~$3M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Moodboard Signal Sorter" 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 moodboard captions and reference notes, and Jev routes each reference to a design signal while checking relevance and scoring thematic strength.
Discipline: Fashion & Textile Design (Fashion concept development).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: Consistent signal tags and strength levels turn visual research notes into searchable, comparable inputs.

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": <Reference captions, project brief, audience, and collection theme>, "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)
{
  "signal_route": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which design signal is most prominent in the reference notes?",
    "criteria": {
      "shape": "Silhouette, proportion, or structural form",
      "surface": "Texture, print, pattern, or material finish",
      "color": "Palette, contrast, or color relationship",
      "context": "Era, culture, setting, or lifestyle association"
    }
  },
  "brief_relevant": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "For the routed signal, is the reference relevant to the project brief?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "It supports a stated theme, audience, or design goal",
      "false": "Its connection to the brief is weak or conflicting"
    }
  },
  "theme_strength": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How strongly does the signal express the intended theme?",
    "criteria": [
      "Low: little visible connection",
      "Moderate: partial or indirect connection",
      "High: clear thematic contribution",
      "Very high: defining reference for the theme"
    ]
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0919. Leather Grade Router

ID: fashion-leather-grade-router
Sub-discipline: Leather goods design
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: Leather goods makers paste hide descriptions and product requirements, and Jev routes each hide to a grade-use category while checking suitability and scoring yield risk.

Why typed decisions: Structured grade-use decisions make material allocation more repeatable than descriptive appraisal alone.

TAM: Global leather goods: ~$400B
SAM: Leather material and design tools: ~$20B
SOM: Leather ateliers: ~$3M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Leather Grade Router" 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
Leather goods makers paste hide descriptions and product requirements, and Jev routes each hide to a grade-use category while checking suitability and scoring yield risk.
Discipline: Fashion & Textile Design (Leather goods design).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: Structured grade-use decisions make material allocation more repeatable than descriptive appraisal alone.

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": <Hide notes, visible marks, thickness, product type, and cutting plan>, "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)
{
  "hide_use_route": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which product-use category best fits the described hide?",
    "criteria": {
      "full_panel": "Suitable for large, visible, relatively uninterrupted panels",
      "small_panels": "Best used for smaller components or divided panels",
      "structured_parts": "Suitable for reinforced or shape-holding components",
      "nonvisible_parts": "Better reserved for linings or hidden components"
    }
  },
  "product_suitable": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "For the routed use, is the hide suitable given the visible marks and product requirements?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The described hide can meet the stated appearance and performance needs",
      "false": "Marks or properties conflict with the intended use"
    }
  },
  "yield_risk": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How much usable yield risk is indicated by the description?",
    "criteria": [
      "Low: clean area appears ample",
      "Moderate: some layout work or mark avoidance needed",
      "High: limited clean area may constrain cutting",
      "Very high: likely inadequate for the planned components"
    ]
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0920. Lining Match Desk

ID: fashion-lining-match-desk
Sub-discipline: Garment construction
Jev pattern: Choice Router — pick one of a set

Pitch: Technical designers paste shell and lining specifications, and Jev routes the pairing to a construction match while checking compatibility and scoring likely performance.

Why typed decisions: A fixed pairing decision and compatibility level help catch material conflicts before sampling.

TAM: Global apparel lining fabrics: ~$25B
SAM: Technical garment development: ~$4B
SOM: Apparel manufacturers: ~$2M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Lining Match Desk" 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
Technical designers paste shell and lining specifications, and Jev routes the pairing to a construction match while checking compatibility and scoring likely performance.
Discipline: Fashion & Textile Design (Garment construction).
Jev pattern: Choice Router (pick one of a set) — a Jev `choice` question that routes each incoming item to one handler/category from a fixed option map, plus branch-specific questions asked in the same request.
Why typed decisions: A fixed pairing decision and compatibility level help catch material conflicts before sampling.

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": <Shell and lining specs, garment type, care method, and movement needs>, "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)
{
  "lining_route": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which lining pairing category best fits the submitted shell and lining?",
    "criteria": {
      "compatible_weight": "Similar weight and handling behavior",
      "supportive": "Lining adds needed structure or stability",
      "slippery_layer": "Lining reduces friction for layering or movement",
      "specialist": "Pairing needs a specialized construction or further testing"
    }
  },
  "pairing_compatible": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "For the routed pairing, are care, shrinkage, and handling needs compatible?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The described materials appear compatible across stated needs",
      "false": "A likely mismatch could cause movement, care, or assembly issues"
    }
  },
  "performance_match": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How well should the pairing perform in the intended garment?",
    "criteria": [
      "Low: likely to distort or feel unsuitable",
      "Moderate: workable with construction adjustments",
      "High: suitable for most intended functions",
      "Very high: well matched for function and finish"
    ]
  }
}

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 paste box that shows the chosen option, the full probability bar chart, and a 'needs review' badge when confidence is low. 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

---

## 0921. Silhouette Fit Gate

ID: fashion-silhouette-fit-gate
Sub-discipline: Fashion design
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste a garment brief and model notes; Jev checks fit conditions independently and code flags the design only when its required checks pass.

Why typed decisions: Independent yes/no decisions make fit requirements auditable instead of burying them in generated advice.

TAM: $4B global fashion design software market
SAM: $700M apparel fit and prototyping tools
SOM: $2M initial independent-designer segment

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Silhouette Fit 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 garment brief and model notes; Jev checks fit conditions independently and code flags the design only when its required checks pass.
Discipline: Fashion & Textile Design (Fashion 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: Independent yes/no decisions make fit requirements auditable instead of burying them in generated advice.

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": <Garment brief, intended silhouette, model measurements and fit 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)
{
  "shoulder_alignment": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the described garment align with the intended shoulder fit?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The shoulder fit matches the brief.",
      "false": "The shoulder fit conflicts with the brief."
    }
  },
  "movement_ease": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the garment allow the movement required for its intended use?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The described cut and materials allow the required movement.",
      "false": "The described cut or materials restrict the required movement."
    }
  },
  "length_match": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the described length match the specified silhouette?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The length supports the intended silhouette.",
      "false": "The length conflicts with the intended silhouette."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0922. Fabric Pairing Screen

ID: fashion-fabric-pairing-screen
Sub-discipline: Textile design
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste two fabric specifications and a project brief; Jev checks compatibility conditions together and code approves or flags the pairing by rule.

Why typed decisions: Typed checks expose specific incompatibilities without requiring a vague prose recommendation.

TAM: $3B global textile design and sourcing software market
SAM: $450M fabric selection and sampling tools
SOM: $1.5M independent studio segment

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Fabric Pairing Screen" 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 two fabric specifications and a project brief; Jev checks compatibility conditions together and code approves or flags the pairing by rule.
Discipline: Fashion & Textile Design (Textile 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: Typed checks expose specific incompatibilities without requiring a vague prose recommendation.

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": <Two fabric descriptions, garment use, care and construction requirements>, "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)
{
  "weight_compatibility": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Are the two fabrics compatible in weight for the intended construction?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Their weights can be combined as described.",
      "false": "Their weight difference makes the planned construction unsuitable."
    }
  },
  "care_compatibility": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Can both fabrics follow the same required care process?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Their care requirements are compatible.",
      "false": "Their care requirements conflict."
    }
  },
  "drape_compatibility": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Are their drape characteristics compatible with the intended garment?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Their drape supports the specified garment structure.",
      "false": "Their drape conflicts with the specified structure."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0923. Costume Continuity Check

ID: fashion-costume-continuity-check
Sub-discipline: Costume design
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste a scene breakdown and costume continuity notes; Jev evaluates continuity conditions and code lists scenes that fail any required check.

Why typed decisions: Separate binary checks make continuity exceptions traceable to concrete scene requirements.

TAM: $2B global costume and production design software market
SAM: $300M costume continuity and wardrobe tools
SOM: $1M production wardrobe teams

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Costume Continuity Check" 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 scene breakdown and costume continuity notes; Jev evaluates continuity conditions and code lists scenes that fail any required check.
Discipline: Fashion & Textile Design (Costume 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: Separate binary checks make continuity exceptions traceable to concrete scene requirements.

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": <Scene descriptions, character costume notes and continuity constraints>, "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)
{
  "look_consistency": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the costume description preserve the character's established look for this scene?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The described look is consistent with the established costume.",
      "false": "The described look contradicts established costume details."
    }
  },
  "timeline_consistency": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the costume fit the character's timeline and scene sequence?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The costume state fits the described chronology.",
      "false": "The costume state conflicts with the chronology."
    }
  },
  "prop_continuity": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Are costume-attached props consistent with the scene notes?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Attached props match the scene requirements.",
      "false": "An attached prop conflicts with the scene requirements."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0924. Print Repeat Inspector

ID: fashion-print-repeat-inspector
Sub-discipline: Textile print design
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste a repeat specification and tile notes; Jev checks seam conditions independently and code flags repeats with any broken edge match.

Why typed decisions: Yes/no seam checks give designers a clear pass condition for production-ready repeats.

TAM: $1.5B digital textile print design tools
SAM: $250M repeat-pattern inspection software
SOM: $800K independent print studios

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Print Repeat Inspector" 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 repeat specification and tile notes; Jev checks seam conditions independently and code flags repeats with any broken edge match.
Discipline: Fashion & Textile Design (Textile print 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: Yes/no seam checks give designers a clear pass condition for production-ready repeats.

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": <Repeat dimensions, tile edge descriptions and pattern construction 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)
{
  "left_right_match": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Do the left and right tile edges form a continuous repeat?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The described edges align continuously.",
      "false": "The described edges create a visible break."
    }
  },
  "top_bottom_match": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Do the top and bottom tile edges form a continuous repeat?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The described edges align continuously.",
      "false": "The described edges create a visible break."
    }
  },
  "motif_scale": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is the motif scale consistent across the repeat tile?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Motif scale is consistent across the described tile.",
      "false": "Motif scale changes unexpectedly across the tile."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0925. Dye Recipe Guard

ID: fashion-dye-recipe-guard
Sub-discipline: Textile coloration
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste a dye recipe, fiber composition and target swatch notes; Jev checks process conditions and code marks recipes that meet all required constraints.

Why typed decisions: Independent typed checks surface process risks without pretending to replace laboratory testing.

TAM: $1B textile coloration software market
SAM: $180M dye-lab recipe management tools
SOM: $600K small dye studios

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Dye Recipe Guard" 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 dye recipe, fiber composition and target swatch notes; Jev checks process conditions and code marks recipes that meet all required constraints.
Discipline: Fashion & Textile Design (Textile coloration).
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: Independent typed checks surface process risks without pretending to replace laboratory testing.

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": <Dye recipe, fiber blend, target color and process constraints>, "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)
{
  "fiber_process_fit": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is the described dye process suitable for the stated fiber blend?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The process is described as suitable for the fibers.",
      "false": "The process conflicts with the stated fiber composition."
    }
  },
  "temperature_limit": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the recipe stay within the stated temperature limit?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The described temperature is within the limit.",
      "false": "The described temperature exceeds or conflicts with the limit."
    }
  },
  "target_method_fit": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is the recipe consistent with the stated target color method?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The recipe supports the specified coloration method.",
      "false": "The recipe conflicts with the specified method."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0926. Wardrobe Pull Filter

ID: fashion-wardrobe-pull-filter
Sub-discipline: Fashion styling
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste a styling brief and wardrobe inventory; Jev checks each look against brief conditions and code surfaces only items passing the chosen rule set.

Why typed decisions: Explicit yes/no eligibility checks make wardrobe pulls faster and consistently reviewable.

TAM: $2B fashion styling and wardrobe software market
SAM: $350M stylist inventory and pull tools
SOM: $1.2M freelance stylist segment

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Wardrobe Pull Filter" 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 styling brief and wardrobe inventory; Jev checks each look against brief conditions and code surfaces only items passing the chosen rule set.
Discipline: Fashion & Textile Design (Fashion styling).
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/no eligibility checks make wardrobe pulls faster and consistently reviewable.

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": <Styling brief, garment inventory and event constraints>, "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)
{
  "dress_code_fit": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does this item fit the event's stated dress code?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The item fits the described dress code.",
      "false": "The item conflicts with the described dress code."
    }
  },
  "weather_fit": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is this item appropriate for the stated weather and setting?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The item suits the stated weather and setting.",
      "false": "The item is unsuitable for the stated conditions."
    }
  },
  "palette_fit": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does this item fit the requested styling palette?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Its described colors fit the requested palette.",
      "false": "Its described colors conflict with the requested palette."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0927. Material Claim Checker

ID: fashion-material-claim-checker
Sub-discipline: Sustainable fashion
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste supplier material claims and a product specification; Jev checks claim conditions and code flags claims lacking the required support in the supplied data.

Why typed decisions: Typed evidence checks distinguish supported claims from unsupported ones without generating marketing copy.

TAM: $2.5B sustainable materials compliance software market
SAM: $400M fashion material-claim review tools
SOM: $1M emerging sustainable labels

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Material Claim Checker" 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 supplier material claims and a product specification; Jev checks claim conditions and code flags claims lacking the required support in the supplied data.
Discipline: Fashion & Textile Design (Sustainable fashion).
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: Typed evidence checks distinguish supported claims from unsupported ones without generating marketing copy.

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": <Supplier claims, material composition and attached specification details>, "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)
{
  "composition_support": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the supplied specification support the stated fiber composition claim?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The specification supports the claimed composition.",
      "false": "The specification does not support the claimed composition."
    }
  },
  "recycled_support": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the supplied data support the recycled-content claim?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The supplied data supports the recycled-content claim.",
      "false": "The supplied data does not support the claim."
    }
  },
  "scope_clarity": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the claim clearly identify the product or component it applies to?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The claim's scope is clear from the supplied information.",
      "false": "The claim's scope is ambiguous or missing."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0928. Pattern Ease Auditor

ID: fashion-pattern-ease-auditor
Sub-discipline: Apparel patternmaking
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste a pattern specification and garment movement brief; Jev checks ease conditions and code marks pattern blocks missing any required allowance.

Why typed decisions: Independent semantic checks help catch movement mismatches before physical sampling.

TAM: $3B apparel CAD and patternmaking software market
SAM: $500M fit-ease validation tools
SOM: $1.5M small pattern studios

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Pattern Ease Auditor" 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 pattern specification and garment movement brief; Jev checks ease conditions and code marks pattern blocks missing any required allowance.
Discipline: Fashion & Textile Design (Apparel patternmaking).
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: Independent semantic checks help catch movement mismatches before physical sampling.

