Risk and evidence are different axes
Risk fields ask what the available data says about the token. Data-quality fields ask how much usable evidence was available to support that conclusion.
Combining the two prevents a common failure mode: interpreting missing fields as zero risk.
Jepeta fail-closed boundary
Jepeta requires GoPlus coverage and explicit honeypot/mintability values for a successful strict preview. Required unknowns do not become false.
DEX Screener market context can be partial or unavailable; Jepeta surfaces that source status separately and keeps unavailable market values null.
Why permanent pages require a quality gate
The public evidence publication gate only promotes already-published tokens with HIGH or MEDIUM public data quality, explicit security booleans, and at least two non-null public evidence dimensions.
This means ordinary or low-quality scans do not become indexable SEO pages, reducing both misinformation risk and thin-content risk. It also keeps citations and search snippets tied to evidence that is complete enough to explain responsibly.
Do not count an unavailable metric as a reassuring one
Compare two hypothetical records with the same optional field absent: one has usable required security evidence; the other lacks a required observation. The first may still support a qualified V5 decision under its documented rules; the second cannot obtain a verdict merely by ignoring that gap. Record which field is missing and its source status. “Low measured risk” and “too little evidence to decide” are different conclusions.
AI-assisted review of linked documentation; no independent product benchmark. Screening observations and policy labels do not guarantee token safety.
Practical checklist
- Read data quality separately from risk level
- Inspect source status
- Keep null distinct from zero
- Require explicit critical booleans
- Prefer fresh evidence
