Conversation
Voice, SMS, email or forms collect the information the operation actually needs.
Insurance · High-intent workflow
Structure first notice of loss without automating judgment.
Claire can gather policyholder and incident context, retrieve permitted policy information, collect required documents, prepare the notice, confirm next steps and route coverage or urgency decisions to authorized staff.
Request to resolution● Governed workflow
Incoming request“I was rear-ended this morning and need to report a claim.”
- 1Verify policyholder using approved processConfigured next actionClaire
- 2Capture incident, parties and safety statusConfigured next actionClaire
- 3Retrieve permitted policy contextConfigured next actionClaire
- 4Structure FNOL and document requestConfigured next actionSystem
- 5Send reference and approved next stepsConfigured next actionClaire
- 6Escalate coverage or urgency questionHuman decision or exceptionHuman
Why Claire is different
The search starts with reception. The value continues through the workflow.
A basic answering service captures a message. Claire can maintain context, apply rules, coordinate approved actions and communications, and bring people in when the workflow reaches a decision or exception.
Coordination
Variables, branching, waits, API actions and follow-up keep the next step moving.
Human control
Approval and exception boundaries keep consequential decisions with your team.
Implementation
Start with one bounded workflow.
- Map the requestInputs, channels, volume and failure points.
- Define permissionsWhat Claire may retrieve, prepare, update or communicate.
- Connect systemsValidate API access and operational constraints.
- Test exceptionsSimulate edge cases and human handoffs before launch.
Systems commonly encountered
Applied Epic, AMS360, EZLynx, HawkSoft.
Integration status: configurable connection subject to API access and implementation validation. No native integration is claimed on this page.
Operational depth
What FNOL and insurance intake requires in practice.
First notice of loss is a structured beginning to a claims process, not a coverage decision. The workflow may need identity and policy context, loss details, parties, location, time, documents, safety information, preferred communication, routing, and a clear boundary between administrative intake and licensed or adjuster judgment.
Policyholder / claimantMakes or receives the request
ClaireMaintains workflow state and coordination
Policy + claims systemsProvides authorized context and actions
Agent / adjusterOwns judgment, approval or exception
1. Capture context
Identify the caller and gather the configured policy or account references.
2. Understand the request
Capture date, time, location, loss type, parties, injuries or immediate safety concerns.
3. Apply operating rules
Collect or request documents and photos through the approved process.
4. Coordinate the system step
Apply routing rules without deciding coverage, liability, reserve, settlement, or legal position.
5. Communicate clearly
Create or prepare the permitted FNOL record and acknowledgement.
6. Escalate exceptions
Escalate injury, fraud indicators, vulnerable customers, complex losses, or uncertain identity to the correct person.
Where people stay involved. Licensed staff, agents, adjusters, claims leaders, and legal teams retain decisions about coverage, liability, investigation, settlement, exceptions, and sensitive customer handling. Claire should make the intake more complete and the route more reliable while preserving those responsibilities.
Systems and implementation truth
Connect only what can be validated.
Applied Epic, AMS360, EZLynx, HawkSoft, Guidewire and other insurance systems require separate API, permission, security, and implementation review. No native integration is claimed. A deployment must establish data minimization, authentication, audit, error, and document-handling requirements.
Implementation begins by mapping the trigger, identity keys, required reads and writes, permissions, normal path, timeouts, failure states, human owner, communications, and test cases. Claire’s API Call, variables, branching, delays, messaging, calling, consent, time checks, documents, human handoff, Runtime, Operations, and Quality primitives provide the building blocks; the exact end-to-end behavior must be configured and tested for the customer.
How to measure the workflow
Measure intake completeness, time to human ownership, missing-document follow-up, routing accuracy, exception aging, and policyholder update completion. Automation should not be evaluated by how quickly it makes a decision it is not authorized to make.
No invented proof: this page describes workflow capability and deployment requirements. It does not claim customer results, certifications, or integrations that have not been substantiated.
Evaluation guide
How to evaluate FNOL and insurance intake without buying a demo illusion.
A convincing call is only the beginning. Ask the vendor to demonstrate the complete path using representative data and the failure conditions your team sees in production. The test should show how the workflow identifies the correct record, what happens when more than one record matches, which actions are read-only or writable, how permissions are enforced, and how the person receiving an exception sees the context.
Bring real test cases
Include a straightforward request, an incomplete request, an out-of-policy request, a system timeout, unavailable capacity, conflicting information, a caller who asks for a person, and a request that arrives after hours. For FNOL and insurance intake, the demonstration should use the vocabulary and operational dependencies described on this page rather than a generic appointment-booking script.
Define completion before launch
A conversation is not complete merely because the call ended. Define whether completion means a verified record was found, required fields were captured, a permitted action succeeded, the system of record reflects the new state, the customer received the correct confirmation, or a named human accepted ownership. If an API fails, the workflow must expose the failure and route it; it must not tell the customer the work is finished.
Separate configuration, integration, and product gaps
Scripts, knowledge, business hours, routing rules, variables, messages, and many branches may be configuration. System reads and writes usually require integration work. Durable external-event resume, approval chains, complex exception queues, or other behaviors may require product verification or development. A useful implementation plan labels the difference instead of hiding every dependency behind “customization.”
Protect the human operating model
Licensed staff, agents, adjusters, claims leaders, and legal teams retain decisions about coverage, liability, investigation, settlement, exceptions, and sensitive customer handling. Claire should make the intake more complete and the route more reliable while preserving those responsibilities. The strongest workflow removes repeated coordination and prepares decisions; it does not erase accountability. Agree on the handoff owner, response expectation, fallback channel, and what happens after the person acts.
Buyer questions
Before you deploy.
Is this just a voice bot?
No. Voice can start the workflow, but Claire’s value is coordinating the configured system, communication and human steps that follow.
Can Claire act without human review?
Only within the permissions and policy boundaries configured for the workflow. Decisions and exceptions can require a human.
Does Claire replace our current system?
No. Claire is designed to orchestrate around systems of record rather than create another disconnected database.
How do we prove the workflow works?
We test representative requests, system responses, unavailable actions and handoff conditions before production rollout.
See Claire run an FNOL workflow.
Bring the real request, rules, systems and handoff points.