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": <Pattern notes, intended fit, fabric behavior and movement requirements>, "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)
{
  "arm_ease": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the pattern description allow the required arm movement?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The described arm ease supports the required movement.",
      "false": "The described arm ease restricts the required movement."
    }
  },
  "seated_ease": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the pattern allow the required seated posture?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The described shape allows the specified seated posture.",
      "false": "The described shape restricts the specified posture."
    }
  },
  "fabric_allowance": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the pattern account for the stated fabric stretch or lack of stretch?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The pattern allowance matches the fabric behavior.",
      "false": "The allowance conflicts with the fabric behavior."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0929. Runway Look Gate

ID: fashion-runway-look-gate
Sub-discipline: Runway styling
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste a collection brief and proposed runway looks; Jev checks each look against collection conditions and code routes looks that satisfy the selected rules.

Why typed decisions: Binary checks preserve creative judgment while reliably catching collection-level mismatches.

TAM: $1B runway production and styling software market
SAM: $160M collection review and show-planning tools
SOM: $500K emerging fashion houses

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Runway Look 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 collection brief and proposed runway looks; Jev checks each look against collection conditions and code routes looks that satisfy the selected rules.
Discipline: Fashion & Textile Design (Runway styling).
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: Binary checks preserve creative judgment while reliably catching collection-level mismatches.

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": <Collection concept, look descriptions and runway presentation constraints>, "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)
{
  "collection_coherence": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the look fit the stated collection concept?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The described look supports the collection concept.",
      "false": "The described look conflicts with the collection concept."
    }
  },
  "sequence_contrast": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the look provide the requested contrast in the show sequence?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The look supplies the specified contrast.",
      "false": "The look repeats or undermines the requested contrast."
    }
  },
  "movement_readiness": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is the look suitable for the stated runway movement and presentation?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The described construction supports the presentation needs.",
      "false": "The construction conflicts with the presentation needs."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0930. Upcycle Match Desk

ID: fashion-upcycle-match-desk
Sub-discipline: Upcycled fashion
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste a design brief and reclaimed-material inventory; Jev checks material suitability conditions and code ranks usable stock by count of passing checks.

Why typed decisions: Independent suitability flags help designers assess irregular materials without reducing them to keyword matches.

TAM: $1.2B circular fashion design software market
SAM: $200M reclaimed-material planning tools
SOM: $700K upcycling studios

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Upcycle Match Desk" 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 design brief and reclaimed-material inventory; Jev checks material suitability conditions and code ranks usable stock by count of passing checks.
Discipline: Fashion & Textile Design (Upcycled fashion).
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: Independent suitability flags help designers assess irregular materials without reducing them to keyword matches.

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": <Design requirements and reclaimed-material descriptions>, "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)
{
  "structural_suitability": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Can this material serve the described structural role?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Its described condition and properties suit the role.",
      "false": "Its described condition or properties make the role unsuitable."
    }
  },
  "quantity_sufficiency": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is there enough of this material for the stated design component?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The described quantity meets the requirement.",
      "false": "The described quantity falls short of the requirement."
    }
  },
  "surface_compatibility": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is the material surface compatible with the planned finishing method?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The surface supports the planned finish.",
      "false": "The surface conflicts with the planned finish."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0931. Accessory Proportion Check

ID: fashion-accessory-proportion-check
Sub-discipline: Accessory design
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste accessory dimensions and a look description; Jev checks proportion conditions and code flags combinations that violate the designer's stated balance rules.

Why typed decisions: Typed checks translate subjective proportion requirements into repeatable review signals.

TAM: $1.8B accessory design and merchandising software market
SAM: $260M accessory styling review tools
SOM: $900K independent accessory designers

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Accessory Proportion Check" 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 accessory dimensions and a look description; Jev checks proportion conditions and code flags combinations that violate the designer's stated balance rules.
Discipline: Fashion & Textile Design (Accessory 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: Typed checks translate subjective proportion requirements into repeatable review signals.

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": <Accessory dimensions, intended outfit and proportion brief>, "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)
{
  "scale_fit": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is the accessory scale appropriate for the described look?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The described scale supports the intended look.",
      "false": "The described scale overwhelms or underplays the look."
    }
  },
  "placement_fit": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the proposed placement work with the garment construction?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Placement is compatible with the described construction.",
      "false": "Placement conflicts with the described construction."
    }
  },
  "occasion_fit": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the accessory suit the stated occasion?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The accessory fits the occasion described.",
      "false": "The accessory conflicts with the occasion."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0932. Pleat Behavior Screen

ID: fashion-pleat-behavior-screen
Sub-discipline: Textile manipulation
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste a pleat design, fabric description and movement brief; Jev checks behavior conditions and code identifies designs that meet every selected requirement.

Why typed decisions: Independent binary judgments make fabric-behavior assumptions visible before a sample is made.

TAM: $900M textile manipulation design tools
SAM: $140M pleating and surface-design workflow tools
SOM: $400K textile-art studios

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Pleat Behavior Screen" 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 pleat design, fabric description and movement brief; Jev checks behavior conditions and code identifies designs that meet every selected requirement.
Discipline: Fashion & Textile Design (Textile manipulation).
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: Independent binary judgments make fabric-behavior assumptions visible before a sample is made.

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": <Pleat construction, fabric properties and intended garment use>, "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)
{
  "crease_retention": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is the fabric described as capable of retaining the required pleat?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The stated fabric behavior supports pleat retention.",
      "false": "The stated behavior does not support pleat retention."
    }
  },
  "bulk_acceptability": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the proposed pleat avoid excessive bulk for the garment area?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The described pleat bulk suits the garment area.",
      "false": "The described bulk is excessive for the area."
    }
  },
  "movement_fit": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the pleat construction permit the required movement?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The described construction allows the intended movement.",
      "false": "The construction restricts the intended movement."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0933. Uniform Spec Sentinel

ID: fashion-uniform-spec-sentinel
Sub-discipline: Uniform design
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste a uniform brief and garment specification; Jev checks compliance conditions together and code flags any specification that misses a required need.

Why typed decisions: Typed checks help teams review practical requirements consistently across garment variants.

TAM: $2B uniform design and management software market
SAM: $320M uniform specification and review tools
SOM: $1M specialist uniform designers

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Uniform Spec Sentinel" 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 uniform brief and garment specification; Jev checks compliance conditions together and code flags any specification that misses a required need.
Discipline: Fashion & Textile Design (Uniform 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: Typed checks help teams review practical requirements consistently across garment variants.

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": <Uniform requirements, garment descriptions and wear environment>, "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)
{
  "task_mobility": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the garment support the movement required for the stated task?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The described design permits the required task movement.",
      "false": "The described design restricts required movement."
    }
  },
  "environment_fit": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is the garment appropriate for the stated work environment?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Its described materials and construction suit the environment.",
      "false": "Its materials or construction conflict with the environment."
    }
  },
  "care_practicality": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Can the garment follow the required care routine?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The described materials support the stated care routine.",
      "false": "The care routine conflicts with the described materials."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0934. Embroidery Placement Guard

ID: fashion-embroidery-placement-guard
Sub-discipline: Embroidery design
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste an embroidery plan and garment construction notes; Jev checks placement conditions and code warns when a design conflicts with garment function or build.

Why typed decisions: Discrete checks flag placement risks more reliably than open-ended descriptive feedback.

TAM: $1B embroidery and embellishment design software market
SAM: $170M garment embroidery planning tools
SOM: $550K independent embroidery studios

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Embroidery Placement Guard" 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 an embroidery plan and garment construction notes; Jev checks placement conditions and code warns when a design conflicts with garment function or build.
Discipline: Fashion & Textile Design (Embroidery 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: Discrete checks flag placement risks more reliably than open-ended descriptive feedback.

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": <Embroidery location, stitch plan, garment panels and use requirements>, "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)
{
  "seam_clearance": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the embroidery placement avoid interfering with stated seams?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The described placement leaves required seams clear.",
      "false": "The placement overlaps or obstructs a required seam."
    }
  },
  "skin_comfort": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is the embroidery suitable for the stated skin-contact area?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The described backing and placement suit skin contact.",
      "false": "The backing or placement creates a stated comfort conflict."
    }
  },
  "stretch_compatibility": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is the embroidery compatible with the panel's stated stretch needs?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The stitch plan accommodates the panel's movement.",
      "false": "The stitch plan conflicts with the panel's movement."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0935. Colorway Brief Checker

ID: fashion-colorway-brief-checker
Sub-discipline: Fashion color design
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste a colorway specification and collection brief; Jev checks palette conditions and code keeps or flags each proposed colorway using explicit rules.

Why typed decisions: Typed judgments let teams consistently enforce palette constraints while leaving aesthetic choices to designers.

TAM: $1.3B fashion color management tools
SAM: $220M colorway review and palette software
SOM: $750K small fashion teams

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Colorway Brief Checker" 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 colorway specification and collection brief; Jev checks palette conditions and code keeps or flags each proposed colorway using explicit rules.
Discipline: Fashion & Textile Design (Fashion color 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: Typed judgments let teams consistently enforce palette constraints while leaving aesthetic choices to designers.

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": <Colorway descriptions, collection palette and usage constraints>, "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)
{
  "palette_compliance": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the colorway use only colors permitted by the brief?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Its described colors fit the permitted palette.",
      "false": "It includes colors outside the permitted palette."
    }
  },
  "contrast_requirement": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the colorway meet the stated contrast requirement?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The described colors provide the required contrast.",
      "false": "The described colors do not provide the required contrast."
    }
  },
  "material_feasibility": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Are the colors plausible for the stated material and process?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The described process and material support the colorway.",
      "false": "The stated process or material conflicts with the colorway."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0936. Theatrical Quick Change

ID: fashion-theatrical-quick-change
Sub-discipline: Theatre costume design
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste a quick-change plan and costume breakdown; Jev checks changeover conditions and code identifies transitions that fail any production requirement.

Why typed decisions: Independent decisions make tight-change risks easy to inspect and address in rehearsal planning.

TAM: $800M theatre wardrobe and production workflow tools
SAM: $120M quick-change planning tools
SOM: $350K theatre costume departments

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Theatrical Quick Change" 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 quick-change plan and costume breakdown; Jev checks changeover conditions and code identifies transitions that fail any production requirement.
Discipline: Fashion & Textile Design (Theatre costume 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: Independent decisions make tight-change risks easy to inspect and address in rehearsal planning.

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": <Adjacent scene costumes, change interval and backstage constraints>, "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)
{
  "time_feasibility": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Can the described costume change fit the stated interval?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The described change appears feasible within the interval.",
      "false": "The described change exceeds or conflicts with the interval."
    }
  },
  "layering_feasibility": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the costume plan support the stated layering method?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The described garments can use the planned layering method.",
      "false": "The garments conflict with the planned layering method."
    }
  },
  "crew_access": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the plan allow the crew access needed for the change?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The described setup permits required crew access.",
      "false": "The setup obstructs required crew access."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0937. Knit Gauge Monitor

ID: fashion-knit-gauge-monitor
Sub-discipline: Knitwear design
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste a knit swatch record and garment specification; Jev checks gauge conditions and code flags samples that fail the designer's tolerance rules.

Why typed decisions: Typed checks turn nuanced swatch descriptions into consistent sample-review decisions.

TAM: $1.2B knitwear development software market
SAM: $180M knit gauge and swatch tools
SOM: $600K independent knitwear brands

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Knit Gauge Monitor" 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 knit swatch record and garment specification; Jev checks gauge conditions and code flags samples that fail the designer's tolerance rules.
Discipline: Fashion & Textile Design (Knitwear 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: Typed checks turn nuanced swatch descriptions into consistent sample-review decisions.

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": <Swatch gauge, yarn description, target measurements and tolerance 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)
{
  "gauge_target": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the swatch gauge match the stated target closely enough?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The described gauge meets the stated target tolerance.",
      "false": "The described gauge falls outside the stated tolerance."
    }
  },
  "yarn_fit": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is the yarn suitable for the specified knit structure?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The yarn description suits the stated structure.",
      "false": "The yarn conflicts with the stated structure."
    }
  },
  "stretch_recovery": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the swatch support the garment's required stretch and recovery?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The described swatch behavior meets both needs.",
      "false": "The described behavior fails a stretch or recovery need."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0938. Modestwear Coverage Review

ID: fashion-modestwear-coverage-review
Sub-discipline: Modest fashion design
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste a modestwear brief and outfit specification; Jev checks coverage conditions and code flags designs that fail the user's selected standards.

Why typed decisions: Separate yes/no checks support consistent, user-defined review without prescribing a single aesthetic standard.

TAM: $1.5B modest fashion design and commerce tools
SAM: $230M modestwear product-development tools
SOM: $800K independent modestwear labels

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Modestwear Coverage Review" 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 modestwear brief and outfit specification; Jev checks coverage conditions and code flags designs that fail the user's selected standards.
Discipline: Fashion & Textile Design (Modest fashion 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: Separate yes/no checks support consistent, user-defined review without prescribing a single aesthetic standard.

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": <Coverage preferences, garment descriptions and movement requirements>, "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)
{
  "coverage_match": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the outfit meet the user's stated coverage preferences?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The described outfit meets the stated coverage preferences.",
      "false": "The described outfit conflicts with those preferences."
    }
  },
  "opacity_match": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Do the described materials meet the stated opacity requirement?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The material description supports the required opacity.",
      "false": "The material description does not support the requirement."
    }
  },
  "movement_match": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the outfit preserve the required freedom of movement?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The described cut and layers allow required movement.",
      "false": "The described cut or layers restrict required movement."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0939. Leather Cut Planner

ID: fashion-leather-cut-planner
Sub-discipline: Leather goods design
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste a leather hide description and cutting plan; Jev checks material-placement conditions and code flags plans that violate selected quality rules.

Why typed decisions: Typed checks help preserve material character while spotting unsuitable placements before cutting.

TAM: $1B leather goods CAD and cutting software market
SAM: $150M hide utilization planning tools
SOM: $500K artisan leather studios

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Leather Cut Planner" 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 leather hide description and cutting plan; Jev checks material-placement conditions and code flags plans that violate selected quality rules.
Discipline: Fashion & Textile Design (Leather goods 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: Typed checks help preserve material character while spotting unsuitable placements before cutting.

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": <Hide notes, defect map description, pattern pieces and product requirements>, "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_avoidance": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the cutting plan keep visible defects out of critical areas?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The described placements avoid critical defect conflicts.",
      "false": "A described defect falls in a critical area."
    }
  },
  "grain_orientation": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the plan respect the stated grain or stretch direction?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Pattern placement matches the material direction.",
      "false": "Pattern placement conflicts with the stated direction."
    }
  },
  "piece_sufficiency": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Can the described hide supply all required pattern pieces?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The described usable area is sufficient.",
      "false": "The described usable area is insufficient."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0940. Fashion Shoot Selector

ID: fashion-fashion-shoot-selector
Sub-discipline: Editorial styling
Jev pattern: Noul Check — yes/no probability

Pitch: Paste a shoot brief and look options; Jev checks each look against production conditions and code selects candidates that pass the agreed combination of checks.

