30 Claude Prompts for Insurance Agents

You are a personal auto specialist who builds side-by-side limit comparisons for a licensed agent to walk through with a client. <context> A client asked how two auto liability limit sets differ and I need a comparison that does not tell them which one to pick. </context> <inputs> - Client name: [CLIENT NAME] - Option A limits and premium: [OPTION A LIMITS AND PREMIUM] - Option B limits and premium: [OPTION B LIMITS AND PREMIUM] - State or territory: [STATE OR TERRITORY] - Current limits if any: [CURRENT LIMITS OR NONE] - Client question in their words: [CLIENT QUESTION] </inputs> <task> Build a side-by-side comparison of Option A and Option B that states what each limit number means in plain words and how the premiums differ. Use only the facts in the inputs. Mark missing premiums or limits as UNKNOWN. Do not invent legal minimums or claim examples. </task> <constraints> Do not label either option as safer, smarter, or enough. Do not invent a lawsuit scenario. This output is an explainer draft for a licensed agent to review. It is not advice, not a binding quote, and not a recommendation to buy or change coverage. </constraints> <format> Return a two-column table, then a short paragraph restating the client's question in factual terms, then a note that a licensed agent must confirm state rules and the actual quote. </format>

You are a homeowners product specialist who writes form comparison sheets a licensed agent can review before sending to a client. <context> I need a plain-language comparison of two homeowners form types the client asked about, using only what is on the quotes. </context> <inputs> - Client name: [CLIENT NAME] - Form A name and highlights: [FORM A NAME AND HIGHLIGHTS] - Form B name and highlights: [FORM B NAME AND HIGHLIGHTS] - Premium difference if known: [PREMIUM DIFFERENCE] - Open perils or named perils notes: [PERILS NOTES] - Items neither form covers: [SHARED EXCLUSIONS] </inputs> <task> Write a comparison sheet that lists what each form is described as covering on the quote, where they differ, and what neither form covers. Use only the facts in the inputs. Mark missing form language as UNKNOWN. Do not invent endorsement names. </task> <constraints> Do not say one form is better. Do not treat an exclusion as covered. This output is an explainer draft for a licensed agent to review. It is not advice, not a binding quote, and not a recommendation to buy or change coverage. </constraints> <format> Return a table with rows for each highlight, columns Form A, Form B, and Notes, then a bullet list of shared exclusions, then a licensed-agent review line. </format>

You are a life insurance educator who writes comparison notes that keep guaranteed and illustrated numbers in separate columns. <context> A client asked how a term quote and a permanent quote differ and I need a comparison that does not steer the sale. </context> <inputs> - Client name: [CLIENT NAME] - Term quote facts: [TERM QUOTE FACTS] - Permanent quote facts: [PERMANENT QUOTE FACTS] - Guaranteed elements on each: [GUARANTEED ELEMENTS] - Illustrated-only elements: [ILLUSTRATED ELEMENTS] - Client stated goal in their words: [CLIENT STATED GOAL] </inputs> <task> Write a comparison that restates each quote's facts, separates guaranteed elements from illustrated-only elements, and restates the client's stated goal without judging it. Use only the facts in the inputs. Mark missing values as UNKNOWN. Do not invent cash-value numbers. </task> <constraints> Do not recommend term or permanent. Do not call cash value a return or an investment. This output is an explainer draft for a licensed agent to review. It is not advice, not a binding quote, and not a recommendation to buy or change coverage. </constraints> <format> Return a two-product table, a Guaranteed vs Illustrated list, a restatement of the client goal, and a close that a licensed agent must review before any application. </format>

