jev-mcp
Server Configuration
Describes the environment variables required to run the server.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| JEV_MODEL | No | Jev model ID, for example `typesafe/jev-1.14` to pin a version | ~typesafe/jev-latest |
| JEV_RULES_FILE | No | Default rules file | .jev/rules.yaml |
| OPENROUTER_API_KEY | Yes | Your OpenRouter API key |
Instructions
Guidance the server publishes about itself, which clients place ahead of the tool catalog so the model reads it before choosing anything.
This server publishes no instructions, or was last inspected before Glama recorded them.
Capabilities
Features and capabilities supported by this server
Protocol revision2025-11-25
| Capability | Details |
|---|---|
| tools | {
"listChanged": true
} |
Tools
Functions exposed to the LLM to take actions
| Name | Description |
|---|---|
| evaluate_rulesA | Decide several rules at once (one Jev call) for the given context. Uses rules from the rules file and/or custom rules. Each yes/no result has decision, probability and 'uncertain'; each choice result has decision, confidence and 'uncertain'. When 'uncertain' is true, ask the user instead of acting. |
| ask_yes_noA | Decide one yes/no question for the given context, e.g. 'Should this issue be split into sub-issues?' or 'Should I reply to this email today?'. Returns decision, probability of yes, and 'uncertain'. When 'uncertain' is true, ask the user instead of acting. |
| ask_choiceA | Decide one multiple-choice question for the given context, e.g. 'How big is this work?' or 'What is the tone of this comment?'. Returns the chosen option, confidence, per-option probabilities, and 'uncertain'. When 'uncertain' is true, ask the user instead of acting. |
| list_rulesA | Show the rules defined in the rules file, so you know which rule_ids exist. |
Prompts
Interactive templates invoked by user choice
| Name | Description |
|---|---|
No prompts | |
Resources
Contextual data attached and managed by the client
| Name | Description |
|---|---|
No resources | |
TDQS
Scored across 4 tools
evaluate_rules is clearly for batched rule evaluation, while ask_yes_no and ask_choice handle single ad-hoc questions. The overlap is minor—ask_yes_no and ask_choice are essentially specialized single-rule cases—but descriptions provide enough distinction.
All tool names use snake_case with a consistent verb-first pattern: evaluate_rules, ask_yes_no, ask_choice, list_rules. The convention is predictable and readable throughout.
Four tools is well-scoped for a rule-based decision server: one for listing rules, one for batch evaluation, and two for single-question decisions. Each tool earns its place without bloat.
The surface covers listing rules, evaluating multiple rules, and asking single yes/no or multiple-choice questions. Minor gaps exist (no rule creation/editing or open-ended question type), but core decision workflows are supported.