Loss verification
Baseline first · candidate experiment
Existing catastrophe, weather and incident feeds come first. Ask for only a precise missing corroboration question or public source outside that coverage, not routine loss verification.
Interactive Responses evidence scope · Decisions unavailable · Monitor preview only
Main dependency
Actual vendor names, adapter contracts and coverage are unverified here; missing setup is not a claimed business gap.
- 01
Weather & incidents
Existing baseline · simulated here
- 02
Coverage check
Answered already? Stop; zero Parallel calls
- 03
Precise extra question
Optional, explicit action only
- 04
Incremental evidence
Supported additions, coverage and reviewer effort
Scenario input Synthetic
Outbound public context preview
{
"peril": "hail",
"loss_window_utc": {
"start": "2024-05-26T22:00:00Z",
"end": "2024-05-27T01:00:00Z"
},
"timezone": "America/Chicago",
"location": {
"zip": "75201",
"state": "TX"
},
"radius_km": "10.00",
"question": "What public event evidence overlaps this hypothetical loss?"
}Kept local: precise coordinates (ZIP and state sent by default)
Incremental outside research Optional
Interactive Responses evidence scope · Decisions unavailable · Monitor preview only
A precise missing corroboration question or missing public source. Candidate experiment, not a verified deficiency. If existing evidence answers the question, stop.
No runs yet.