How to evaluate an AI policy-checking workflow

Choose the right comparison basis

Newly issued policies may need checking against the selected quote, binder, recorded instructions and relevant endorsements. A renewal comparison may also use the expiring policy. Define the comparison purpose before selecting documents.

Include a document inventory and version dates. A technically accurate comparison of the wrong files can still produce the wrong operating result. The reviewer should see which source established the expected term.

Keep evidence states distinct

No endorsement found in the supplied file describes the available evidence. It does not establish that no applicable endorsement exists. This distinction makes the review more useful and prevents a missing document from turning into an unsupported conclusion.

• A confirmed difference between supplied documents
• A required source document that has not been provided
• Text that could not be read reliably
• Conflicting information requiring review
• A finding the agency has reviewed and accepted
• A correction awaiting a carrier response

Test difficult cases deliberately

Include a fictional omitted location, a changed deductible, an endorsement attached separately and a revised quote that supersedes the original. Ask the tool to show the source for each finding and to preserve conditions that do not fit a simple field match.

Review false positives as well as missed differences. A long list of low-value alerts can transfer work to account managers while making the automation rate look impressive.

Evaluate resolution after detection

Finding a discrepancy is one step. Completion depends on the agreed evidence and the agency’s decision, with any remaining external dependency visible.

• Can a reviewer accept, reject or question a finding with a reason?
• Can the team prepare the appropriate correction request?
• Does an incoming reply resolve the actual issue or merely acknowledge it?
• Can the final document be reconciled with the reviewed correction?
• Does the agency’s operating record show what remains open?

Use complete denominators

Track all cases in the agreed scope, then show any automation-eligible subset separately. Measure reviewer minutes, corrections, serious errors, reopened cases and support effort. Report document complexity so simple and difficult accounts are not treated as equivalent.

A small evaluation can reveal important weaknesses. It cannot establish universal accuracy or an E&O guarantee. Customer references, implementation fit and ongoing operational evidence remain part of the purchasing decision.

The SF Coverage approach

Policy checking is part of the agency platform SF Coverage is developing. The intended experience connects selected terms, client decisions and issued documents, with outstanding findings carried forward until they reach a clear status. Availability and scope must be confirmed for each pilot.