Install any skill in seconds. Free to start, no credit card required.
Get Started Free →Write a clear insurance claim letter or appeal that supports a payout. Use when asked to write an insurance claim, file a claim letter, document a loss for insurance, or appeal a denied claim. Produces a structured claim — policy and incident details, the documented loss, the amount claimed, and the evidence — or an appeal that rebuts the denial reason, ready to submit.
.claude/skills/mohitagw15856-insurance-claim/SKILL.md| Test case | Without → With | Effect | Δ tokens | Δ turns |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| case-02 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | 45% | 0% |
| case-04 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | 83% | 0% |
| case-06 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | 67% | 0% |
| case-07 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | 42% | 0% |
| case-08 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | 343% | 0% |
Claims get paid faster when they're complete and well-documented: the right policy and incident details, an itemised loss, and the evidence attached. This skill writes that letter — or, for a denial, an appeal that addresses the insurer's stated reason directly — so the adjuster has everything they need to say yes.
> Note: this is a drafting aid, not legal, financial, or insurance advice, and it does not guarantee a > payout. Coverage, deadlines, and procedures depend on your policy and jurisdiction — read your policy, meet > the insurer's deadlines, and consult a qualified advisor for complex or high-value claims. Never misrepresent > facts; insurance fraud is a crime.
Given "file a claim for water damage from a burst pipe", write the full claim anyway — structure it and bracket the specifics (policy number, dates, amounts, itemised losses) to fill in, and list the evidence to attach. Never withhold for missing detail; never inflate or invent losses.
Ask for these only if they aren't already provided (else bracket to fill in):
For an appeal, add a section that quotes the denial reason and rebuts it with the policy wording and evidence.
Provide a document checklist and notes on policy deadlines to confirm.
Insurance-claim practice — complete incident documentation, itemised evidenced loss, and denial-specific appeals grounded in policy wording.
| Case | Status | Duration (ms) | Turns | Tokens | Tool calls | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Without | With | Δ | Without | With | Δ | Without | With | Δ | Without | With | Δ | ||
case-21 | fail→fail | 15,101 | 13,703 | -9% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 3,141 | 3,502 | +11% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-01 | fail→fail | 10,235 | 13,154 | +29% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,763 | 3,187 | +81% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-02 | fail→pass | 11,743 | 11,552 | -2% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,992 | 2,895 | +45% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-03 | pass→pass | 10,259 | 10,824 | +6% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,767 | 3,174 | +80% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-04 | fail→pass | 9,474 | 12,523 | +32% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,720 | 3,148 | +83% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-05 | fail→fail | 15,244 | 15,651 | +3% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,602 | 3,603 | +38% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-06 | fail→pass | 10,518 | 12,920 | +23% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,819 | 3,034 | +67% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-07 | fail→pass | 15,871 | 16,883 | +6% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,542 | 3,616 | +42% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-08 | fail→pass | 2,946 | 8,673 | +194% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 529 | 2,345 | +343% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-09 | pass→pass | 10,461 | 14,175 | +36% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,888 | 3,146 | +67% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-10 | fail→fail | 10,356 | 10,775 | +4% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,727 | 2,713 | +57% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-11 | fail→pass | 13,043 | 13,074 | +0% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,139 | 3,005 | +40% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-12 | fail→pass | 8,445 | 11,364 | +35% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,478 | 3,048 | +106% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-13 | fail→pass | 9,958 | 14,040 | +41% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,914 | 3,277 | +71% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-14 | pass→pass | 12,652 | 14,247 | +13% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,221 | 3,194 | +44% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-15 | fail→fail | 9,230 | 12,712 | +38% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,624 | 2,950 | +82% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-16 | fail→fail | 13,680 | 13,913 | +2% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,296 | 3,204 | +40% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-17 | fail→fail | 9,129 | 13,907 | +52% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,564 | 3,169 | +103% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-18 | fail→pass | 9,542 | 12,453 | +31% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,761 | 3,018 | +71% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-19 | fail→pass | 9,148 | 13,528 | +48% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,686 | 3,131 | +86% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-20 | pass→pass | 9,536 | 17,456 | +83% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,601 | 3,697 | +131% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-22 | pass→fail | 14,728 | 17,805 | +21% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,554 | 4,034 | +58% | 0 | 0 | — |
DecimalAI ran this skill against gemini-3.6-flash twice over the same eval suite — once with the skill loaded and once without — and compared the two runs case by case. 22 cases were attempted. The headline lift of +41 percentage points is the difference between those two pass rates over the 22 comparable cases. 1 case got worse with the skill loaded, and it is included in that figure.
Without the skill loaded, the model failed this case. With it loaded, the same prompt on the same model passed. This is one improved case from the latest verified run; every case, including any that regressed, is in the table above.
Other measured skills in the registry, with their headline benchmark lift.