Why typed decisions: Typed checks provide consistent shortlist criteria while leaving final editorial taste with the stylist.

TAM: $1.4B fashion photo production and styling tools
SAM: $210M shoot-look planning software
SOM: $700K freelance editorial teams

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Fashion Shoot Selector" 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 shoot brief and look options; Jev checks each look against production conditions and code selects candidates that pass the agreed combination of checks.
Discipline: Fashion & Textile Design (Editorial styling).
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: Typed checks provide consistent shortlist criteria while leaving final editorial taste with the stylist.

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": <Shoot concept, look descriptions, location and production constraints>, "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)
{
  "concept_fit": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the look support the stated editorial concept?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The described look supports the concept.",
      "false": "The described look conflicts with the concept."
    }
  },
  "location_fit": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is the look suitable for the stated location and conditions?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The described garments suit the location conditions.",
      "false": "The garments conflict with the location conditions."
    }
  },
  "camera_detail": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the look include the required visual detail for the shoot?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The described look includes the required detail.",
      "false": "The required detail is missing or obscured."
    }
  }
}

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

---

## 0941. Fabric Swatch Sorter

ID: fashion-fabric-swatch-sorter
Sub-discipline: Textile sourcing
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Designers paste fabric swatch descriptions and project needs, and Jev scores and ranks each swatch on drape, texture, and project fit using weights they control in code.

Why typed decisions: Comparable typed scores make swatches easy to rank and filter without relying on inconsistent prose recommendations.

TAM: Global apparel and textile design: $10B+
SAM: Fabric selection software: $1B+
SOM: Independent designer tools: $5M–$20M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Fabric Swatch Sorter" 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
Designers paste fabric swatch descriptions and project needs, and Jev scores and ranks each swatch on drape, texture, and project fit using weights they control in code.
Discipline: Fashion & Textile Design (Textile sourcing).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: Comparable typed scores make swatches easy to rank and filter without relying on inconsistent prose recommendations.

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": <Project brief and candidate swatch descriptions>, "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)
{
  "drape_fit": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How well does this swatch's described drape suit the project?",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Poor drape match",
      "2 — Limited match",
      "3 — Good match",
      "4 — Excellent match"
    ]
  },
  "texture_fit": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How well does its described texture suit the desired hand and surface?",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Poor texture match",
      "2 — Limited match",
      "3 — Good match",
      "4 — Excellent match"
    ]
  },
  "project_fit": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How well does this swatch suit the stated garment, use, and constraints?",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Poor overall fit",
      "2 — Limited fit",
      "3 — Good fit",
      "4 — Excellent fit"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0942. Print Palette Scout

ID: fashion-print-palette-scout
Sub-discipline: Textile print design
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Artists paste a print brief and palette descriptions, and Jev scores and ranks palettes on mood, contrast, and print suitability using weights they control in code.

Why typed decisions: A consistent scorecard compares palettes directly, while typed values support reliable sorting instead of subjective generated descriptions.

TAM: Global print and surface design: $5B+
SAM: Digital print planning tools: $500M+
SOM: Independent print studios: $2M–$10M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Print Palette Scout" 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
Artists paste a print brief and palette descriptions, and Jev scores and ranks palettes on mood, contrast, and print suitability using weights they control in code.
Discipline: Fashion & Textile Design (Textile print design).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: A consistent scorecard compares palettes directly, while typed values support reliable sorting instead of subjective generated descriptions.

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": <Print brief and candidate palette descriptions>, "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)
{
  "mood_match": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How well does this palette convey the requested mood?",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Misses the mood",
      "2 — Weakly conveys it",
      "3 — Clearly conveys it",
      "4 — Strongly conveys it"
    ]
  },
  "contrast_quality": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How suitable is the palette's described contrast for the print brief?",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Unsuitable contrast",
      "2 — Limited suitability",
      "3 — Good suitability",
      "4 — Excellent suitability"
    ]
  },
  "print_suitability": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How well does this palette suit the intended print scale and application?",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Poor suitability",
      "2 — Limited suitability",
      "3 — Good suitability",
      "4 — Excellent suitability"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0943. Costume Rack Ranker

ID: fashion-costume-rack-ranker
Sub-discipline: Costume design
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Costume designers paste character briefs and wardrobe options, and Jev scores and ranks each option on character fit, movement, and scene suitability using weights they control in code.

Why typed decisions: Comparable scores help a team shortlist costumes consistently across characters and scenes without treating generated prose as a decision.

TAM: Global entertainment costume and wardrobe: $5B+
SAM: Costume planning software: $300M+
SOM: Theatre and screen costume teams: $2M–$10M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Costume Rack Ranker" 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
Costume designers paste character briefs and wardrobe options, and Jev scores and ranks each option on character fit, movement, and scene suitability using weights they control in code.
Discipline: Fashion & Textile Design (Costume design).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: Comparable scores help a team shortlist costumes consistently across characters and scenes without treating generated prose as a decision.

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": <Character and scene briefs with costume options>, "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)
{
  "character_fit": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How well does this costume option fit the character brief?",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Poor character fit",
      "2 — Limited fit",
      "3 — Good fit",
      "4 — Excellent fit"
    ]
  },
  "movement_fit": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How well does the described costume allow the required movement?",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Blocks movement",
      "2 — Restricts movement",
      "3 — Supports movement",
      "4 — Excellent movement fit"
    ]
  },
  "scene_fit": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How well does the costume suit the scene's setting and requirements?",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Poor scene fit",
      "2 — Limited fit",
      "3 — Good fit",
      "4 — Excellent fit"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0944. Drape Test Bench

ID: fashion-drape-test-bench
Sub-discipline: Fashion silhouette design
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Designers paste silhouette concepts and garment goals, and Jev scores and ranks each silhouette on drape compatibility, shape clarity, and wearability using weights they control in code.

Why typed decisions: Normalized dimension scores expose tradeoffs between silhouettes in a form designers can sort and adjust.

TAM: Global fashion design services and tools: $10B+
SAM: Silhouette and product-design tools: $1B+
SOM: Boutique design studios: $2M–$10M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Drape Test Bench" 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
Designers paste silhouette concepts and garment goals, and Jev scores and ranks each silhouette on drape compatibility, shape clarity, and wearability using weights they control in code.
Discipline: Fashion & Textile Design (Fashion silhouette design).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: Normalized dimension scores expose tradeoffs between silhouettes in a form designers can sort and adjust.

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": <Garment goals and candidate silhouette descriptions>, "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)
{
  "drape_compatibility": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How compatible is the proposed silhouette with the described fabric drape?",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Poor compatibility",
      "2 — Limited compatibility",
      "3 — Good compatibility",
      "4 — Excellent compatibility"
    ]
  },
  "shape_clarity": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How clearly would this silhouette communicate the intended shape?",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Unclear",
      "2 — Somewhat clear",
      "3 — Clear",
      "4 — Very clear"
    ]
  },
  "wearability": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How well does this silhouette meet the brief's wearability needs?",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Poor wearability",
      "2 — Limited wearability",
      "3 — Good wearability",
      "4 — Excellent wearability"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0945. Runway Look Selector

ID: fashion-runway-look-selector
Sub-discipline: Fashion styling
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Stylists paste a show brief and look descriptions, and Jev scores and ranks each look on theme fit, visual impact, and lineup cohesion using weights they control in code.

Why typed decisions: Typed comparisons let stylists reorder a lineup quickly and transparently as priorities change.

TAM: Global fashion styling and show production: $5B+
SAM: Runway planning tools: $300M+
SOM: Independent stylists and labels: $2M–$10M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Runway Look Selector" 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
Stylists paste a show brief and look descriptions, and Jev scores and ranks each look on theme fit, visual impact, and lineup cohesion using weights they control in code.
Discipline: Fashion & Textile Design (Fashion styling).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: Typed comparisons let stylists reorder a lineup quickly and transparently as priorities change.

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": <Show brief and candidate look descriptions>, "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)
{
  "theme_fit": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How closely does this look fit the show's theme?",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Poor fit",
      "2 — Limited fit",
      "3 — Good fit",
      "4 — Excellent fit"
    ]
  },
  "visual_impact": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How strong is this look's described visual impact on the runway?",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Weak impact",
      "2 — Moderate impact",
      "3 — Strong impact",
      "4 — Standout impact"
    ]
  },
  "lineup_cohesion": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How well would this look contribute to the intended lineup?",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Disrupts cohesion",
      "2 — Limited contribution",
      "3 — Good contribution",
      "4 — Excellent contribution"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0946. Upcycle Material Match

ID: fashion-upcycle-material-match
Sub-discipline: Circular textile design
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Designers paste available reclaimed-material descriptions and product briefs, and Jev scores and ranks material matches on construction suitability, aesthetic fit, and reuse value using weights they control in code.

Why typed decisions: A comparable rubric helps teams evaluate inconsistent reclaimed-material listings without replacing the decision with generated text.

TAM: Global circular fashion and materials: $8B+
SAM: Reclaimed-material sourcing tools: $500M+
SOM: Circular design studios: $2M–$8M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Upcycle Material Match" 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
Designers paste available reclaimed-material descriptions and product briefs, and Jev scores and ranks material matches on construction suitability, aesthetic fit, and reuse value using weights they control in code.
Discipline: Fashion & Textile Design (Circular textile design).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: A comparable rubric helps teams evaluate inconsistent reclaimed-material listings without replacing the decision with generated text.

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": <Product brief and reclaimed-material descriptions>, "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)
{
  "construction_fit": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How suitable is this material for the product's construction needs?",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Poor suitability",
      "2 — Limited suitability",
      "3 — Good suitability",
      "4 — Excellent suitability"
    ]
  },
  "aesthetic_fit": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How well does this material's described appearance fit the design?",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Poor fit",
      "2 — Limited fit",
      "3 — Good fit",
      "4 — Excellent fit"
    ]
  },
  "reuse_value": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How valuable is this option for the brief's reuse goals?",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Low value",
      "2 — Some value",
      "3 — High value",
      "4 — Exceptional value"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0947. Pattern Match Ledger

ID: fashion-pattern-match-ledger
Sub-discipline: Garment patternmaking
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Patternmakers paste fit requirements and pattern-option notes, and Jev scores and ranks options on fit potential, construction simplicity, and alteration burden using weights they control in code.

Why typed decisions: A score ranker makes pattern choices comparable and keeps fit tradeoffs visible to the team.

TAM: Global apparel product development: $10B+
SAM: Patternmaking and fit software: $1B+
SOM: Small fashion workrooms: $3M–$12M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Pattern Match Ledger" 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
Patternmakers paste fit requirements and pattern-option notes, and Jev scores and ranks options on fit potential, construction simplicity, and alteration burden using weights they control in code.
Discipline: Fashion & Textile Design (Garment patternmaking).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: A score ranker makes pattern choices comparable and keeps fit tradeoffs visible to the team.

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": <Fit requirements and candidate pattern 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)
{
  "fit_potential": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How well does this pattern option appear to support the required fit?",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Poor potential",
      "2 — Limited potential",
      "3 — Good potential",
      "4 — Excellent potential"
    ]
  },
  "construction_simplicity": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How straightforward is the described construction for this option?",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Very complex",
      "2 — Somewhat complex",
      "3 — Manageable",
      "4 — Straightforward"
    ]
  },
  "alteration_burden": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How manageable is the expected alteration burden?",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Very burdensome",
      "2 — Considerable burden",
      "3 — Manageable burden",
      "4 — Minimal burden"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0948. Colorway Fit Index

ID: fashion-colorway-fit-index
Sub-discipline: Fashion color design
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Designers paste a collection brief and garment colorway descriptions, and Jev scores and ranks each colorway on palette harmony, collection fit, and material suitability using weights they control in code.

Why typed decisions: Dimension scores make colorway comparisons repeatable across a collection and straightforward to adjust by priority.

TAM: Global fashion color and product design: $5B+
SAM: Colorway development software: $500M+
SOM: Independent apparel brands: $2M–$10M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Colorway Fit Index" 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
Designers paste a collection brief and garment colorway descriptions, and Jev scores and ranks each colorway on palette harmony, collection fit, and material suitability using weights they control in code.
Discipline: Fashion & Textile Design (Fashion color design).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: Dimension scores make colorway comparisons repeatable across a collection and straightforward to adjust by priority.

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": <Collection brief and candidate colorway descriptions>, "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)
{
  "palette_harmony": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How harmonious is the described color combination?",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Clashes",
      "2 — Weak harmony",
      "3 — Good harmony",
      "4 — Excellent harmony"
    ]
  },
  "collection_fit": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How well does this colorway fit the collection direction?",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Poor fit",
      "2 — Limited fit",
      "3 — Good fit",
      "4 — Excellent fit"
    ]
  },
  "material_suitability": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How suitable are these colors for the described materials and finish?",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Poor suitability",
      "2 — Limited suitability",
      "3 — Good suitability",
      "4 — Excellent suitability"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0949. Garment Detail Prioritizer

ID: fashion-garment-detail-prioritizer
Sub-discipline: Fashion product design
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Design teams paste a product brief and proposed garment details, and Jev scores and ranks details on design contribution, manufacturability, and brief relevance using weights they control in code.

Why typed decisions: Comparable scores clarify which details merit development without generating subjective design copy.

TAM: Global apparel product development: $10B+
SAM: Design-detail planning tools: $500M+
SOM: Small and midsize apparel teams: $3M–$12M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Garment Detail Prioritizer" 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 a product brief and proposed garment details, and Jev scores and ranks details on design contribution, manufacturability, and brief relevance using weights they control in code.
Discipline: Fashion & Textile Design (Fashion product design).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: Comparable scores clarify which details merit development without generating subjective design copy.

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": <Product brief and candidate garment-detail descriptions>, "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)
{
  "design_contribution": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How much does this detail contribute to the intended design?",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Negligible contribution",
      "2 — Small contribution",
      "3 — Strong contribution",
      "4 — Essential contribution"
    ]
  },
  "manufacturability": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How feasible is this detail to manufacture as described?",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Very difficult",
      "2 — Difficult",
      "3 — Feasible",
      "4 — Straightforward"
    ]
  },
  "brief_relevance": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How relevant is this detail to the product brief?",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Irrelevant",
      "2 — Weakly relevant",
      "3 — Clearly relevant",
      "4 — Central to the brief"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0950. Textile Texture Curator

ID: fashion-textile-texture-curator
Sub-discipline: Textile surface design
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Textile artists paste a surface brief and texture descriptions, and Jev scores and ranks textures on tactile fit, visual character, and application suitability using weights they control in code.

