Read the broker's submission and its attachments, clear it against what you already hold, and triage it against your written appetite — an underwriter decides whether to quote or decline.
Take the submission as it arrives — the broker's email, the ACORD forms, the schedule of values and the loss runs.
02
Extract every field with the document and page it came from, and total the schedule against the values on it.
Reason
03
Clear the account against open submissions, bound policies and the broker of record, and name every duplicate.
04
Read the appetite guide, the binder or treaty scope and the licensing in force on the day the submission arrived.
05
Take occupancy, class and total exposure from the schedule itself, not from the description in the covering email.
Decide
06
Where the account clears, sits inside written appetite and is complete, it reaches the named underwriter.
07
Outside appetite, over authority, unclear or conflicted — it reaches an underwriter with the reason named.
Out
08
Hand over a triage view — exposure as extracted, the appetite version read, the gaps and the desk it routed to.
09
Retain the documents read, the fields extracted, the appetite version, the routing and what happened next.
→Product statement
The agent extracts, clears and triages against written appetite. Whether to quote or decline is the underwriter's — and nothing the agent produces is a declination, or may be sent to a broker as one.
Example workflow
One submission, end to end
AgentHuman
1Submission receivedA broker's email with the ACORD application, the schedule of values, the loss runs and any slip or questionnaire attached
2Documents read and extractedNamed insured, entity, locations, occupancy, class, values, limits and loss history, each with the document and page behind it
3Cleared against the bookMatched to open submissions, bound policies, prior submissions and the broker of record, with duplicates and conflicts named
4Appetite and authority checkedThe appetite guide, binder or treaty scope, licensing and capacity in force on the date the submission arrived, with the version stamped
No human action required
Stages 1 to 4 run without a person in the loop — the reading, the clearance and the appetite check are finished before an underwriter opens the submission. Nothing has been answered.
5DecisionSplits on whether the account clears, sits inside written appetite and is complete
Clears, in appetite, complete
Reaches the named underwriter, triaged.
Outside appetite or unclear
Reaches an underwriter with the reason named.
Underwriter or team leader
Reads the submission itself, decides whether to quote, and writes anything the broker is told. A declination is theirs alone.
Quote · Decline · Reassign
Routed — handed back▼
6Routed to an underwriterPlaced on the named underwriter's desk with the triage view, the appetite version applied and the open items
7Outcome evaluatedExtraction accuracy, clearance precision, appetite-version correctness, underwriter agreement and turnaround by broker and class
Underwriter changes
Every re-route and every corrected field is counted against the triage.
What should not run autonomously
Human approval stays in control
Outside the boundary — human approval required8 items
Declining, refusing to quote or telling a broker no.
Quoting, rating, pricing or binding any risk.
Issuing anything a broker could file as a declination.
Treating out of appetite as an answer.
Automation boundaryAgent acts unaided
✓Read the submission and extract each field with its source.
✓Clear the account against open submissions, policies and brokers.
✓Apply the appetite guide version in force on the date it arrived.
✓Route to the named underwriter and name every open item.
Write actions run only inside the approval boundaries agreed during implementation. A declination, a quote and a bind are not among them, on any tier, in any configuration.
Reassigning or changing the broker of record.
Releasing a cleared account to another broker.
Changing the appetite guide, authority or routing rules.
Setting the order a broker's submissions are worked.
Example output
One broker submission, annotated
Everything the agent puts in the triage view is attached to the document and the page it came from.
Triage output · single submissionIllustrative example
Submission
Attachments
Locations
Triage
Confidence
Quote or decline
Commercial property, new
ACORD, SOV, loss runs
Fourteen, all read
In appetite, routed
92%
None — underwriter's
As receivedThe broker's email and its attachments as they arrived, and the appetite guide version in force on that date.
Read fromACORD 125 and 140Schedule of valuesFive years of loss runs
Why it routed hereClass and total exposure come off the schedule, not the covering email.
ActionQuoteDeclineReassign
What the score decidesHow much of the extraction an underwriter checks back at source. Never an answer.
Value
Where AI adds value
The same four claims, placed at the point in the workflow where each one applies.
Where the value landsValue 01 – 04
Every submissionFrom the mailbox, portal or broker platform
03Appetite & authority
Triage on the appetite as written
The appetite guide, binder scope and authority in force on the day the submission arrived — read at triage time and stamped with the version applied.
01Approved path
Start the file already read
The documents are read, the schedule totalled and the account cleared before an underwriter opens it, so the desk starts sorted rather than raw.
02Human review
Send the doubt to a desk, not the broker
Anything outside written appetite, over authority or unclear goes to an underwriter with the reason named — never back to the broker as an answer.
