Build blueprint
Meeting Participation Router
A planner assigning attend, async input, optional, or no-action per person and agenda item.
- Problem
- Teams invite people broadly because deciding who truly needs each agenda item is tedious.
- Why Jev
- The product makes a matrix of small choices—many decisions per meeting.
- Architecture
- Agenda + roles + projects → per-person Choices → organizer review → calendar updates.
- Current alternative
- Organizer intuition and blanket invitations.
- Jev advantage
- Parallel typed questions can evaluate the entire participation matrix.
- Unknowns
- Organizational politics and incomplete role context.
Why this confidence: Technically suitable but behavior change and social acceptance are uncertain.
This is an authored hypothesis derived from the research corpus. Nothing here demonstrates product demand, or that Jev performs well on this particular workload. Run the validation experiment before building past the MVP.
Sources
Limitations
- Organizational politics and incomplete role context.
- This is a research hypothesis, not evidence of product demand or Jev performance in this workflow.
Supporting research
- Cascade router PlausibleA cheap decision chooses whether to use rules, a small model, a premium model, a specialist, or a human.
- Axon Work integration ObservedThe author states that Axon Work uses Jev-style model decisions with a skill/action harness.
- Routing, classification, verification, and workflow control are the dominant early mental models. PlausibleThose categories recur in the collected launch discussion and align with the documented output primitives.
- Parallel decision matrix PlausibleOne state is evaluated against many named questions, replacing repeated prompt/parse cycles.