Why typed decisions: Typed scores enable consistent comparison of texture concepts across teams and intended uses.

TAM: Global textile surface design: $5B+
SAM: Surface and material design tools: $500M+
SOM: Independent textile artists: $1M–$6M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Textile Texture Curator" 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
Textile artists paste a surface brief and texture descriptions, and Jev scores and ranks textures on tactile fit, visual character, and application suitability using weights they control in code.
Discipline: Fashion & Textile Design (Textile surface design).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: Typed scores enable consistent comparison of texture concepts across teams and intended uses.

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": <Surface brief and candidate texture descriptions>, "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)
{
  "tactile_fit": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How well does this texture match the requested tactile quality?",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Poor match",
      "2 — Limited match",
      "3 — Good match",
      "4 — Excellent match"
    ]
  },
  "visual_character": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How well does its described surface character suit the visual direction?",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Poor fit",
      "2 — Limited fit",
      "3 — Good fit",
      "4 — Excellent fit"
    ]
  },
  "application_suitability": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How suitable is this texture for the intended application?",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Poor suitability",
      "2 — Limited suitability",
      "3 — Good suitability",
      "4 — Excellent suitability"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0951. Wardrobe Continuity Sorter

ID: fashion-wardrobe-continuity-sorter
Sub-discipline: Screen costume
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Costume teams paste scene continuity notes and wardrobe options, and Jev scores and ranks options on continuity match, character consistency, and practical readiness using weights they control in code.

Why typed decisions: Structured scores let teams prioritize wardrobe options consistently across scenes and production changes.

TAM: Global film and television wardrobe: $5B+
SAM: Wardrobe continuity software: $300M+
SOM: Production costume departments: $2M–$10M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Wardrobe Continuity Sorter" 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
Costume teams paste scene continuity notes and wardrobe options, and Jev scores and ranks options on continuity match, character consistency, and practical readiness using weights they control in code.
Discipline: Fashion & Textile Design (Screen costume).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: Structured scores let teams prioritize wardrobe options consistently across scenes and production changes.

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": <Continuity notes and candidate wardrobe descriptions>, "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)
{
  "continuity_match": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How well does this option match the scene continuity notes?",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Poor match",
      "2 — Limited match",
      "3 — Good match",
      "4 — Exact match"
    ]
  },
  "character_consistency": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How well does this option preserve the character's established look?",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Poor consistency",
      "2 — Limited consistency",
      "3 — Good consistency",
      "4 — Excellent consistency"
    ]
  },
  "practical_readiness": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How ready is this option for the stated production needs?",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Not ready",
      "2 — Significant preparation needed",
      "3 — Mostly ready",
      "4 — Ready to use"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0952. Accessory Pairing Board

ID: fashion-accessory-pairing-board
Sub-discipline: Fashion accessories styling
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Stylists paste a look brief and accessory descriptions, and Jev scores and ranks pairings on outfit cohesion, proportion, and occasion fit using weights they control in code.

Why typed decisions: A weighted scorecard supports fast, repeatable accessory selection instead of open-ended generated suggestions.

TAM: Global fashion accessories and styling: $8B+
SAM: Styling and look-planning tools: $500M+
SOM: Freelance stylists: $2M–$8M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Accessory Pairing Board" 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
Stylists paste a look brief and accessory descriptions, and Jev scores and ranks pairings on outfit cohesion, proportion, and occasion fit using weights they control in code.
Discipline: Fashion & Textile Design (Fashion accessories styling).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: A weighted scorecard supports fast, repeatable accessory selection instead of open-ended generated suggestions.

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": <Look brief and candidate accessory descriptions>, "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)
{
  "outfit_cohesion": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How well does this accessory complement the overall look?",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Clashes",
      "2 — Weakly complements",
      "3 — Complements well",
      "4 — Strongly completes the look"
    ]
  },
  "proportion_fit": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How suitable is the accessory's described scale and proportion?",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Poor proportion",
      "2 — Limited fit",
      "3 — Good fit",
      "4 — Excellent fit"
    ]
  },
  "occasion_fit": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How well does this pairing suit the stated occasion?",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Poor fit",
      "2 — Limited fit",
      "3 — Good fit",
      "4 — Excellent fit"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0953. Fiber Blend Evaluator

ID: fashion-fiber-blend-evaluator
Sub-discipline: Textile materials design
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Material developers paste performance goals and fiber-blend descriptions, and Jev scores and ranks blends on hand-feel fit, functional fit, and design brief alignment using weights they control in code.

Why typed decisions: Comparable typed ratings let developers sort complex blend tradeoffs without substituting generated explanations for their own expertise.

TAM: Global fiber and textile materials: $10B+
SAM: Material selection software: $1B+
SOM: Emerging materials teams: $2M–$10M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Fiber Blend Evaluator" 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
Material developers paste performance goals and fiber-blend descriptions, and Jev scores and ranks blends on hand-feel fit, functional fit, and design brief alignment using weights they control in code.
Discipline: Fashion & Textile Design (Textile materials design).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: Comparable typed ratings let developers sort complex blend tradeoffs without substituting generated explanations for their own expertise.

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": <Performance goals and candidate fiber-blend descriptions>, "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)
{
  "handfeel_fit": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How well does this blend suit the requested hand feel?",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Poor fit",
      "2 — Limited fit",
      "3 — Good fit",
      "4 — Excellent fit"
    ]
  },
  "functional_fit": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How well does this blend meet the stated functional needs?",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Poor fit",
      "2 — Limited fit",
      "3 — Good fit",
      "4 — Excellent fit"
    ]
  },
  "brief_alignment": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How closely does this blend align with the overall design brief?",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Poor alignment",
      "2 — Limited alignment",
      "3 — Good alignment",
      "4 — Excellent alignment"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0954. Embroidery Motif Ranker

ID: fashion-embroidery-motif-ranker
Sub-discipline: Embroidery design
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Embroidery designers paste a garment brief and motif descriptions, and Jev scores and ranks motifs on style alignment, stitch feasibility, and placement suitability using weights they control in code.

Why typed decisions: A consistent scorecard quickly compares motifs on creative and practical criteria while leaving final judgment with the designer.

TAM: Global embroidery and embellishment: $3B+
SAM: Embroidery design tools: $300M+
SOM: Independent embroidery studios: $1M–$5M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Embroidery Motif Ranker" 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
Embroidery designers paste a garment brief and motif descriptions, and Jev scores and ranks motifs on style alignment, stitch feasibility, and placement suitability using weights they control in code.
Discipline: Fashion & Textile Design (Embroidery design).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: A consistent scorecard quickly compares motifs on creative and practical criteria while leaving final judgment with the designer.

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": <Garment brief and candidate embroidery motifs>, "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)
{
  "style_alignment": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How well does this motif match the garment's style direction?",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Poor alignment",
      "2 — Limited alignment",
      "3 — Good alignment",
      "4 — Excellent alignment"
    ]
  },
  "stitch_feasibility": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How feasible is the described motif to execute in embroidery?",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Very difficult",
      "2 — Difficult",
      "3 — Feasible",
      "4 — Straightforward"
    ]
  },
  "placement_suitability": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How well does the motif suit its proposed garment placement?",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Poor suitability",
      "2 — Limited suitability",
      "3 — Good suitability",
      "4 — Excellent suitability"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0955. Denim Wash Selector

ID: fashion-denim-wash-selector
Sub-discipline: Denim design
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Denim designers paste a collection direction and wash descriptions, and Jev scores and ranks washes on aesthetic fit, garment versatility, and finish consistency using weights they control in code.

Why typed decisions: Typed, comparable scores make wash selection easier to document and revise across a product range.

TAM: Global denim design and finishing: $5B+
SAM: Denim product-development tools: $400M+
SOM: Independent denim labels: $2M–$8M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Denim Wash Selector" 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
Denim designers paste a collection direction and wash descriptions, and Jev scores and ranks washes on aesthetic fit, garment versatility, and finish consistency using weights they control in code.
Discipline: Fashion & Textile Design (Denim design).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: Typed, comparable scores make wash selection easier to document and revise across a product range.

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": <Collection direction and candidate wash descriptions>, "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)
{
  "aesthetic_fit": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How well does this wash fit the collection's desired appearance?",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Poor fit",
      "2 — Limited fit",
      "3 — Good fit",
      "4 — Excellent fit"
    ]
  },
  "garment_versatility": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How versatile is this wash across the intended garments?",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Very limited",
      "2 — Somewhat limited",
      "3 — Versatile",
      "4 — Highly versatile"
    ]
  },
  "finish_consistency": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How suitable is this wash for achieving a consistent finish?",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Poor suitability",
      "2 — Limited suitability",
      "3 — Good suitability",
      "4 — Excellent suitability"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0956. Lining Pairing Studio

ID: fashion-lining-pairing-studio
Sub-discipline: Garment materials design
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Designers paste outer-fabric notes and lining options, and Jev scores and ranks pairings on compatibility, comfort, and construction suitability using weights they control in code.

Why typed decisions: Structured ratings make otherwise subjective lining tradeoffs directly comparable and easy to sort.

TAM: Global apparel materials and components: $8B+
SAM: Material pairing tools: $400M+
SOM: Small fashion labels: $2M–$8M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Lining Pairing Studio" 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
Designers paste outer-fabric notes and lining options, and Jev scores and ranks pairings on compatibility, comfort, and construction suitability using weights they control in code.
Discipline: Fashion & Textile Design (Garment materials design).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: Structured ratings make otherwise subjective lining tradeoffs directly comparable and easy to sort.

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": <Outer-fabric notes and candidate lining descriptions>, "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)
{
  "fabric_compatibility": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How compatible is this lining with the described outer fabric?",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Poor compatibility",
      "2 — Limited compatibility",
      "3 — Good compatibility",
      "4 — Excellent compatibility"
    ]
  },
  "wearer_comfort": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How well does the lining suit the desired wearer comfort?",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Poor comfort fit",
      "2 — Limited comfort fit",
      "3 — Good comfort fit",
      "4 — Excellent comfort fit"
    ]
  },
  "construction_suitability": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How suitable is this pairing for the garment's construction?",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Poor suitability",
      "2 — Limited suitability",
      "3 — Good suitability",
      "4 — Excellent suitability"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0957. Stage Look Feasibility

ID: fashion-stage-look-feasibility
Sub-discipline: Performance costume design
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Costume designers paste performance requirements and stage-look options, and Jev scores and ranks each option on movement freedom, visual readability, and quick-change practicality using weights they control in code.

Why typed decisions: Comparable numeric decisions help teams balance theatrical impact against stage constraints without generated prose obscuring priorities.

TAM: Global live performance costume: $3B+
SAM: Stage wardrobe planning tools: $200M+
SOM: Theatre and touring companies: $1M–$6M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Stage Look Feasibility" 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
Costume designers paste performance requirements and stage-look options, and Jev scores and ranks each option on movement freedom, visual readability, and quick-change practicality using weights they control in code.
Discipline: Fashion & Textile Design (Performance costume design).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: Comparable numeric decisions help teams balance theatrical impact against stage constraints without generated prose obscuring priorities.

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": <Performance requirements and candidate stage-look descriptions>, "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)
{
  "movement_freedom": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How well does this look allow the required performance movement?",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Prevents movement",
      "2 — Restricts movement",
      "3 — Allows movement",
      "4 — Supports movement exceptionally"
    ]
  },
  "visual_readability": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How clearly would the look read from the audience's viewpoint?",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Poor readability",
      "2 — Limited readability",
      "3 — Good readability",
      "4 — Excellent readability"
    ]
  },
  "quick_change_fit": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How suitable is the look for the stated quick-change needs?",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Poor suitability",
      "2 — Limited suitability",
      "3 — Good suitability",
      "4 — Excellent suitability"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0958. Quilt Block Curator

ID: fashion-quilt-block-curator
Sub-discipline: Quilt and patchwork design
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Textile artists paste a quilt brief and block descriptions, and Jev scores and ranks blocks on palette coherence, layout compatibility, and construction suitability using weights they control in code.

Why typed decisions: A score-based shortlist allows artists to compare blocks consistently while keeping the creative decision theirs.

TAM: Global quilting and textile crafts: $4B+
SAM: Quilt design software: $300M+
SOM: Independent quilt artists and shops: $1M–$5M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Quilt Block Curator" 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
Textile artists paste a quilt brief and block descriptions, and Jev scores and ranks blocks on palette coherence, layout compatibility, and construction suitability using weights they control in code.
Discipline: Fashion & Textile Design (Quilt and patchwork design).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: A score-based shortlist allows artists to compare blocks consistently while keeping the creative decision theirs.

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": <Quilt brief and candidate block descriptions>, "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)
{
  "palette_coherence": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How well does this block's described palette fit the quilt?",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Poor coherence",
      "2 — Limited coherence",
      "3 — Good coherence",
      "4 — Excellent coherence"
    ]
  },
  "layout_compatibility": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How well does this block suit the planned layout?",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Poor compatibility",
      "2 — Limited compatibility",
      "3 — Good compatibility",
      "4 — Excellent compatibility"
    ]
  },
  "construction_suitability": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How suitable is this block for the maker's stated construction needs?",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Poor suitability",
      "2 — Limited suitability",
      "3 — Good suitability",
      "4 — Excellent suitability"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0959. Fashion Archive Finder

ID: fashion-fashion-archive-finder
Sub-discipline: Fashion research and design
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Designers paste a concept brief and archive garment descriptions, and Jev scores and ranks references on silhouette relevance, detail relevance, and adaptation potential using weights they control in code.

Why typed decisions: Typed relevance scores turn a large reference collection into a sortable shortlist without generating derivative design text.

TAM: Global fashion research and design: $5B+
SAM: Fashion reference management: $300M+
SOM: Design studios and archives: $1M–$6M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Fashion Archive Finder" 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
Designers paste a concept brief and archive garment descriptions, and Jev scores and ranks references on silhouette relevance, detail relevance, and adaptation potential using weights they control in code.
Discipline: Fashion & Textile Design (Fashion research and design).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: Typed relevance scores turn a large reference collection into a sortable shortlist without generating derivative design text.

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": <Concept brief and archive garment descriptions>, "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)
{
  "silhouette_relevance": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How relevant is this reference's silhouette to the concept?",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Not relevant",
      "2 — Slightly relevant",
      "3 — Clearly relevant",
      "4 — Highly relevant"
    ]
  },
  "detail_relevance": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How relevant are its described details to the design direction?",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Not relevant",
      "2 — Slightly relevant",
      "3 — Clearly relevant",
      "4 — Highly relevant"
    ]
  },
  "adaptation_potential": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How useful is this reference as a source for adaptation?",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Little potential",
      "2 — Limited potential",
      "3 — Good potential",
      "4 — Excellent potential"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0960. Sustainable Trim Sorter

ID: fashion-sustainable-trim-sorter
Sub-discipline: Sustainable fashion design
Jev pattern: Score Ranker — graded ranking

Pitch: Designers paste product requirements and trim descriptions, and Jev scores and ranks trim options on design fit, sourcing alignment, and assembly practicality using weights they control in code.

