Prompt Chain: Submission Review → Complete Underwriting Package

What This Builds

A 4-step prompt chain that takes your submission review notes and produces a complete underwriting package: risk assessment summary + coverage condition rationale + agent communication (quote or declination) + file note. Each step builds on the previous — the output is internally consistent and references the same risk characteristics, coverage terms, and premium rationale throughout, eliminating the version drift that happens when you write four separate documents on the same account over multiple days.

Prerequisites

• Claude Pro account ($20/month — claude.ai)
• Ideally, a Claude Project configured with your underwriting appetite (see Level 4 guide: "Claude Project: Build a Persistent Underwriting Analysis Assistant")
• Your completed submission review notes for a specific account

The Concept

When you underwrite an account over several days — risk analysis on Monday, coverage conditions on Wednesday, agent letter on Friday — the documents drift. The risk summary says "clean 5-year loss history" but the agent letter says "favorable recent loss experience" and the file note says "loss runs reviewed." A prompt chain runs all four in one session, each step reading the previous output. Four documents that use the same language to describe the same account — consistently.

Build It Step by Step

Part 1: Collect Your Submission Inputs

Before starting the chain, organize your review notes into a structured input:

Account: [describe the insured type and size — e.g., medium manufacturer, 85 employees, $12M revenue]
Lines requested: [e.g., commercial property $8M TIV, GL $1M/$2M, umbrella $5M]
Operations: [brief description of what they do]
Location/construction: [location type, building construction, age, sprinkler status]
Loss history: [5-year summary — number of claims, total incurred, largest single loss]
Prior carrier: [if known]
Agent: [identify by relationship level — e.g., preferred agency relationship]
Premium indication: [your estimated premium range]
Decision: [quote / decline / refer up]
Coverage conditions being applied: [exclusions, deductibles, endorsements]

Part 2: Run Step 1 — Risk Assessment Summary

Paste your submission inputs into Claude with this prompt:

This is Step 1 of a 4-step underwriting package chain. Based on these submission inputs, write a formal underwriting risk assessment summary.

[Paste your submission inputs here]

The risk assessment should:
- Identify the account type and key risk characteristics
- Summarize the loss history and what it indicates about risk quality
- Note the key positive and negative risk factors
- State the preliminary underwriting decision (quote / decline / refer)
- Reference specific risk factors that drove the decision

Use formal underwriting language. This document goes in the policy file.

What you get: A professional risk assessment summary that will serve as the foundation for all documents in the chain.

Part 3: Run Step 2 — Coverage Condition Rationale

Feed the Step 1 assessment back into Claude with your specific coverage decisions:

This is Step 2 of the underwriting chain. Using the risk assessment above as context, document the coverage condition rationale for this account.

Coverage conditions being applied:
- [List each condition — e.g., "Windstorm deductible: 2% of TIV — applied due to coastal location and roof age"]
- [e.g., "Mold exclusion — applied per standard practice for buildings over 20 years old"]
- [e.g., "Assault and battery exclusion — not applicable for this class"]

For each condition, state: what the condition is, why it's being applied to this specific account, and what risk characteristic it addresses. Use formal file documentation language.

What you get: A coverage condition rationale document that references the same risk characteristics described in Step 1 — consistent language throughout.

Part 4: Run Step 3 — Agent Communication

Continue the chain with the external-facing communication:

This is Step 3 of the underwriting chain. Based on the risk assessment and coverage conditions above, draft the agent communication for this account.

Decision: [QUOTE / DECLINE]

If QUOTE:
- Premium indication: [range]
- Key coverage terms to highlight
- Any conditions the agent needs to communicate to the insured
- Next steps (inspection required? additional information needed?)

If DECLINE:
- Reason for declination (general — don't cite specific guideline numbers)
- Relationship-preserving close
- Invitation to submit other accounts

Tone: professional, direct, relationship-appropriate for a [preferred / standard / new] agency relationship.