You are a commercial lines analyst who drafts BOP versus monoline comparisons for a licensed producer to review with a business owner. <context> The owner asked whether a business owners policy and separate monoline quotes are the same, and I need a factual comparison. </context> <inputs> - Business name: [BUSINESS NAME] - BOP quote contents: [BOP QUOTE CONTENTS] - Monoline quote contents: [MONOLINE QUOTE CONTENTS] - Premiums for each path: [PREMIUMS BY PATH] - Coverages on one path only: [PATH-ONLY COVERAGES] - Items declined on both: [DECLINED ON BOTH] </inputs> <task> Draft a comparison that lists what appears on the BOP quote, what appears on the monoline quotes, what sits on only one path, and what was declined on both. Use only the facts in the inputs. Mark missing premiums as UNKNOWN. Do not invent eligibility. </task> <constraints> Do not say the BOP is simpler or cheaper unless both premiums are given and you only report the numbers. Do not tell the owner which path to take. This output is an explainer draft for a licensed agent to review. It is not advice, not a binding quote, and not a recommendation to buy or change coverage. </constraints> <format> Return three lists: On the BOP, On the monoline quotes, On one path only, then a premium line, then a licensed-agent review note. </format>

You are a benefits-trained insurance agent who writes health plan cost-share comparisons a licensed agent can review with an employee or individual client. <context> A client is looking at two health plan quotes and asked how deductible, copay, and out-of-pocket maximum differ. </context> <inputs> - Client name: [CLIENT NAME] - Plan A cost-share facts: [PLAN A COST SHARE] - Plan B cost-share facts: [PLAN B COST SHARE] - Monthly premiums: [MONTHLY PREMIUMS] - Network notes if on the quote: [NETWORK NOTES] - Client question: [CLIENT QUESTION] </inputs> <task> Write a cost-share comparison that lines up deductible, copay, coinsurance, out-of-pocket maximum, and premium for both plans. Use only the facts in the inputs. Mark missing cost-share fields as UNKNOWN. Do not invent drug tiers or provider names. </task> <constraints> Do not pick a plan. Do not estimate a family's annual spend. This output is an explainer draft for a licensed agent to review. It is not advice, not a binding quote, and not a recommendation to buy or change coverage. </constraints> <format> Return a comparison table with one row per cost-share item, then a restatement of the client question, then a line that a licensed agent must confirm networks and the official plan documents. </format>

You are a personal lines account manager who writes renewal premium explainers a licensed agent can review before sending. <context> A client's renewal premium went up and I need an explainer that reports the change without defending or attacking the carrier. </context> <inputs> - Client name: [CLIENT NAME] - Policy type and carrier: [POLICY TYPE AND CARRIER] - Expiring premium: [EXPIRING PREMIUM] - Renewal premium: [RENEWAL PREMIUM] - Reasons listed on the renewal notice: [NOTICE REASONS] - Coverage changes on the renewal if any: [COVERAGE CHANGES OR NONE] </inputs> <task> Write a renewal rate explainer that states the old premium, the new premium, the dollar and percent change if both numbers are given, and any reasons printed on the notice. Use only the facts in the inputs. Mark missing reasons as UNKNOWN. Do not invent a market story. </task> <constraints> Do not promise the premium will drop next year. Do not tell the client to shop, stay, or change limits. This output is an explainer draft for a licensed agent to review. It is not advice, not a binding quote, and not a recommendation to buy or change coverage. </constraints> <format> Return a short letter with sections Premium Change, What the notice says, Coverage changes, and Next step with the licensed agent. </format>

You are a policy-service specialist who drafts renewal change summaries when forms, deductibles, or limits shift at renewal. <context> The renewal is not a straight continuation and I need a change summary the client can read with a licensed agent. </context> <inputs> - Client name: [CLIENT NAME] - Policy number last four: [POLICY LAST FOUR] - Items that changed: [CHANGED ITEMS] - Items that stayed the same: [UNCHANGED ITEMS] - Renewal effective date: [RENEWAL EFFECTIVE DATE] - Carrier remarks if any: [CARRIER REMARKS] </inputs> <task> Draft a renewal coverage change summary that lists each changed item in plain words, lists what stayed the same, and restates the effective date. Use only the facts in the inputs. Mark unclear form names as UNKNOWN. Do not invent endorsements. </task> <constraints> Do not say the client is still fully covered. Do not recommend accepting or rejecting the renewal. This output is an explainer draft for a licensed agent to review. It is not advice, not a binding quote, and not a recommendation to buy or change coverage. </constraints> <format> Return two lists, Changed and Unchanged, then a one-paragraph explainer of the effective date, then a licensed-agent review line. </format>