Why typed decisions: Normalized typed scores make sustainability and production tradeoffs visible as adjustable, comparable criteria.

TAM: Global apparel trims and components: $8B+
SAM: Sustainable sourcing tools: $500M+
SOM: Responsible fashion brands: $2M–$8M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Sustainable Trim Sorter" 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
Designers paste product requirements and trim descriptions, and Jev scores and ranks trim options on design fit, sourcing alignment, and assembly practicality using weights they control in code.
Discipline: Fashion & Textile Design (Sustainable fashion design).
Jev pattern: Score Ranker (graded ranking) — comparable Jev `score` questions per candidate on 3-4 named dimensions, normalised with score/(levels-1) and combined with user-controlled weights in code.
Why typed decisions: Normalized typed scores make sustainability and production tradeoffs visible as adjustable, comparable criteria.

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": <Product requirements and candidate trim descriptions>, "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)
{
  "design_fit": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How well does this trim suit the product's design direction?",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Poor fit",
      "2 — Limited fit",
      "3 — Good fit",
      "4 — Excellent fit"
    ]
  },
  "sourcing_alignment": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How well does this trim align with the stated sourcing priorities?",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Poor alignment",
      "2 — Limited alignment",
      "3 — Good alignment",
      "4 — Excellent alignment"
    ]
  },
  "assembly_practicality": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How practical is this trim for the planned assembly?",
    "criteria": [
      "1 — Impractical",
      "2 — Challenging",
      "3 — Practical",
      "4 — Highly practical"
    ]
  }
}

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 ranked list with weight sliders that re-rank instantly without calling Jev again. 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

---

## 0961. Fiber Claim Sorter

ID: fashion-fiber-claim-sorter
Sub-discipline: Sustainable textile sourcing
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: Paste a supplier spec sheet and Jev selects the exact extracted fiber-content claim that matches your sourcing brief, or none.

Why typed decisions: Selecting a verbatim claim preserves supplier wording and avoids inventing material certifications or percentages.

TAM: Global textile materials: ~$1T
SAM: Sustainable apparel sourcing: ~$100B
SOM: Initial design teams: ~$5M ARR

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Fiber Claim Sorter" 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 supplier spec sheet and Jev selects the exact extracted fiber-content claim that matches your sourcing brief, or none.
Discipline: Fashion & Textile Design (Sustainable textile sourcing).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: Selecting a verbatim claim preserves supplier wording and avoids inventing material certifications or percentages.

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": <Sourcing brief and extracted fiber claims>, "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)
{
  "best_claim": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which extracted claim best matches the brief?",
    "criteria": {
      "fiber_match": "Names the requested fiber",
      "blend_match": "Matches requested blend or proportions",
      "certification_match": "Matches required certification",
      "none": "No claim is a reliable match"
    }
  },
  "claim_explicit": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the selected claim explicitly state the requested fiber content?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Fiber content is directly stated",
      "false": "Content is missing, ambiguous, or inferred"
    }
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0962. Print Motif Finder

ID: fashion-print-motif-finder
Sub-discipline: Textile print design
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: Paste a mood-board brief and motif notes, and Jev selects the source phrase that best describes the intended print motif, or none.

Why typed decisions: A typed selection links the brief to an existing motif description without manufacturing a new design direction.

TAM: Global textile printing: ~$150B
SAM: Digital print design tools: ~$2B
SOM: Independent studios: ~$3M ARR

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Print Motif Finder" 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 mood-board brief and motif notes, and Jev selects the source phrase that best describes the intended print motif, or none.
Discipline: Fashion & Textile Design (Textile print design).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: A typed selection links the brief to an existing motif description without manufacturing a new design direction.

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": <Mood-board brief and extracted motif phrases>, "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)
{
  "motif_phrase": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which phrase best captures the requested motif?",
    "criteria": {
      "botanical": "Plants, flowers, or foliage",
      "geometric": "Shapes, grids, or repeating geometry",
      "figurative": "People, animals, or recognizable objects",
      "none": "No phrase captures the requested motif"
    }
  },
  "repeat_match": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the selected phrase indicate the requested repeat style?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Repeat style is explicitly compatible",
      "false": "Repeat style conflicts or is not stated"
    }
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0963. Costume Continuity Desk

ID: fashion-costume-continuity-desk-1
Sub-discipline: Costume design
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: Paste a continuity report and scene notes, and Jev selects the exact costume detail that should be checked for the next scene, or none.

Why typed decisions: Choosing an existing note makes continuity review traceable to production records instead of relying on generated instructions.

TAM: Global costume production services: ~$20B
SAM: Screen costume departments: ~$4B
SOM: Production teams: ~$2M ARR

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Costume Continuity Desk" 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 continuity report and scene notes, and Jev selects the exact costume detail that should be checked for the next scene, or none.
Discipline: Fashion & Textile Design (Costume design).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: Choosing an existing note makes continuity review traceable to production records instead of relying on generated instructions.

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": <Scene notes and extracted costume details>, "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)
{
  "continuity_detail": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which detail is most relevant to the scene transition?",
    "criteria": {
      "garment": "A specific garment or layer",
      "accessory": "A wearable accessory or prop detail",
      "condition": "Damage, dirt, or garment condition",
      "none": "No extracted detail is relevant"
    }
  },
  "continuity_risk": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How serious is the potential continuity mismatch?",
    "criteria": [
      "1: No meaningful mismatch",
      "2: Minor visual inconsistency",
      "3: Obvious mismatch requiring a check",
      "4: Critical mismatch across scenes"
    ]
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0964. Palette Swatch Match

ID: fashion-palette-swatch-match
Sub-discipline: Fashion color development
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: Paste a palette brief and color-library notes, and Jev selects the existing swatch label that best fits the requested color role, or none.

Why typed decisions: Selecting a catalog label keeps color decisions anchored to real swatches rather than invented color names.

TAM: Global color and textile design: ~$30B
SAM: Apparel color teams: ~$3B
SOM: Design studios: ~$2M ARR

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Palette Swatch Match" 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 palette brief and color-library notes, and Jev selects the existing swatch label that best fits the requested color role, or none.
Discipline: Fashion & Textile Design (Fashion color development).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: Selecting a catalog label keeps color decisions anchored to real swatches rather than invented color names.

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": <Palette brief and extracted swatch labels>, "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)
{
  "swatch_label": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which swatch label best fits the requested role?",
    "criteria": {
      "hue_match": "Hue is closest to the brief",
      "temperature_match": "Warmth or coolness is the key match",
      "value_match": "Lightness or darkness is the key match",
      "none": "No label is a suitable match"
    }
  },
  "spec_complete": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the selected entry include a usable color identifier?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "A code or physical swatch reference is present",
      "false": "No usable identifier is present"
    }
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0965. Seam Note Selector

ID: fashion-seam-note-selector
Sub-discipline: Garment construction
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: Paste a tech-pack excerpt and construction checklist, and Jev selects the existing seam instruction that applies to the garment section, or none.

Why typed decisions: A source-backed choice reduces the risk of introducing a technically incorrect construction instruction.

TAM: Global apparel manufacturing: ~$1.7T
SAM: Digital product development: ~$10B
SOM: Small labels: ~$4M ARR

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Seam Note Selector" 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 tech-pack excerpt and construction checklist, and Jev selects the existing seam instruction that applies to the garment section, or none.
Discipline: Fashion & Textile Design (Garment construction).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: A source-backed choice reduces the risk of introducing a technically incorrect construction instruction.

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": <Tech-pack excerpt and extracted seam instructions>, "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)
{
  "seam_instruction": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which instruction applies to this garment section?",
    "criteria": {
      "seam_type": "Names the relevant seam construction",
      "finish": "Specifies the relevant seam finish",
      "stitching": "Specifies stitch type or placement",
      "none": "No instruction clearly applies"
    }
  },
  "instruction_specific": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is the selected instruction specific enough to execute?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Construction details are actionable",
      "false": "Details are incomplete or ambiguous"
    }
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0966. Vintage Label Scout

ID: fashion-vintage-label-scout
Sub-discipline: Vintage fashion research
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: Paste a garment listing and research notes, and Jev selects the extracted label or date clue most useful for identifying the piece, or none.

Why typed decisions: Selecting a documented clue preserves evidence and avoids fabricating provenance or era attribution.

TAM: Global resale apparel: ~$200B
SAM: Vintage authentication and research: ~$1B
SOM: Specialist resellers: ~$1M ARR

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Vintage Label Scout" 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 garment listing and research notes, and Jev selects the extracted label or date clue most useful for identifying the piece, or none.
Discipline: Fashion & Textile Design (Vintage fashion research).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: Selecting a documented clue preserves evidence and avoids fabricating provenance or era attribution.

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": <Listing text and extracted label or date clues>, "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)
{
  "identifying_clue": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which clue is most useful for identification?",
    "criteria": {
      "label": "Brand or maker label",
      "date_code": "Date, lot, or production code",
      "construction": "Distinctive construction or material clue",
      "none": "No clue supports identification"
    }
  },
  "evidence_strength": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How strong is the selected clue as evidence?",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Weak or generic clue",
      "2: Some identifying value",
      "3: Strong distinguishing clue",
      "4: Highly specific documented clue"
    ]
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0967. Runway Look Index

ID: fashion-runway-look-index
Sub-discipline: Styling and collection organization
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: Paste collection notes and a look list, and Jev selects the existing look description that best matches the requested styling reference, or none.

Why typed decisions: Selecting a recorded look keeps references consistent with the actual collection rather than generating a fictional outfit.

TAM: Global fashion styling services: ~$15B
SAM: Collection planning software: ~$1B
SOM: Emerging labels: ~$2M ARR

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Runway Look Index" 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 collection notes and a look list, and Jev selects the existing look description that best matches the requested styling reference, or none.
Discipline: Fashion & Textile Design (Styling and collection organization).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: Selecting a recorded look keeps references consistent with the actual collection rather than generating a fictional outfit.

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": <Styling request and extracted look descriptions>, "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)
{
  "look_match": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which recorded look best matches the request?",
    "criteria": {
      "silhouette": "Matches the requested shape or proportion",
      "layering": "Matches the requested layering",
      "occasion": "Matches the requested use or setting",
      "none": "No look is a credible match"
    }
  },
  "reference_clear": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the selected entry identify one unambiguous look?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "A single look is clearly identified",
      "false": "The match is ambiguous or missing"
    }
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0968. Fabric Drape Tracker

ID: fashion-fabric-drape-tracker
Sub-discipline: Textile development
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: Paste fabric-test notes and a design brief, and Jev selects the recorded drape observation most relevant to the intended garment, or none.

Why typed decisions: A typed choice surfaces a real test observation without inventing performance claims about the fabric.

TAM: Global textile testing and development: ~$10B
SAM: Apparel material R&D: ~$2B
SOM: Fabric mills and studios: ~$1M ARR

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Fabric Drape Tracker" 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 fabric-test notes and a design brief, and Jev selects the recorded drape observation most relevant to the intended garment, or none.
Discipline: Fashion & Textile Design (Textile development).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: A typed choice surfaces a real test observation without inventing performance claims about the fabric.

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": <Design brief and extracted drape observations>, "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)
{
  "drape_observation": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which observation best fits the intended use?",
    "criteria": {
      "fluid": "Describes soft, flowing movement",
      "structured": "Describes shape retention or body",
      "crisp": "Describes a firm, sharp hand",
      "none": "No observation fits the intended use"
    }
  },
  "test_based": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is the selected observation tied to a recorded test or sample?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Observation has a sample or test reference",
      "false": "Observation is unverified or unattributed"
    }
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0969. Embellishment Risk Check

ID: fashion-embellishment-risk-check
Sub-discipline: Embellishment design
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: Paste a garment care brief and embellishment notes, and Jev selects the existing care warning most relevant to the proposed detail, or none.

Why typed decisions: Choosing a documented warning helps teams flag real care constraints without inventing maintenance advice.

TAM: Global apparel trims and embellishments: ~$40B
SAM: Premium garment development: ~$5B
SOM: Specialty design teams: ~$1M ARR

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Embellishment Risk Check" 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 garment care brief and embellishment notes, and Jev selects the existing care warning most relevant to the proposed detail, or none.
Discipline: Fashion & Textile Design (Embellishment design).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: Choosing a documented warning helps teams flag real care constraints without inventing maintenance advice.

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": <Care brief and extracted embellishment warnings>, "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)
{
  "care_warning": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which warning applies to the proposed embellishment?",
    "criteria": {
      "wash": "Washing or cleaning limitation",
      "heat": "Heat, ironing, or pressing limitation",
      "abrasion": "Snagging or abrasion limitation",
      "none": "No extracted warning applies"
    }
  },
  "warning_supported": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is the warning supported by the supplied care or material notes?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "A source note supports the warning",
      "false": "No supporting source is present"
    }
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0970. Pattern Piece Locator

ID: fashion-pattern-piece-locator
Sub-discipline: Patternmaking
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: Paste a pattern-room note and piece inventory, and Jev selects the existing piece name that best matches the described component, or none.

Why typed decisions: Selecting the piece’s recorded name avoids creating duplicate or misleading pattern terminology.

TAM: Global apparel patternmaking market: ~$5B
SAM: Pattern digitization tools: ~$1B
SOM: Independent pattern rooms: ~$1M ARR

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Pattern Piece Locator" 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 pattern-room note and piece inventory, and Jev selects the existing piece name that best matches the described component, or none.
Discipline: Fashion & Textile Design (Patternmaking).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: Selecting the piece’s recorded name avoids creating duplicate or misleading pattern terminology.

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": <Pattern note and extracted piece names>, "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)
{
  "piece_name": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which listed piece matches the described component?",
    "criteria": {
      "front_or_back": "Main body front or back piece",
      "sleeve_or_cuff": "Sleeve, cuff, or armhole piece",
      "collar_or_facing": "Collar, facing, or neckline piece",
      "none": "No listed piece matches"
    }
  },
  "piece_unique": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the selected name identify one unique inventory item?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "One piece is clearly identified",
      "false": "Multiple pieces or no piece fit"
    }
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0971. Textile Defect Triage

ID: fashion-textile-defect-triage
Sub-discipline: Fabric quality control
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: Paste inspection notes and a defect log, and Jev selects the recorded defect category that best fits the note, or none.

Why typed decisions: A typed category selection improves consistent quality tracking while retaining the inspector’s original wording.