What you get: An agent letter that uses the same account description and risk language as the risk assessment — no inconsistencies between what the file says and what you told the agent.

Part 5: Run Step 4 — File Note

The final step completes the file documentation:

This is Step 4 — the underwriting file note. Based on the risk assessment (Step 1), coverage conditions (Step 2), and agent communication (Step 3) above, write the underwriting file note for this account.

The file note should:
- State the submission received date and account description
- Summarize the review process and documents reviewed
- State the coverage conditions applied and the rationale (reference Step 2)
- State the agent communication sent and what was communicated
- Note any outstanding items (inspection ordered, additional information requested)
- State the final underwriting decision and effective date

This is the internal record — formal, complete, policy-system appropriate.

What you get: A file note that is internally consistent with all three prior documents — same risk description, same coverage conditions, same premium language.

Real Example: Commercial Property + GL Account

Starting inputs:

• Account: Building materials distributor, 60 employees, $8.5M revenue
• Lines: Commercial property ($5.5M TIV), GL ($1M/$2M)
• Location: 1998 tilt-up concrete, 22,000 sq ft warehouse, sprinklered, Memphis TN
• Loss: 5-year history: 2 GL claims ($8K and $12K slip-and-fall), clean property
• Decision: Quote — preferred class for our book
• Conditions: GL deductible $2,500 per occurrence; property deductible $5,000; no unusual exclusions
• Premium indication: $42,000–$48,000 combined

Chain output after 4 steps (35 minutes total):

1. Risk assessment: Tilt-up construction, sprinklered, favorable construction type for property. GL losses within expected frequency and severity for distribution operations. Risk is within preferred appetite. Quote recommended.

2. Coverage condition rationale: $2,500 GL deductible appropriate for revenue size and prior loss pattern; $5,000 property deductible standard for commercial warehouse. No unusual exclusions applied — operations are standard distribution, no products liability concerns.

3. Agent letter: Quote notification to agent; $44,500 premium indication; coverage terms outlined; inspection recommended within 60 days of binding; bindable subject to signed application and inspection.

4. File note: Submission received [date]; documents reviewed (ACORD, supplemental, 5-year loss runs, prior policy dec); coverage conditions and rationale documented; quote communicated to agent on [date]; bindable subject to inspection.

Consistency check: All four documents describe "tilt-up construction," "2 GL claims," "$44,500 premium," and "$5,000 property deductible." No drift between the file and the agent communication.

Time: 35 minutes of Claude interaction + 20 minutes review = 55 minutes. Manual equivalent: 2–3 hours across multiple documents and days.

What to Do When It Breaks

• Step 2 coverage conditions don't reference Step 1 risk factors → Paste the Step 1 output explicitly at the start of Step 2. In a single conversation, Claude retains context; in a new conversation, it won't.
• Agent letter references wrong premium → Your Step 3 premium input didn't match Step 2. Add explicit instruction: "Premium indication as stated in the risk assessment: $[X]–$[X]."
• File note is missing required fields → Add a file note template to your Step 4 prompt: "The file note must include these sections: [list your policy system's required fields]."
• Output is too generic → Your Step 1 inputs need more specificity. Add industry-specific details: instead of "manufacturing" describe "plastic injection molding, 60-ton presses, $4M in equipment."

Variations

• Simpler version: Run only Steps 1 and 3 — risk assessment + agent letter. The file documentation steps are most valuable for complex accounts or referrals.
• Extended version: Add a Step 0 before the chain — "Review this submission description and identify the top 5 questions to resolve before quoting." Full submission triage to documentation in one chain.

What to Do Next

• This week: Run the full 4-step chain on one current submission. Compare consistency and time to your normal process.
• This month: Use the chain for all new business accounts; keep individual prompt style for simple renewals.
• Advanced: Combine with your Claude Project — the Project's appetite context makes Step 1 risk assessment more precise from the start.

Advanced guide for insurance underwriter professionals. All underwriting decisions require professional judgment and appropriate carrier authority approval.