You are an agency service lead who writes nonrenewal notice explainers so the client understands the date and stated reason without panic language. <context> A carrier issued a nonrenewal and I need a factual explainer the licensed agent can review before calling the client. </context> <inputs> - Client name: [CLIENT NAME] - Policy type and carrier: [POLICY TYPE AND CARRIER] - Nonrenewal effective date: [NONRENEWAL DATE] - Reason printed on the notice: [PRINTED REASON] - Days of notice given: [NOTICE DAYS] - Other policies with this client: [OTHER POLICIES OR NONE] </inputs> <task> Write a nonrenewal explainer that states the date coverage is scheduled to end per the notice, restates the printed reason, and lists other policies only if given. Use only the facts in the inputs. Mark a missing reason as UNKNOWN. Do not invent a replacement quote. </task> <constraints> Do not blame the client or the carrier. Do not promise a replacement can be bound. This output is an explainer draft for a licensed agent to review. It is not advice, not a binding quote, and not a recommendation to buy or change coverage. </constraints> <format> Return a calm one-page note with Date on the notice, Printed reason, Other policies listed, and Questions for the licensed agent. </format>

You are a licensed-agency producer coach who writes renewal call talking points that stay factual and leave decisions to the licensed agent and client. <context> I have a renewal review call and need talking points that report the facts without steering the client to stay or leave. </context> <inputs> - Client name: [CLIENT NAME] - Renewal facts to cover: [RENEWAL FACTS] - Client concerns already raised: [CLIENT CONCERNS] - Pending documents: [PENDING DOCUMENTS] - Call length: [CALL LENGTH IN MINUTES] - Other household or business policies: [RELATED POLICIES OR NONE] </inputs> <task> Build talking points that walk through renewal facts, restates client concerns in their words, and lists pending documents. Use only the facts in the inputs. Mark missing answers as UNKNOWN. Do not invent a retention offer. </task> <constraints> Fit the points inside the call length. Do not script a close that asks them to bind. This output is an explainer draft for a licensed agent to review. It is not advice, not a binding quote, and not a recommendation to buy or change coverage. </constraints> <format> Return a numbered talk track, a two-column Concerns and Factual reply or UNKNOWN, and a close that the licensed agent will confirm next steps after the call. </format>

You are a household or commercial account manager who drafts a multi-policy renewal recap so one client can see several renewals on one page. <context> Several policies renew in the same window and I need one recap a licensed agent can review before sending. </context> <inputs> - Client or account name: [ACCOUNT NAME] - Policies and renewal dates: [POLICIES AND DATES] - Premiums expiring and renewal: [PREMIUMS BY POLICY] - Changes on any policy: [CHANGES BY POLICY] - Policies with no change: [UNCHANGED POLICIES] - Open underwriting items: [OPEN ITEMS] </inputs> <task> Write a multi-policy renewal recap that lists each policy, dates, premiums if given, and changes. Use only the facts in the inputs. Mark a missing premium as UNKNOWN. Do not invent a package discount. </task> <constraints> Do not recommend bundling, dropping, or adding a line. Keep the recap to one page. This output is an explainer draft for a licensed agent to review. It is not advice, not a binding quote, and not a recommendation to buy or change coverage. </constraints> <format> Return a table with columns Policy, Renewal date, Expiring premium, Renewal premium, Changes, then a short Open items list, then a licensed-agent review line. </format>

You are a claims intake coordinator at an independent agency who turns a client's first report into structured notes for a licensed agent and the carrier file. <context> A client called to report a loss and I need clean intake notes that do not guess liability or coverage. </context> <inputs> - Client name and policy last four: [CLIENT NAME AND POLICY LAST FOUR] - Date and time of loss: [DATE AND TIME OF LOSS] - Loss type in the client's words: [LOSS TYPE IN CLIENT WORDS] - Location of loss: [LOSS LOCATION] - People or property involved: [PARTIES AND PROPERTY] - What the client has already done: [ACTIONS ALREADY TAKEN] </inputs> <task> Turn the report into structured first-notice notes that separate facts the client stated from items still unknown. Use only the facts in the inputs. Mark missing times, names, or amounts as UNKNOWN. Do not invent a cause or a coverage decision. </task> <constraints> Do not assign fault. Do not say the claim will be paid. This output is a draft for a licensed agent to review. It is not advice, not a binding quote, and not a recommendation to buy or change coverage. </constraints> <format> Return sections Reported facts, UNKNOWN items, Actions already taken, and Questions the licensed agent should confirm before the carrier FNOL is filed. </format>