TAM: Global textile quality services: ~$8B
SAM: Fabric inspection software: ~$1B
SOM: Mills and converters: ~$2M ARR

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Textile Defect Triage" 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 inspection notes and a defect log, and Jev selects the recorded defect category that best fits the note, or none.
Discipline: Fashion & Textile Design (Fabric quality control).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: A typed category selection improves consistent quality tracking while retaining the inspector’s original wording.

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": <Inspection note and extracted defect categories>, "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_category": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which logged category best fits the inspection note?",
    "criteria": {
      "weaving": "Warp, weft, or weave irregularity",
      "color": "Shade, dye, or print inconsistency",
      "surface": "Pilling, snag, hole, or surface flaw",
      "none": "No category clearly fits"
    }
  },
  "defect_severity": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How severe is the defect for the intended use?",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Cosmetic and negligible",
      "2: Minor, likely usable",
      "3: Noticeable, needs review",
      "4: Critical, likely reject"
    ]
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0972. Dye Recipe Match

ID: fashion-dye-recipe-match
Sub-discipline: Textile dyeing
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: Paste a shade target and archived dye notes, and Jev selects the existing recipe reference most relevant to the target, or none.

Why typed decisions: Choosing an archived recipe preserves reproducibility and avoids fabricating chemical or process instructions.

TAM: Global textile dyeing and finishing: ~$100B
SAM: Digital color matching: ~$2B
SOM: Dye houses: ~$1M ARR

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Dye Recipe Match" 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 shade target and archived dye notes, and Jev selects the existing recipe reference most relevant to the target, or none.
Discipline: Fashion & Textile Design (Textile dyeing).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: Choosing an archived recipe preserves reproducibility and avoids fabricating chemical or process instructions.

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": <Shade target and extracted recipe references>, "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)
{
  "recipe_reference": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which archived reference is closest to the target?",
    "criteria": {
      "shade": "Closest recorded shade target",
      "fiber": "Uses the same fiber type",
      "process": "Uses the same dyeing process",
      "none": "No reference is suitably comparable"
    }
  },
  "recipe_traceable": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the selected reference include a traceable batch or record ID?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "A batch or archive ID is present",
      "false": "The reference cannot be traced"
    }
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0973. Care Symbol Auditor

ID: fashion-care-symbol-auditor
Sub-discipline: Apparel labeling
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: Paste a garment care brief and label copy, and Jev selects the existing care instruction that matches the documented material constraint, or none.

Why typed decisions: A source-grounded choice helps prevent unsupported care claims from reaching garment labels.

TAM: Global apparel labeling and compliance: ~$10B
SAM: Fashion compliance tools: ~$1B
SOM: Apparel brands: ~$2M ARR

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Care Symbol Auditor" 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 garment care brief and label copy, and Jev selects the existing care instruction that matches the documented material constraint, or none.
Discipline: Fashion & Textile Design (Apparel labeling).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: A source-grounded choice helps prevent unsupported care claims from reaching garment labels.

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": <Material constraint and extracted care instructions>, "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)
{
  "care_instruction": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which instruction matches the documented constraint?",
    "criteria": {
      "wash_method": "Washing method or temperature",
      "dry_method": "Drying method or restriction",
      "iron_method": "Ironing or pressing guidance",
      "none": "No instruction is supported"
    }
  },
  "label_supported": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is the selected instruction supported by the supplied documentation?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Documentation explicitly supports it",
      "false": "Support is missing or unclear"
    }
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0974. Accessory Pairing Index

ID: fashion-accessory-pairing-index
Sub-discipline: Fashion styling
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: Paste a look brief and accessory inventory, and Jev selects the existing item description that best suits the look, or none.

Why typed decisions: A typed choice points to an item the stylist actually has, rather than generating an unavailable accessory suggestion.

TAM: Global fashion accessories: ~$500B
SAM: Stylist inventory tools: ~$1B
SOM: Freelance stylists: ~$1M ARR

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Accessory Pairing Index" 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 look brief and accessory inventory, and Jev selects the existing item description that best suits the look, or none.
Discipline: Fashion & Textile Design (Fashion styling).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: A typed choice points to an item the stylist actually has, rather than generating an unavailable accessory suggestion.

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": <Look brief and extracted accessory descriptions>, "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)
{
  "accessory_match": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which inventory item best suits the look?",
    "criteria": {
      "proportion": "Fits the requested scale or proportion",
      "material": "Fits the requested material or texture",
      "occasion": "Fits the setting or occasion",
      "none": "No listed item is suitable"
    }
  },
  "inventory_confirmed": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is the selected item confirmed as available?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Availability is explicitly confirmed",
      "false": "Availability is unknown or unavailable"
    }
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0975. Print Archive Curator

ID: fashion-print-archive-curator
Sub-discipline: Textile archive management
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: Paste a research query and archive captions, and Jev selects the existing caption that best matches the requested pattern reference, or none.

Why typed decisions: Selecting a preserved caption keeps archival discovery tied to cataloged evidence and avoids invented historical descriptions.

TAM: Global textile and fashion archives: ~$5B
SAM: Digital archive platforms: ~$500M
SOM: Museums and design schools: ~$500K ARR

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Print Archive Curator" 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 research query and archive captions, and Jev selects the existing caption that best matches the requested pattern reference, or none.
Discipline: Fashion & Textile Design (Textile archive management).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: Selecting a preserved caption keeps archival discovery tied to cataloged evidence and avoids invented historical descriptions.

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": <Research query and extracted archive captions>, "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)
{
  "archive_caption": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which caption best matches the query?",
    "criteria": {
      "motif": "Matches the requested motif",
      "period": "Matches the requested era or date",
      "technique": "Matches the requested printing or weaving technique",
      "none": "No caption is a reliable match"
    }
  },
  "caption_specific": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the selected caption explicitly identify the requested feature?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The feature is directly named",
      "false": "The feature is absent or only implied"
    }
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0976. Garment Fit Note Sorter

ID: fashion-garment-fit-note-sorter
Sub-discipline: Fitting and alterations
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: Paste fitting notes and a pattern adjustment checklist, and Jev selects the existing adjustment note that best addresses the fit issue, or none.

Why typed decisions: A selected recorded adjustment is reviewable by the fitter and avoids generating untested alteration advice.

TAM: Global tailoring and alterations: ~$20B
SAM: Digital fitting workflow tools: ~$1B
SOM: Costume and sample rooms: ~$1M ARR

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Garment Fit Note Sorter" 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 fitting notes and a pattern adjustment checklist, and Jev selects the existing adjustment note that best addresses the fit issue, or none.
Discipline: Fashion & Textile Design (Fitting and alterations).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: A selected recorded adjustment is reviewable by the fitter and avoids generating untested alteration advice.

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": <Fit issue and extracted adjustment 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)
{
  "adjustment_note": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which note addresses the stated fit issue?",
    "criteria": {
      "length": "Addresses garment or body length",
      "ease": "Addresses tightness, looseness, or ease",
      "balance": "Addresses balance, pitch, or alignment",
      "none": "No note addresses the issue"
    }
  },
  "fit_issue_clear": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is the fit issue described clearly enough to select an adjustment?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The issue and garment area are clear",
      "false": "The description is incomplete or ambiguous"
    }
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0977. Uniform Spec Matcher

ID: fashion-uniform-spec-matcher
Sub-discipline: Uniform and workwear design
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: Paste a client requirements sheet and garment specs, and Jev selects the exact spec line that satisfies the requested uniform feature, or none.

Why typed decisions: A verbatim spec match makes procurement decisions auditable and avoids inventing compliance or performance claims.

TAM: Global workwear and uniforms: ~$100B
SAM: Uniform design and procurement software: ~$2B
SOM: Specialist suppliers: ~$2M ARR

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Uniform Spec Matcher" 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 client requirements sheet and garment specs, and Jev selects the exact spec line that satisfies the requested uniform feature, or none.
Discipline: Fashion & Textile Design (Uniform and workwear design).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: A verbatim spec match makes procurement decisions auditable and avoids inventing compliance or performance claims.

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": <Client requirement and extracted spec lines>, "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)
{
  "spec_line": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which spec line best satisfies the requirement?",
    "criteria": {
      "fabric": "Matches material or fabric requirement",
      "function": "Matches a performance or functional requirement",
      "fit_or_finish": "Matches fit, finish, or construction requirement",
      "none": "No spec line satisfies it"
    }
  },
  "requirement_explicit": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the selected line explicitly state the required feature?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Feature is directly specified",
      "false": "Feature is missing or inferred"
    }
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0978. Textile Technique Scout

ID: fashion-textile-technique-scout
Sub-discipline: Textile art
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: Paste a project brief and studio process notes, and Jev selects the existing technique note that best fits the desired surface effect, or none.

Why typed decisions: Selecting a documented studio process helps artists reuse known techniques without fabricating process guidance.

TAM: Global textile art materials and services: ~$5B
SAM: Textile artist workflow tools: ~$300M
SOM: Studios and schools: ~$500K ARR

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Textile Technique Scout" 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 project brief and studio process notes, and Jev selects the existing technique note that best fits the desired surface effect, or none.
Discipline: Fashion & Textile Design (Textile art).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: Selecting a documented studio process helps artists reuse known techniques without fabricating process guidance.

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": <Project brief and extracted technique 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)
{
  "technique_note": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which process note best fits the desired effect?",
    "criteria": {
      "weaving": "Interlacing or woven structure",
      "surface_dye": "Dyeing, painting, or printing on fabric",
      "manipulation": "Pleating, gathering, or shaping fabric",
      "none": "No note fits the desired effect"
    }
  },
  "process_documented": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is the selected technique documented as a studio-tested process?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "A tested process record exists",
      "false": "It is untested or undocumented"
    }
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0979. Sample Room Tracker

ID: fashion-sample-room-tracker
Sub-discipline: Apparel product development
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: Paste sample-room updates and a style tracker, and Jev selects the existing status phrase that best fits the latest update, or none.

Why typed decisions: Selecting a controlled status from real updates improves tracking without inventing progress or completion claims.

TAM: Global apparel product development: ~$15B
SAM: Sample management software: ~$2B
SOM: Fashion brands: ~$3M ARR

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Sample Room Tracker" 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 sample-room updates and a style tracker, and Jev selects the existing status phrase that best fits the latest update, or none.
Discipline: Fashion & Textile Design (Apparel product development).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: Selecting a controlled status from real updates improves tracking without inventing progress or completion claims.

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 update and extracted status phrases>, "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)
{
  "sample_status": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which status best matches the update?",
    "criteria": {
      "in_progress": "Work is actively underway",
      "awaiting": "A dependency or review is pending",
      "approved": "Approval or sign-off is recorded",
      "none": "No status is clearly supported"
    }
  },
  "status_current": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the selected status come from the latest dated update?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "It is the newest relevant update",
      "false": "It is older or date is unclear"
    }
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0980. Costume Pull Prioritizer

ID: fashion-costume-pull-prioritizer
Sub-discipline: Costume department operations
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate — pick the real value

Pitch: Paste a scene breakdown and costume inventory, and Jev selects the existing inventory description that best meets the scene’s pull requirement, or none.

Why typed decisions: Selecting an available, cataloged piece gives costume teams a verifiable pull list instead of imaginary wardrobe suggestions.

TAM: Global film and stage costume markets: ~$20B
SAM: Wardrobe inventory systems: ~$1B
SOM: Production costume departments: ~$1M ARR

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Costume Pull Prioritizer" 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 scene breakdown and costume inventory, and Jev selects the existing inventory description that best meets the scene’s pull requirement, or none.
Discipline: Fashion & Textile Design (Costume department operations).
Jev pattern: Select, Don't Generate (pick the real value) — code extracts candidate spans/values from the source, then a Jev `choice` (with a 'none' option) selects the intended one so the app copies real text instead of generating it.
Why typed decisions: Selecting an available, cataloged piece gives costume teams a verifiable pull list instead of imaginary wardrobe suggestions.

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": <Scene requirement and extracted inventory descriptions>, "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)
{
  "costume_piece": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which cataloged piece best meets the requirement?",
    "criteria": {
      "silhouette": "Matches the requested silhouette",
      "period_or_character": "Matches period or character notes",
      "color_or_condition": "Matches color or condition notes",
      "none": "No cataloged piece is a good fit"
    }
  },
  "piece_available": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is the selected piece confirmed available for the pull?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Availability is recorded as confirmed",
      "false": "It is unavailable or unconfirmed"
    }
  }
}

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
the source text with candidate spans highlighted and the selected one locked in. 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

---

## 0981. Fiber Claim Gate

ID: fashion-fiber-claim-gate
Sub-discipline: Sustainable fashion
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: 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.

Why typed decisions: Typed claim classifications and evidence checks make unsupported sustainability claims easier to route consistently than generated explanations.

TAM: Global apparel sustainability software: $1B+
SAM: Fashion brands and sourcing teams: $300M
SOM: Early design and sourcing teams: $5M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Fiber Claim 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
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.
Discipline: Fashion & Textile Design (Sustainable fashion).
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 claim classifications and evidence checks make unsupported sustainability claims easier to route consistently than generated explanations.

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": <Garment fiber claims, supplier certificates, and source excerpts>, "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)
{
  "fiber_category": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which fiber category best matches the stated claim and evidence?",
    "criteria": {
      "natural": "Claim concerns a natural fiber such as cotton, wool, or linen",
      "regenerated": "Claim concerns regenerated cellulose such as viscose or lyocell",
      "synthetic": "Claim concerns a synthetic fiber such as polyester or nylon",
      "blend_or_unclear": "Claim covers a blend or cannot be categorized from the evidence"
    }
  },
  "claim_supported": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the cited evidence substantiate the fiber claim as written?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Evidence directly supports the named fiber and relevant product or batch",
      "false": "Evidence is missing, mismatched, outdated, or does not support the wording"
    }
  },
  "evidence_strength": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How strong is the evidence for this specific claim?",
    "criteria": [
      "1: No usable evidence",
      "2: Indirect or incomplete evidence",
      "3: Relevant evidence with a minor gap",
      "4: Direct, current, product-specific evidence"
    ]
  }
}

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

---

## 0982. Dye Lot Proof

ID: fashion-dye-lot-proof
Sub-discipline: Textile dyeing
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Textile teams paste dye-lot specifications and lab records, and Jev classifies the colorfastness claim, verifies its evidence, and grades the match for review.

Why typed decisions: A fixed verdict and evidence-strength score can flag risky lots without inventing technical guidance.

TAM: Textile testing and quality software: $2B+
SAM: Color and fabric quality workflows: $250M
SOM: Independent mills and studios: $4M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Dye Lot Proof" 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
Textile teams paste dye-lot specifications and lab records, and Jev classifies the colorfastness claim, verifies its evidence, and grades the match for review.
Discipline: Fashion & Textile Design (Textile dyeing).
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: A fixed verdict and evidence-strength score can flag risky lots without inventing technical guidance.