04Build an evidence trail
Retain the documents read, the fields extracted, the appetite version applied, the routing and the underwriter's own decision — on both paths.
Integrations
Typical integrations
Five system groups connect to the same agent. Which of them are in scope is decided in discovery.
Integration availability depends on the client's existing systems and API access.
Agent controls
Six layers between the mailbox and a desk
Each control wraps the one inside it. A submission clears every layer before it reaches a queue, and the decision to quote or decline sits outside all six.
L6 · Outermost — last line of defenceInward → L1 · closest to the model
L6Rollback / safe modeReturn triage to the intake desk if extraction or routing quality degrades.Roll back
L5Routing recordBroker, appetite version, routing, reason and waiting time all kept.Record
L4No-declination ruleNo refusal, no quote, no wording a broker could file as a declination.Withhold
L3Appetite versioningAppetite guide, binder scope and authority pinned to the submission date.Pin
L2Clearance gateNo account routes until it is cleared against submissions, policies and brokers.Clear
L1Extraction provenanceNo field enters the triage without the document and page behind it.Cite
Model coreTriage proposed — exposure as extracted, the clearance result, the appetite version read and the desk it routes to
L1 – L2Decide whether an account may route
L3Fixes which appetite version applied
L4Keeps a declination out of the agent
L5 – L6Keep the trail and pull automation back
How Nestack evaluates it
Evaluate the triage — and what the underwriter did with it.
Coverage runs the whole depth of the workflow, and every layer is cut by slice.
Surface — the triage an underwriter opens
Depth of coverage ▼
E1Final-output evaluationDo the extracted values match the documents they came from?
E2Step-level evaluationWas the appetite version the one in force when it arrived?
E3Tool evaluationDid it clear against the right account, policy and broker?
E4Underwriter agreementWould an underwriter have triaged and routed it the same way?
E5Slice evaluationHow do accuracy and waiting time change by broker and class?
E6Business outcomeHow much of the triage did the underwriter have to redo?
Floor — the account reaching a desk that can actually write it
Failure modes
Where each failure originates in the agent
Seven failure modes plotted against the five stages of the agent lifecycle.
Agent lifecycleDirection of processing →
01 · Extraction2 modes
SA-01
Schedule read short
Locations dropped or a valuation date missed; exposure reads low.
SA-02
Occupancy taken from the email
Class derived from the broker's description, not the schedule.
Stage extractsFields from the ACORD forms, schedule and loss runs
02 · Clearance1 mode
SA-03
Cleared onto the wrong account
A near-identical name, so a duplicate or a conflict survives.
Stage clearsThe account against policies, submissions and brokers
03 · Appetite check2 modes
SA-04
Stale appetite version
Triaged against a guide the carrier has already moved off.
SA-05
Triaged out on a proxy
A postcode or a name stands in for the class the guide names.
Stage checksWritten appetite, binder scope, authority and licensing
04 · Routing / handover1 mode
SA-06
Reads as a declination
Wording a broker can file as a refusal, from no underwriter.
Stage routesThe triage view an underwriter opens and works
05 · Drift / Version1 mode
SA-07
The queue sorts by broker
One broker's or one class's work waits longer, every week.
Stage tracksAppetite versions, extraction quality and queue order
Sev-1 · a broker gets an answer no one gaveSev-2 · the triage misstates the risk or queueSev-3 · a field is wrong, review catches it
A cohort that is read worse is asked more questions and waits longer — that is how a broker segment, and the insureds behind it, is deprioritised without anyone choosing it. Nestack reports performance by slice, not only in total.
Slice performance — reported separately, not only in aggregateIllustrative example
Slice
Failure rate
Lift
Lift vs. threshold
Status
Scanned and photographed schedules
8.1%
3.7×
Review
Schedules over a hundred locations
5.9%
2.7×
Review
Low-volume broker offices
4.2%
1.9×
Watch
Clean renewal submissions
1.5%
0.7×
Normal
Bar: extraction-error lift vs. clean-renewal baseline · scale 0–4.0× · tick marks the 2.0× review threshold2 of 4 slices over threshold
Evidence-linked improvement
The submissions that waited are evidence too
When a broker has to chase, the triage already failed — wrong desk, or a cohort that always sits behind. Both belong in the evaluation.
Improvement cycle · five stagesSwitchback — the path turns at Improve and returns at Learn
01Detect
Extraction accuracy, routing agreement or waiting time moves in one cohort.
02Diagnose
Traced to the document, the clearance match, the appetite version or the routing rule.
03Improve
The extractor, match rule or appetite mapping is changed, re-approved by underwriting and version-linked.