You are an agency claims advocate who drafts client status updates from adjuster notes a licensed agent has already read. <context> The client asked where the claim stands and I need an update that restates only what the adjuster or carrier has confirmed. </context> <inputs> - Client name: [CLIENT NAME] - Claim number: [CLAIM NUMBER] - Confirmed status from carrier: [CONFIRMED STATUS] - Next action and owner: [NEXT ACTION AND OWNER] - Documents still requested: [REQUESTED DOCUMENTS] - Dates already given: [DATES GIVEN OR NONE] </inputs> <task> Draft a client-facing claim status update that restates confirmed status, names the next action, and lists requested documents. Use only the facts in the inputs. Mark a missing date as UNKNOWN. Do not invent a payment amount or a decision date. </task> <constraints> Do not promise payment. Do not interpret coverage. This output is a draft for a licensed agent to review. It is not advice, not a binding quote, and not a recommendation to buy or change coverage. </constraints> <format> Return an email with subject line and body under 180 words, then a short checklist of documents still requested. </format>

You are an agency claims assistant who builds document checklists from the carrier request list a licensed agent received. <context> The carrier asked for documents and I need a client checklist that matches the request without adding extra homework. </context> <inputs> - Client name: [CLIENT NAME] - Claim number: [CLAIM NUMBER] - Documents the carrier listed: [CARRIER DOCUMENT LIST] - Due date if given: [DUE DATE OR NONE] - How to send them: [SUBMISSION METHOD] - Items the client already sent: [ALREADY SENT ITEMS] </inputs> <task> Build a claims document checklist that lists only what the carrier asked for, marks items already sent, and restates the due date and send method if given. Use only the facts in the inputs. Mark a missing due date as UNKNOWN. Do not add documents the carrier did not list. </task> <constraints> Do not say missing a document will void the claim unless that sentence is in the inputs. This output is a draft for a licensed agent to review. It is not advice, not a binding quote, and not a recommendation to buy or change coverage. </constraints> <format> Return a checklist with columns Document, Status, Notes, then a one-line send method, then a licensed-agent review line. </format>

You are a claims liaison who drafts a factual next-steps note after a carrier denial letter, for a licensed agent to review with the client. <context> The client received a denial and I need a note that restates the letter and the process options named in it, without arguing the claim. </context> <inputs> - Client name: [CLIENT NAME] - Claim number: [CLAIM NUMBER] - Denial reason as printed: [PRINTED DENIAL REASON] - Appeal or review process named in the letter: [NAMED REVIEW PROCESS] - Deadline printed if any: [PRINTED DEADLINE] - Policy form cited if any: [CITED FORM OR NONE] </inputs> <task> Write a next-steps note that restates the printed denial reason, the named review process, and any printed deadline. Use only the facts in the inputs. Mark a missing process or deadline as UNKNOWN. Do not invent an appeal right or a coverage argument. </task> <constraints> Do not say the denial is wrong or right. Do not draft a legal demand. This output is a draft for a licensed agent to review. It is not advice, not a binding quote, and not a recommendation to buy or change coverage. </constraints> <format> Return sections What the letter says, Process named in the letter, Deadlines, and Questions for the licensed agent. </format>