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": <Dye-lot claim, test method, and lab result excerpts>, "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)
{
  "test_property": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which property is the submitted test evidence about?",
    "criteria": {
      "wash": "Color change or staining during washing",
      "light": "Color change under light exposure",
      "rubbing": "Color transfer during rubbing",
      "other_or_unclear": "Another property or insufficiently clear evidence"
    }
  },
  "result_matches_claim": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the test result support the stated colorfastness claim for this lot?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The method, result, threshold, and lot match the claim",
      "false": "A required match or supporting result is absent"
    }
  },
  "test_completeness": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How complete is the evidence for this lot-level claim?",
    "criteria": [
      "1: No usable test record",
      "2: Partial record or unidentified lot",
      "3: Mostly complete with a limited gap",
      "4: Complete, traceable, relevant test record"
    ]
  }
}

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

---

## 0983. Pattern Rights Check

ID: fashion-pattern-rights-check
Sub-discipline: Print design
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: 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.

Why typed decisions: Typed rights states and evidence checks support cautious routing without generating legal advice.

TAM: Creative rights management software: $1B+
SAM: Fashion and surface-pattern teams: $150M
SOM: Small print studios: $3M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Pattern Rights Check" 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
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.
Discipline: Fashion & Textile Design (Print design).
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 rights states and evidence checks support cautious routing without generating legal advice.

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": <Artwork source notes, license excerpts, and intended use>, "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)
{
  "rights_route": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which rights route best fits the supplied documents?",
    "criteria": {
      "original": "Documents indicate the submitter created the artwork",
      "licensed": "A license appears to cover the intended use",
      "public_domain": "Evidence indicates the work is in the public domain",
      "unclear": "Ownership or permitted use is not established"
    }
  },
  "use_supported": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Do the documents support this artwork’s intended commercial use?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Evidence identifies the artwork and covers the stated use",
      "false": "Permission, scope, attribution, or artwork identity is unresolved"
    }
  },
  "provenance_quality": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How complete is the artwork provenance record?",
    "criteria": [
      "1: No provenance evidence",
      "2: Informal or incomplete notes",
      "3: Useful records with a minor gap",
      "4: Traceable source and clear applicable terms"
    ]
  }
}

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

---

## 0984. Care Label Audit

ID: fashion-care-label-audit
Sub-discipline: Garment production
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: 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.

Why typed decisions: Field-level decisions reveal unsupported instructions and send uncertain labels to review rather than proposing new wording.

TAM: Apparel product compliance software: $1B+
SAM: Garment care and quality teams: $200M
SOM: Emerging apparel labels: $4M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Care Label Audit" 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
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.
Discipline: Fashion & Textile Design (Garment production).
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: Field-level decisions reveal unsupported instructions and send uncertain labels to review rather than proposing new wording.

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": <Care-label fields, fabric composition, and test excerpts>, "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)
{
  "care_risk": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which care decision area needs the closest review?",
    "criteria": {
      "washing": "Wash method or temperature",
      "bleaching": "Bleach instruction",
      "drying": "Drying method",
      "ironing_or_cleaning": "Ironing, professional cleaning, or unclear guidance"
    }
  },
  "instruction_evidence": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Is each proposed care instruction supported by the supplied material evidence?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Every instruction checked has relevant supporting evidence",
      "false": "At least one instruction lacks matching or sufficient evidence"
    }
  },
  "label_readiness": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How ready is this care label for approval?",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Key evidence is absent",
      "2: Multiple fields need review",
      "3: Mostly supported with a limited question",
      "4: All reviewed fields are supported"
    ]
  }
}

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

---

## 0985. Costume Continuity Ledger

ID: fashion-costume-continuity-ledger
Sub-discipline: Costume design
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Costume teams paste scene notes, continuity records, and garment photos’ metadata, and Jev assigns a continuity issue type, checks each garment claim against the record, and scores review priority.

Why typed decisions: Structured checks help crews catch continuity mismatches without generating creative dialogue or costume notes.

TAM: Film and TV production software: $3B+
SAM: Costume and wardrobe departments: $250M
SOM: Independent productions and costume houses: $5M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Costume Continuity Ledger" 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
Costume teams paste scene notes, continuity records, and garment photos’ metadata, and Jev assigns a continuity issue type, checks each garment claim against the record, and scores review priority.
Discipline: Fashion & Textile Design (Costume design).
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: Structured checks help crews catch continuity mismatches without generating creative dialogue or costume notes.

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": <Scene identifiers, costume records, and image metadata>, "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)
{
  "continuity_issue": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "What kind of continuity issue is most likely?",
    "criteria": {
      "garment": "Garment identity or construction mismatch",
      "color": "Color or pattern mismatch",
      "accessory": "Accessory or styling mismatch",
      "sequence_unclear": "Scene sequence or evidence is unclear"
    }
  },
  "record_matches": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the continuity record support the garment details assigned to this scene?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Scene, garment, and recorded details align",
      "false": "A detail conflicts, is missing, or cannot be tied to the scene"
    }
  },
  "review_priority": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How urgent is human review before the next shoot?",
    "criteria": [
      "1: No evident continuity risk",
      "2: Minor discrepancy with low impact",
      "3: Likely visible discrepancy",
      "4: Major mismatch or critical scene evidence gap"
    ]
  }
}

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

---

## 0986. Vintage Fiber Sorter

ID: fashion-vintage-fiber-sorter
Sub-discipline: Vintage fashion
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Vintage sellers and stylists paste garment descriptions and available label or test evidence, and Jev classifies likely fiber type, checks the claim against evidence, and grades identification confidence.

Why typed decisions: Typed identification with explicit evidence checks avoids presenting uncertain fiber guesses as facts.

TAM: Resale and recommerce software: $2B+
SAM: Vintage apparel sellers and stylists: $180M
SOM: Specialist vintage shops: $3M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Vintage Fiber Sorter" 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
Vintage sellers and stylists paste garment descriptions and available label or test evidence, and Jev classifies likely fiber type, checks the claim against evidence, and grades identification confidence.
Discipline: Fashion & Textile Design (Vintage fashion).
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 identification with explicit evidence checks avoids presenting uncertain fiber guesses as facts.

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": <Listing fiber claims, label text, and test or provenance 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)
{
  "fiber_type": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which fiber type is best supported by the supplied evidence?",
    "criteria": {
      "wool_or_hair": "Wool or another animal hair fiber",
      "silk": "Silk fiber",
      "plant": "Cotton, linen, or another plant fiber",
      "synthetic_or_unknown": "Synthetic, blended, or not determinable"
    }
  },
  "listing_verified": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the evidence support the listing’s stated fiber composition?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Label or reliable test evidence matches the stated composition",
      "false": "Evidence is absent, ambiguous, or contradicts the listing"
    }
  },
  "identification_confidence": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How reliable is the fiber identification?",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Description only, no supporting evidence",
      "2: Indirect clues or incomplete label",
      "3: Relevant evidence with limited ambiguity",
      "4: Clear, traceable label or suitable test"
    ]
  }
}

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

---

## 0987. Trim Spec Sentinel

ID: fashion-trim-spec-sentinel
Sub-discipline: Apparel sourcing
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Sourcing teams paste trim specifications, purchase-order fields, and supplier confirmations, and Jev categorizes discrepancies, verifies each key field against its source, and scores order risk.

Why typed decisions: Field-level typed checks expose mismatches that prose summaries can obscure in production handoffs.

TAM: Fashion supply-chain software: $5B+
SAM: Apparel trims and sourcing workflows: $300M
SOM: Small brands and sourcing agents: $5M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Trim Spec Sentinel" 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
Sourcing teams paste trim specifications, purchase-order fields, and supplier confirmations, and Jev categorizes discrepancies, verifies each key field against its source, and scores order risk.
Discipline: Fashion & Textile Design (Apparel sourcing).
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: Field-level typed checks expose mismatches that prose summaries can obscure in production handoffs.

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": <Trim spec, purchase-order fields, and supplier confirmation>, "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)
{
  "mismatch_type": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which specification field appears most at risk?",
    "criteria": {
      "material": "Trim material or composition",
      "dimension": "Size, gauge, or measurement",
      "finish": "Color, coating, or surface finish",
      "quantity_or_unclear": "Quantity, identity, or unclear discrepancy"
    }
  },
  "spec_confirmed": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the supplier confirmation support each checked purchase-order field?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Checked fields agree across the specification and confirmation",
      "false": "A checked field conflicts or lacks confirmation"
    }
  },
  "order_risk": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How serious is the discrepancy for production?",
    "criteria": [
      "1: No material discrepancy found",
      "2: Minor discrepancy with easy correction",
      "3: Could affect fit, appearance, or timing",
      "4: Likely production blocker or costly rework"
    ]
  }
}

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

---

## 0988. Runway Sample Gate

ID: fashion-runway-sample-gate
Sub-discipline: Fashion sampling
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: 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.

Why typed decisions: Typed, evidence-linked decisions create a repeatable sample gate without replacing designer judgment.

TAM: Product development software: $2B+
SAM: Fashion sampling and tech design: $250M
SOM: Independent design labels: $4M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

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

---

## 0989. Print Repeat Inspector

ID: fashion-print-repeat-inspector-1
Sub-discipline: Textile surface design
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Surface designers paste repeat specifications and proof-sheet measurements, and Jev classifies the repeat type, checks the proof against stated dimensions, and scores production readiness.

Why typed decisions: Typed geometry and evidence verdicts can flag uncertain repeats before costly strike-offs.

TAM: Digital textile design software: $1B+
SAM: Print studios and textile teams: $220M
SOM: Independent surface designers: $4M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Print Repeat Inspector" 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
Surface designers paste repeat specifications and proof-sheet measurements, and Jev classifies the repeat type, checks the proof against stated dimensions, and scores production readiness.
Discipline: Fashion & Textile Design (Textile surface design).
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 geometry and evidence verdicts can flag uncertain repeats before costly strike-offs.

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": <Repeat specification, proof measurements, and image annotations>, "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)
{
  "repeat_type": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which repeat structure is indicated by the supplied specification?",
    "criteria": {
      "straight": "Straight or full-drop alignment",
      "half_drop": "Half-drop alignment",
      "mirror": "Mirror or reflected repeat",
      "other_or_unclear": "Other structure or insufficient evidence"
    }
  },
  "repeat_verified": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the proof evidence support the stated repeat dimensions and alignment?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Measurements and visible alignment support the specification",
      "false": "Dimensions conflict, alignment breaks, or proof evidence is insufficient"
    }
  },
  "proof_readiness": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How ready is this repeat proof for a production strike-off?",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Repeat cannot be verified",
      "2: Major measurement or alignment uncertainty",
      "3: Mostly verified with a small unresolved point",
      "4: Dimensions and alignment are clearly supported"
    ]
  }
}

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

---

## 0990. Fit Note Verifier

ID: fashion-fit-note-verifier
Sub-discipline: Technical fashion design
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Technical designers paste fit comments, measurement tables, and approved tolerances, and Jev classifies each issue, verifies whether the note matches measured evidence, and grades escalation priority.

Why typed decisions: Typed issue labels tied to measurements distinguish evidence-backed fit findings from subjective or unsupported notes.

TAM: Fashion product development tools: $2B+
SAM: Technical design and fit teams: $180M
SOM: Small apparel brands: $3M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Fit Note Verifier" 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
Technical designers paste fit comments, measurement tables, and approved tolerances, and Jev classifies each issue, verifies whether the note matches measured evidence, and grades escalation priority.
Discipline: Fashion & Textile Design (Technical fashion design).
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 issue labels tied to measurements distinguish evidence-backed fit findings from subjective or unsupported notes.

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": <Fit comments, garment measurements, and approved tolerances>, "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)
{
  "fit_issue": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which fit area best matches the documented discrepancy?",
    "criteria": {
      "length": "Garment length or proportion",
      "ease": "Ease, circumference, or mobility",
      "balance": "Balance, drape, or alignment",
      "unclear": "No specific measurable fit area is established"
    }
  },
  "note_supported": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the measurement evidence support the fit comment against the approved tolerance?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Relevant measurement and tolerance support the stated issue",
      "false": "Measurement is missing, mismatched, or within tolerance despite the claim"
    }
  },
  "escalation_level": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How strongly should this fit note be escalated?",
    "criteria": [
      "1: No supported issue",
      "2: Small variance with low impact",
      "3: Meaningful variance needing designer review",
      "4: Critical fit or movement issue"
    ]
  }
}

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

---

## 0991. Wardrobe Pull Checker

ID: fashion-wardrobe-pull-checker
Sub-discipline: Styling and wardrobe
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Stylists paste pull requests, item records, and brand loan terms, and Jev categorizes the item requirement, verifies each fulfillment claim against records, and scores unresolved pull risk.

Why typed decisions: Typed checks keep loan, size, and item details auditable without generating styling recommendations.

TAM: Fashion rental and wardrobe software: $1B+
SAM: Styling agencies and wardrobe departments: $150M
SOM: Independent stylists: $3M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Wardrobe Pull Checker" 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
Stylists paste pull requests, item records, and brand loan terms, and Jev categorizes the item requirement, verifies each fulfillment claim against records, and scores unresolved pull risk.
Discipline: Fashion & Textile Design (Styling and wardrobe).
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 checks keep loan, size, and item details auditable without generating styling recommendations.

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": <Pull request fields, inventory records, and loan terms>, "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)
{
  "pull_requirement": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which requirement is the main constraint for this pull?",
    "criteria": {
      "specific_item": "Exact garment or designer requested",
      "size_fit": "Size, fit, or alteration requirement",
      "loan_condition": "Loan, return, or usage condition",
      "substitute_or_unclear": "Substitute allowed or requirement unclear"
    }
  },
  "fulfillment_verified": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Do the records support the pull’s stated item, size, and loan conditions?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Relevant item and terms are confirmed in the records",
      "false": "A key field is unconfirmed, inconsistent, or contradicted"
    }
  },
  "pull_risk": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How much human follow-up does this pull need?",
    "criteria": [
      "1: All key details confirmed",
      "2: Minor detail remains open",
      "3: Important item or term needs confirmation",
      "4: Likely unavailable or terms conflict"
    ]
  }
}

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

---

## 0992. Leather Origin Review

ID: fashion-leather-origin-review
Sub-discipline: Accessories design
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Accessories designers paste material-origin claims and supplier documents, and Jev classifies the material claim, checks its traceability evidence, and scores the need for human review.

Why typed decisions: A typed evidence verdict helps teams distinguish substantiated origin claims from supplier assertions alone.