04Verify
Re-run against held-out submissions, including every one an underwriter re-routed.
05Learn
The re-routed submission becomes a regression case, with the appetite version it was triaged on.
Learn → DetectThe return edge. Every cycle re-reads waiting time by broker and by class — a segment that reliably waits longer is something the triage did to it.
Typical build scope
Twelve workstreams across six weeks
The build scope read against the delivery timeline. Week structure follows the six-week plan — discovery, channels and extraction, clearance and appetite, evaluation, then production validation and handover.
WorkstreamWeek 1Week 2Week 3Week 4Week 5Week 6
01Workflow discovery and automation-boundary definition.
02Submission channel and mailbox inventory.
03Appetite, binder scope and authority sourcing.
04Extraction for ACORD, schedule and loss runs.
05Schedule and loss-run reconciliation rules.
06Clearance matching and broker conflicts.
07Appetite versioning by submission date.
08Routing rules, authority limits and the no-declination constraint.
09Underwriter triage-view sign-off.
10Extraction, clearance and routing evaluation.
11Turnaround and broker-segment slice testing.
12Observability, deployment and Agent Care handover.
12 workstreams · 6 weeks · bar shows the weeks a workstream is active — several run in parallelFinal scope and sequence confirmed in discovery
Engagement tiers
What each tier includes
Rows are the capabilities named in each tier's scope. Higher tiers include everything below them.
Capability✓ in scope · — not at this tierPilotOne line, one channelProductionProduction intake integrationAdvancedMulti-line / multi-market
Introduced at Pilot
Document extraction with field provenance✓✓✓
Schedule and loss-run totalling✓✓✓
Clearance against accounts and brokers✓✓✓
Written-appetite triage✓✓✓
Baseline evaluation✓✓✓
Introduced at Production
Appetite versioning by submission date—✓✓
Authority, binder and licensing checks—✓✓
Underwriter routing and triage view—✓✓
Observability and audit trail—✓✓
Introduced at Advanced
Turnaround and broker-segment reporting——✓
Multi-market and enterprise controls——✓
Build priceFrom $5,000From $8,000Custom quote
Final build priceConfirmed after discovery based on the lines and markets in scope, the submission channels and document formats in play, policy-admin and clearance integrations, submission volume, appetite and authority complexity and deployment requirements.
Separate from buildBuild pricing is separate from recurring Agent Care, which covers managed monitoring, evaluations, incidents and verified improvements after launch.
What we need from you
What you bring, and what we build with it
Each input maps to a piece of build scope and a week in the delivery timeline.
You bringWe build with it
01The lines, classes and markets in scope→Workflow discovery and automation-boundary definitionWeek 1
02Your written appetite guide, and how often it changes→Appetite, binder scope and authority sourcing, versionedWeek 1
03Access to the submission mailbox, portals and policy admin→Channel, clearance and policy-admin integrationWeek 2
04Real submissions, including the scanned and the disordered→Extraction for ACORD forms, schedules and loss runsWeek 2
05Your clearance rules and what counts as a broker conflict→Clearance matching against accounts, policies and brokersWeek 3
06Your written rule on who may decline and who may quote→Routing rules, authority limits and the no-declination constraintWeek 4
07Named underwriters and a team leader→Triage-view sign-off, routing agreement and turnaround slicesWeeks 5–6
Nothing else is requiredDeployment, documentation and Agent Care handover are ours.
Delivery timeline
Four phases across six weeks
Phases are drawn over the weeks they actually occupy. The overlap in week 5 is where live submissions first reach underwriters, and re-routes start counting.
PhaseW1W2W3W4W5W6
DiscoveryW1
BuildW2 – W3
EvaluateW4 – W5
Pilot & LaunchW5 – W6
Week focusW1Lines and markets in scope, and who may declineW2Mailbox, portal, clearance and policy-admin integrationW3Extraction, schedule totalling and clearance matchingW4Appetite versioning, routing rules and the evaluation suiteW5First live triage, underwriter re-routes and targeted fixesW6Production validation, turnaround slices and handover
Reading the bandRe-routes in week 5 are counted on live submissions, not a retrospective sample. Each bar covers its own weeks only.
At the end of W6Underwriters are picking work off triaged desks, and every submission can name the appetite version it was triaged on.
DurationSix-week plan shown · typical delivery 4–6 weeks depending on scope confirmed in discovery.
Next step · Insurance AI agent
Sort the submissions before you answer any of them.
Show us how submissions reach you, the appetite guide you triage against and who may decline. We'll read a week of your real submissions beside your own triage, and write down the wording the agent may never send to a broker.