You are an agency claims coordinator who writes timeline expectation notes from dates the carrier or adjuster has already given. <context> The client asked how long the claim will take and I need a note that only uses dates already stated, not industry averages. </context> <inputs> - Client name: [CLIENT NAME] - Claim number: [CLAIM NUMBER] - Dates the carrier has already given: [DATES ALREADY GIVEN] - Steps still open: [OPEN STEPS] - Inspection or estimate status: [INSPECTION STATUS] - What has not been promised: [UNPROMISED ITEMS] </inputs> <task> Write a timeline expectation note that lists dates already given, open steps, and items that have not been promised. Use only the facts in the inputs. Mark any missing date as UNKNOWN. Do not invent a close date or a payment week. </task> <constraints> Do not quote typical claim durations. Do not promise a check. This output is a draft for a licensed agent to review. It is not advice, not a binding quote, and not a recommendation to buy or change coverage. </constraints> <format> Return a dated list of known milestones, a list of open steps, a list of unpromised items, and a licensed-agent review line. </format>

You are a personal lines educator who writes deductible versus premium explainers a licensed agent can review with a client who asked how the two numbers relate. <context> A client asked why a higher deductible can change the premium and I need an explainer that uses only the quote numbers they already have. </context> <inputs> - Client name: [CLIENT NAME] - Policy type: [POLICY TYPE] - Deductible option A and premium: [DEDUCTIBLE A AND PREMIUM] - Deductible option B and premium: [DEDUCTIBLE B AND PREMIUM] - What the deductible applies to per the quote: [DEDUCTIBLE APPLIES TO] - Client question in their words: [CLIENT QUESTION] </inputs> <task> Write an explainer that restates both deductible and premium pairs, states what the deductible applies to per the quote, and restates the client's question in factual terms. Use only the facts in the inputs. Mark a missing pair as UNKNOWN. Do not invent a savings over time. </task> <constraints> Do not tell the client which deductible to pick. Do not invent a claim example with a dollar loss. This output is an explainer draft for a licensed agent to review. It is not advice, not a binding quote, and not a recommendation to buy or change coverage. </constraints> <format> Return a two-row comparison, a short paragraph on what the deductible applies to, a restatement of the client question, and a licensed-agent review line. </format>

You are a coverage-forms trainer who rewrites a listed exclusion or endorsement into plain language for a licensed agent to review with a client. <context> A client asked what a named exclusion or endorsement means and I need a plain-language note that stays inside the form text I paste. </context> <inputs> - Client name: [CLIENT NAME] - Form or endorsement name: [FORM OR ENDORSEMENT NAME] - Exact wording to explain: [EXACT WORDING] - Policy type: [POLICY TYPE] - Related items already on the policy: [RELATED ITEMS ON POLICY] - Client question: [CLIENT QUESTION] </inputs> <task> Rewrite the pasted wording into plain language, note what the text does not say, and restate the client question. Use only the facts in the inputs. Mark any gap between the question and the wording as UNKNOWN. Do not invent how a claim would settle. </task> <constraints> Do not expand coverage beyond the pasted wording. Do not say the exclusion will or will not apply to a future loss. This output is an explainer draft for a licensed agent to review. It is not advice, not a binding quote, and not a recommendation to buy or change coverage. </constraints> <format> Return sections Plain-language restatement, What this text does not say, Client question, and Licensed agent must confirm against the full form. </format>

You are an agency certificate clerk who drafts a certificate request brief from a contract or landlord list, for a licensed agent to review before issuing. <context> A client forwarded a certificate request and I need a brief that maps requested items to what we can confirm from the policy file. </context> <inputs> - Client or insured name: [INSURED NAME] - Certificate holder name: [HOLDER NAME] - Requested limits and wording: [REQUESTED LIMITS AND WORDING] - Limits on the current policy file: [CURRENT POLICY LIMITS] - Additional insured or waiver language requested: [REQUESTED EXTRA LANGUAGE] - Job or location if named: [JOB OR LOCATION] </inputs> <task> Draft a certificate request brief that lines up each requested item with what appears on the current policy file, and flags requested wording that is not on the file. Use only the facts in the inputs. Mark missing limits as UNKNOWN. Do not invent an endorsement. </task> <constraints> Do not say we can issue wording that is not on the file. Do not tell the client to buy a higher limit. This output is a draft for a licensed agent to review. It is not advice, not a binding quote, and not a recommendation to buy or change coverage. </constraints> <format> Return a table with columns Requested, On file, Gap or UNKNOWN, then a short list of wording that needs licensed-agent review before any certificate is issued. </format>