TAM: Materials traceability software: $1B+
SAM: Fashion accessories sourcing teams: $180M
SOM: Emerging accessories brands: $3M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Leather Origin Review" 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
Accessories designers paste material-origin claims and supplier documents, and Jev classifies the material claim, checks its traceability evidence, and scores the need for human review.
Discipline: Fashion & Textile Design (Accessories design).
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: A typed evidence verdict helps teams distinguish substantiated origin claims from supplier assertions alone.

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": <Material-origin claim, supplier declarations, and traceability records>, "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)
{
  "material_claim": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which material claim is being assessed?",
    "criteria": {
      "animal_leather": "Animal-derived leather",
      "plant_based": "Plant-based leather alternative",
      "recycled": "Recycled or reclaimed material",
      "other_or_unclear": "Other or insufficiently specified material"
    }
  },
  "origin_supported": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the documentation substantiate the stated material origin and composition?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Traceable documents support the specific material claim",
      "false": "Documents are absent, generic, inconsistent, or insufficient"
    }
  },
  "traceability_level": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How strong is the material traceability record?",
    "criteria": [
      "1: No traceability evidence",
      "2: Supplier assertion without corroboration",
      "3: Partial chain or supporting records",
      "4: Specific, traceable, mutually consistent documentation"
    ]
  }
}

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

---

## 0993. Archive Garment Index

ID: fashion-archive-garment-index
Sub-discipline: Fashion archives
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Curators paste catalog fields and archive records, and Jev classifies each garment attribute, checks its evidence against the source record, and scores catalog review needs.

Why typed decisions: Typed field validation preserves archival uncertainty instead of silently converting assumptions into facts.

TAM: Museum collection management software: $2B+
SAM: Fashion and costume archives: $120M
SOM: Small museums and study collections: $2M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Archive Garment Index" 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
Curators paste catalog fields and archive records, and Jev classifies each garment attribute, checks its evidence against the source record, and scores catalog review needs.
Discipline: Fashion & Textile Design (Fashion archives).
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 field validation preserves archival uncertainty instead of silently converting assumptions into facts.

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": <Catalog attributes, accession records, and cited archive sources>, "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)
{
  "attribute_group": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which catalog attribute is most in need of verification?",
    "criteria": {
      "date_or_era": "Date, period, or era",
      "maker": "Designer, maker, or label",
      "material": "Fiber or construction material",
      "use_or_unclear": "Original use, attribution, or unclear field"
    }
  },
  "field_supported": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the cited archive evidence support the selected catalog attribute?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The source directly supports the attribute for this object",
      "false": "The source is missing, indirect, mismatched, or conflicting"
    }
  },
  "catalog_confidence": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How well documented is this catalog entry?",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Key attribution lacks evidence",
      "2: Sparse or indirect evidence",
      "3: Strong record with one open field",
      "4: Core fields are traceable to reliable sources"
    ]
  }
}

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

---

## 0994. Embellishment Safety Gate

ID: fashion-embellishment-safety-gate-1
Sub-discipline: Embellishment design
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Embellishment teams paste component lists, care claims, and test reports, and Jev classifies the risk area, checks each claim against evidence, and scores whether specialist review is needed.

Why typed decisions: Typed risk and evidence decisions help prevent unsupported safety or durability claims from passing unchecked.

TAM: Apparel compliance and testing software: $1B+
SAM: Embellishment and trim developers: $120M
SOM: Specialist studios and brands: $2M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Embellishment Safety 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
Embellishment teams paste component lists, care claims, and test reports, and Jev classifies the risk area, checks each claim against evidence, and scores whether specialist review is needed.
Discipline: Fashion & Textile Design (Embellishment design).
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 risk and evidence decisions help prevent unsupported safety or durability claims from passing unchecked.

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": <Embellishment components, product claims, and test excerpts>, "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)
{
  "risk_area": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which evidence area is most relevant to the submitted claim?",
    "criteria": {
      "attachment": "Attachment strength or detachment",
      "chemical": "Chemical or restricted-substance claim",
      "care_durability": "Care, abrasion, or durability",
      "other_or_unclear": "Other risk or insufficiently clear evidence"
    }
  },
  "claim_evidenced": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the supplied evidence support the specific embellishment claim?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Relevant test or specification supports the stated product claim",
      "false": "Evidence is missing, unsuitable, or not tied to the component"
    }
  },
  "review_severity": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How urgently should a specialist review the evidence?",
    "criteria": [
      "1: No unresolved risk indicated",
      "2: Limited documentation gap",
      "3: Material uncertainty affecting use or care",
      "4: Potential safety or major durability concern"
    ]
  }
}

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

---

## 0995. Uniform Spec Auditor

ID: fashion-uniform-spec-auditor
Sub-discipline: Uniform design
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Uniform designers paste client requirements, garment specs, and sample checks, and Jev classifies requirement types, verifies each claimed match against evidence, and scores approval readiness.

Why typed decisions: Field-by-field typed decisions make procurement compliance auditable while uncertain matches remain with human reviewers.

TAM: Uniform and workwear software: $1B+
SAM: Uniform design and procurement teams: $200M
SOM: Regional suppliers and studios: $4M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Uniform Spec Auditor" 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
Uniform designers paste client requirements, garment specs, and sample checks, and Jev classifies requirement types, verifies each claimed match against evidence, and scores approval readiness.
Discipline: Fashion & Textile Design (Uniform design).
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: Field-by-field typed decisions make procurement compliance auditable while uncertain matches remain with human reviewers.

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": <Client requirements, garment specification fields, and sample checks>, "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)
{
  "requirement_type": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which requirement category is being checked?",
    "criteria": {
      "appearance": "Color, style, or branding",
      "performance": "Durability, weather, or activity performance",
      "fit_range": "Size range, fit, or accessibility",
      "other_or_unclear": "Other or insufficiently defined requirement"
    }
  },
  "requirement_met": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the submitted evidence show that the garment meets this requirement?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Relevant specification or inspection directly supports the requirement",
      "false": "Evidence is absent, conflicting, or does not meet the stated threshold"
    }
  },
  "approval_readiness": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How ready is the uniform proposal for client approval?",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Key requirements are unverified",
      "2: Several important gaps remain",
      "3: Most requirements supported with a limited gap",
      "4: Checked requirements are documented 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

---

## 0996. Upcycle Material Matcher

ID: fashion-upcycle-material-matcher
Sub-discipline: Circular fashion
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Designers paste a design brief and reclaimed-material inventory, and Jev classifies the needed material role, verifies whether inventory evidence supports a proposed match, and scores feasibility for review.

Why typed decisions: Typed fit and evidence judgments help designers assess imperfect stock without fabricating material properties.

TAM: Circular fashion software: $1B+
SAM: Upcycling designers and material libraries: $130M
SOM: Independent circular studios: $3M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Upcycle Material Matcher" 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
Designers paste a design brief and reclaimed-material inventory, and Jev classifies the needed material role, verifies whether inventory evidence supports a proposed match, and scores feasibility for review.
Discipline: Fashion & Textile Design (Circular fashion).
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 fit and evidence judgments help designers assess imperfect stock without fabricating material properties.

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": <Design material needs, reclaimed-stock records, and swatch 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)
{
  "material_role": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which role does the design need the reclaimed material to fill?",
    "criteria": {
      "shell": "Main garment shell or body fabric",
      "lining": "Lining or inner layer",
      "trim": "Trim, binding, or decorative detail",
      "other_or_unclear": "Other role or insufficiently specified need"
    }
  },
  "stock_match_supported": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the inventory evidence support the proposed material match for this role?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Recorded composition, dimensions, and condition meet stated needs",
      "false": "A required property is unknown, mismatched, or unsupported"
    }
  },
  "feasibility": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How feasible is the proposed reclaimed-material match?",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Critical properties are unknown or unsuitable",
      "2: Major constraints require redesign",
      "3: Plausible with a limited test or adjustment",
      "4: Documented stock appears to meet stated needs"
    ]
  }
}

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

---

## 0997. Textile Origin Ledger

ID: fashion-textile-origin-ledger
Sub-discipline: Textile sourcing
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Sourcing teams paste origin fields and mill documentation, and Jev classifies the origin stage, checks each origin claim against evidence, and grades traceability completeness.

Why typed decisions: Typed stage and support decisions expose gaps in a supply chain without turning incomplete documents into confident prose.

TAM: Supply-chain traceability software: $5B+
SAM: Textile and apparel sourcing teams: $350M
SOM: Small sourcing operations: $5M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Textile Origin Ledger" 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
Sourcing teams paste origin fields and mill documentation, and Jev classifies the origin stage, checks each origin claim against evidence, and grades traceability completeness.
Discipline: Fashion & Textile Design (Textile sourcing).
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 stage and support decisions expose gaps in a supply chain without turning incomplete documents into confident prose.

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": <Origin claims, mill records, and supplier chain documents>, "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)
{
  "origin_stage": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which supply-chain stage does the origin claim refer to?",
    "criteria": {
      "raw_material": "Fiber or raw-material source",
      "processing": "Spinning, weaving, knitting, or dyeing",
      "finished_fabric": "Finished fabric or mill location",
      "unclear": "Stage is ambiguous or not specified"
    }
  },
  "origin_verified": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the documentation support the stated origin at the specified stage?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Traceable records identify the relevant stage and material",
      "false": "Stage, location, or material link is missing or inconsistent"
    }
  },
  "chain_completeness": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How complete is the evidence chain for this origin claim?",
    "criteria": [
      "1: No usable chain documentation",
      "2: One stage only or unsupported assertion",
      "3: Several linked records with a limited gap",
      "4: Relevant stages are traceably documented"
    ]
  }
}

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

---

## 0998. Color Approval Docket

ID: fashion-color-approval-docket
Sub-discipline: Color development
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Color teams paste target color values, swatch measurements, and approved tolerances, and Jev classifies the variance, checks each approval claim against measured evidence, and scores sign-off readiness.

Why typed decisions: Typed comparison outcomes make color approval measurable and route borderline readings to a person.

TAM: Color management software: $2B+
SAM: Fashion color development teams: $160M
SOM: Independent color and textile studios: $3M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Color Approval Docket" 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
Color teams paste target color values, swatch measurements, and approved tolerances, and Jev classifies the variance, checks each approval claim against measured evidence, and scores sign-off readiness.
Discipline: Fashion & Textile Design (Color development).
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 comparison outcomes make color approval measurable and route borderline readings to a person.

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": <Target color values, instrument readings, and tolerances>, "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)
{
  "variance_type": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which color comparison outcome best fits the measurements?",
    "criteria": {
      "within_tolerance": "Measured difference is within stated tolerance",
      "borderline": "Reading is near a tolerance boundary",
      "outside_tolerance": "Measured difference exceeds tolerance",
      "unmeasurable": "Method, sample, or measurement is unclear"
    }
  },
  "approval_supported": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Do the measurements support the submitted color approval status?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "Comparable readings meet the documented tolerance",
      "false": "Readings conflict, exceed limits, or are not comparable"
    }
  },
  "signoff_readiness": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How ready is this colorway for sign-off?",
    "criteria": [
      "1: No comparable measurement evidence",
      "2: Significant variance or method uncertainty",
      "3: Borderline reading needing confirmation",
      "4: Comparable measurements clearly meet tolerance"
    ]
  }
}

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

---

## 0999. Seam Finish Inspector

ID: fashion-seam-finish-inspector
Sub-discipline: Garment construction
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Patternmakers paste seam-finish requirements and sample inspection fields, and Jev classifies construction findings, checks each pass claim against the requirement, and scores the need for correction review.

Why typed decisions: Typed construction outcomes support consistent quality gates without generating repair instructions.

TAM: Apparel quality management software: $1B+
SAM: Patternmaking and garment QA teams: $170M
SOM: Small manufacturers and studios: $3M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Seam Finish Inspector" 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
Patternmakers paste seam-finish requirements and sample inspection fields, and Jev classifies construction findings, checks each pass claim against the requirement, and scores the need for correction review.
Discipline: Fashion & Textile Design (Garment construction).
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 construction outcomes support consistent quality gates without generating repair instructions.

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": <Seam requirements, sample inspection fields, and defect photos’ metadata>, "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)
{
  "construction_finding": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "Which seam or finish finding best matches the inspection record?",
    "criteria": {
      "stitching": "Stitch type, density, or consistency",
      "edge_finish": "Raw edge, binding, or seam finish",
      "strength": "Seam strength or stress point",
      "unclear": "Finding is not specific or evidence is unclear"
    }
  },
  "pass_evidence": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the inspection evidence support the seam’s stated pass status?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "The checked construction details meet the documented requirement",
      "false": "A checked detail fails, conflicts, or lacks inspection evidence"
    }
  },
  "correction_priority": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How important is human correction review?",
    "criteria": [
      "1: No supported issue",
      "2: Cosmetic minor issue",
      "3: Likely to affect appearance or wear",
      "4: Structural failure or critical requirement miss"
    ]
  }
}

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

---

## 1000. Moodboard Asset Check

ID: fashion-moodboard-asset-check
Sub-discipline: Fashion styling
Jev pattern: Verify & Escalate — check then hand off

Pitch: Stylists paste moodboard asset credits, source links, and intended-use notes, and Jev classifies asset type, checks each attribution claim against the source evidence, and scores clearance readiness.

Why typed decisions: Typed attribution checks catch missing provenance early without generating captions or legal conclusions.

TAM: Creative asset management software: $1B+
SAM: Fashion editorial and styling teams: $120M
SOM: Independent stylists and studios: $2M

### Self-contained Lovable mega-prompt

Build "Moodboard Asset Check" 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
Stylists paste moodboard asset credits, source links, and intended-use notes, and Jev classifies asset type, checks each attribution claim against the source evidence, and scores clearance readiness.
Discipline: Fashion & Textile Design (Fashion styling).
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 attribution checks catch missing provenance early without generating captions or legal conclusions.

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": <Moodboard asset credits, source links, and intended-use fields>, "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)
{
  "asset_type": {
    "type": "choice",
    "instructions": "What kind of visual asset is being checked?",
    "criteria": {
      "photograph": "Fashion or editorial photograph",
      "illustration": "Illustration, print, or artwork",
      "product_image": "Garment, accessory, or product image",
      "other_or_unclear": "Other asset or unclear classification"
    }
  },
  "credit_supported": {
    "type": "noul",
    "instructions": "Does the source evidence support the submitted creator or rights-holder credit?",
    "criteria": {
      "true": "A traceable source matches the asset and stated credit",
      "false": "Source is absent, mismatched, or does not support the credit"
    }
  },
  "clearance_readiness": {
    "type": "score",
    "instructions": "How ready is the asset record for intended use?",
    "criteria": [
      "1: Source and credit are unknown",
      "2: Source exists but attribution is incomplete",
      "3: Attribution is supported but use terms need review",
      "4: Source, credit, and applicable use evidence are recorded"
    ]
  }
}

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

---