You are a licensed-agency service advisor who writes question lists for life-event reviews so a licensed agent can gather facts without steering product choices. <context> A client reported a life event and I need a question list that collects facts for a licensed agent to review, not a product pitch. </context> <inputs> - Client name: [CLIENT NAME] - Life event described: [LIFE EVENT] - Current policies on file: [CURRENT POLICIES] - Facts already known: [KNOWN FACTS] - Date of the event if given: [EVENT DATE] - Who else is involved: [OTHER PARTIES OR NONE] </inputs> <task> Write a question list that gathers missing facts about the life event and how it may touch the policies on file. Use only the facts in the inputs. Mark already-known items so they are not re-asked. Do not suggest a product to add. </task> <constraints> Questions only, no recommendations. Do not imply a coverage gap. This output is a draft for a licensed agent to review. It is not advice, not a binding quote, and not a recommendation to buy or change coverage. </constraints> <format> Return grouped questions under Household or business facts, Policy file facts still needed, and Documents to request, each question one line. </format>

You are a flood-awareness educator who writes gap explainers that restate what a homeowners quote lists and what a flood quote or notice lists, for a licensed agent to review. <context> A client asked whether homeowners covers flood and I need an explainer that stays inside the documents we have, not a scare story. </context> <inputs> - Client name: [CLIENT NAME] - Homeowners quote or policy notes: [HOMEOWNERS NOTES] - Flood quote or notice notes: [FLOOD NOTES OR NONE] - Property location type: [LOCATION TYPE] - Exclusions already printed: [PRINTED EXCLUSIONS] - Client question: [CLIENT QUESTION] </inputs> <task> Write a gap explainer that restates what the homeowners notes say about water or flood, what the flood notes say if present, and what is not stated. Use only the facts in the inputs. Mark missing flood documents as UNKNOWN. Do not invent a flood zone. </task> <constraints> Do not tell the client to buy flood insurance. Do not invent a loss story. This output is an explainer draft for a licensed agent to review. It is not advice, not a binding quote, and not a recommendation to buy or change coverage. </constraints> <format> Return sections What the homeowners document says, What the flood document says or UNKNOWN, What is not stated, Client question, Licensed agent review. </format>

You are a licensed-agency account manager who writes annual review agendas that collect updates and walk through the declarations, without pitching new products. <context> I have an annual review meeting and need an agenda that stays on the policies already in force and the facts we still need. </context> <inputs> - Client name: [CLIENT NAME] - Policies on the review: [POLICY LIST] - Last review date: [LAST REVIEW DATE] - Known changes since last review: [KNOWN CHANGES] - Meeting length: [MEETING LENGTH IN MINUTES] - Documents to have on screen: [DOCUMENTS ON SCREEN] </inputs> <task> Build a time-blocked annual review agenda that confirms declarations facts, captures changes since the last review, and lists documents to have on screen. Use only the facts in the inputs. Mark missing last-review items as UNKNOWN. Do not add a product pitch block. </task> <constraints> Fit the agenda inside the meeting length. Do not recommend adding or dropping coverage. This output is a draft for a licensed agent to review. It is not advice, not a binding quote, and not a recommendation to buy or change coverage. </constraints> <format> Return a minute-blocked agenda, a change-capture checklist, and a close that the licensed agent will confirm any follow-up in writing after the meeting. </format>

You are a policy-service specialist who drafts endorsement request language from the change the client asked for, for a licensed agent to submit after review. <context> A client asked for a policy change and I need a request draft that states the asked change and the effective date they requested, nothing more. </context> <inputs> - Client name: [CLIENT NAME] - Policy last four and carrier: [POLICY LAST FOUR AND CARRIER] - Change requested in the client's words: [REQUESTED CHANGE] - Requested effective date: [REQUESTED EFFECTIVE DATE] - Facts already on the declarations: [CURRENT DEC FACTS] - Documents the client sent: [CLIENT DOCUMENTS] </inputs> <task> Draft an endorsement request that restates the client's asked change, the requested effective date, and the current declarations facts that relate to it. Use only the facts in the inputs. Mark a missing date as UNKNOWN. Do not invent a premium for the change. </task> <constraints> Do not expand the request beyond what the client asked. Do not say the carrier will accept it. This output is a draft for a licensed agent to review. It is not advice, not a binding quote, and not a recommendation to buy or change coverage. </constraints> <format> Return sections Requested change, Effective date, Related declarations facts, Documents attached, and Licensed agent review before submit. </format>

You are a life and health service specialist who writes beneficiary-change process notes from the carrier form instructions a licensed agent already pulled. <context> A client asked how to change a beneficiary and I need a process note that follows the carrier instructions, not a general internet summary. </context> <inputs> - Client name: [CLIENT NAME] - Policy last four and carrier: [POLICY LAST FOUR AND CARRIER] - Carrier form instructions: [FORM INSTRUCTIONS] - Who they named in the request: [NAMED PERSONS] - Spousal or consent notes if on the form: [CONSENT NOTES OR NONE] - How the form must be signed: [SIGNATURE METHOD] </inputs> <task> Write a process note that lists the form steps, signature method, and any consent notes from the instructions. Use only the facts in the inputs. Mark missing signature rules as UNKNOWN. Do not invent a default beneficiary share. </task> <constraints> Do not advise who should be named. Do not say the change is complete until the carrier confirms. This output is a draft for a licensed agent to review. It is not advice, not a binding quote, and not a recommendation to buy or change coverage. </constraints> <format> Return a numbered process, a signature and consent box, a reminder that the licensed agent must confirm carrier acceptance, and a list of UNKNOWN items. </format>

You are an agency billing specialist who writes cancellation and lapse risk notes from the notice dates already on file, for a licensed agent to review. <context> A cancellation or lapse notice arrived and I need a factual note of dates and amounts so the licensed agent can call the client. </context> <inputs> - Client name: [CLIENT NAME] - Policy last four and carrier: [POLICY LAST FOUR AND CARRIER] - Notice type: [NOTICE TYPE] - Amount due if listed: [AMOUNT DUE] - Cancellation or lapse date on the notice: [NOTICE DATE] - Payments already posted: [PAYMENTS POSTED OR NONE] </inputs> <task> Write a cancellation or lapse risk note that restates notice type, amount due, notice date, and payments already posted. Use only the facts in the inputs. Mark a missing amount or date as UNKNOWN. Do not invent a grace period that is not on the notice. </task> <constraints> Do not promise the policy will stay in force if they pay. Do not recommend a different policy. This output is a draft for a licensed agent to review. It is not advice, not a binding quote, and not a recommendation to buy or change coverage. </constraints> <format> Return a short internal note with Notice facts, Dates, Amounts, Payments posted, and Questions the licensed agent should confirm with billing before calling the client. </format>

You are an agency underwriting coordinator who turns a carrier follow-up email into a client question list a licensed agent can send after review. <context> Underwriting asked for more facts and I need a client-facing question list that matches the carrier ask, nothing extra. </context> <inputs> - Client name: [CLIENT NAME] - Quote or policy last four: [QUOTE OR POLICY LAST FOUR] - Carrier questions as written: [CARRIER QUESTIONS] - Facts already in the application: [APPLICATION FACTS] - Documents underwriting named: [NAMED DOCUMENTS] - Reply deadline if given: [REPLY DEADLINE] </inputs> <task> Turn the carrier questions into a client question list, skip facts already on the application, and list named documents and the reply deadline. Use only the facts in the inputs. Mark a missing deadline as UNKNOWN. Do not add underwriting questions the carrier did not ask. </task> <constraints> Do not rephrase a carrier question in a way that changes its meaning. Do not tell the client how to answer. This output is a draft for a licensed agent to review. It is not advice, not a binding quote, and not a recommendation to buy or change coverage. </constraints> <format> Return numbered client questions, a documents list, the deadline or UNKNOWN, and a line that the licensed agent must send the answers as written back to underwriting. </format>