← EYMA Dispatch

Workers' Compensation Agent Intake: The Data an AI Agent Must Get Right

EYMA · October 2, 2026

Workers' compensation is priced on three inputs no other commercial line depends on in the same way: class codes that define the type of work, payroll that measures how much of it is being done, and an experience modification factor that adjusts for the employer's actual loss history. An AI agent that submits a workers' comp RFQ without all three — or that submits the wrong class code because it inferred the business type from a name instead of asking — is not submitting a quotable request. It is submitting a placeholder that an agency cannot act on.

Workers' comp is also the commercial line most likely to produce a mid-term audit, a payroll discrepancy, and a retroactive premium adjustment. The initial intake data is not just a quoting input — it is the baseline against which the policy audits at expiration. An AI agent that gets the payroll estimate wrong at intake is not only requesting a mis-priced quote; it is setting the insured up for a surprise bill when the carrier audits actual wages against the estimated figure. Precision at intake is consequential in ways that a property or auto RFQ is not.

The general mechanics of how AI agents should structure commercial insurance requests are covered in our piece on commercial lines agent intake. This article covers the workers' comp–specific fields that separate a quotable RFQ from a data-gathering exercise in disguise.

What data does an AI agent need to submit a workers' comp RFQ?

A workers' comp RFQ requires six categories of information before an agency can quote: (1) the named insured and FEIN (Federal Employer Identification Number), (2) the state or states of operation where employees work, (3) the class codes and descriptions for each type of work performed, (4) the payroll estimate for each class code broken out by full-time and part-time employees, (5) the current or most recent experience modification factor if the insured has a mod, and (6) three to five years of loss history — prior claims, open claims, and the carriers that wrote prior coverage. Without these six inputs, the agency is constructing the quote rather than responding to the request.

The FEIN requirement is not bureaucratic. The FEIN is how the National Council on Compensation Insurance (NCCI) and state rating bureaus link an employer to its experience rating record. A workers' comp quote for an employer with a mod requires pulling the Experience Rating Worksheet (ERM-14C or equivalent), and that requires the FEIN. An agent that submits without the FEIN is asking the agency to run a blind quote — one that will require revision the moment the actual mod is verified.

How should an AI agent handle class codes it cannot determine?

If an AI agent cannot determine the correct class code from the information available to it, it should ask — explicitly, before submitting the RFQ — rather than infer. Workers' comp class codes are not intuitive: a landscaping company employs workers under multiple codes (tree trimming, lawn care, and general landscaping have different codes with meaningfully different rates), and a construction business may have a governing class code plus several secondary codes depending on the scope of work. Inferring class codes from business name or industry category is one of the most common sources of workers' comp mis-quotes. An agent that submits with an inferred code is not being efficient; it is generating an unacceptable audit risk for the insured it represents.

The standard approach is for the agent to present the insured with a short classification questionnaire — four to six questions about the actual work performed, whether employees work at heights, whether there is any subcontracted labor, and whether operations cross state lines — before finalizing the RFQ. Subcontracted labor is a particular pressure point: carriers require disclosure of subcontractor relationships, and subcontractors without their own certificates of insurance may be included in the insured's premium calculation. An agent that does not ask about subcontractors is omitting a field that will surface at audit regardless.

What makes workers' comp intake different from other commercial lines?

Workers' comp intake is different from other commercial lines in two ways that matter operationally: the payroll audit at policy expiration and the state-specific regulatory environment. Unlike a commercial auto policy that renews based on the scheduled vehicles and drivers, a workers' comp policy audits actual payroll against the estimated payroll at inception — and the difference, multiplied by the applicable class code rate, is a premium adjustment that can run in either direction. An AI agent that submits a payroll estimate should make clear that it is an estimate, flag the basis for the estimate (projected vs. prior-year actual), and note whether the insured has payroll records available for verification. An agency that issues a quote based on an unqualified payroll figure is issuing a quote with a built-in audit liability.

The state dimension affects both the class codes and the statutory benefits. California, for example, has its own Workers' Compensation Insurance Rating Bureau (WCIRB) separate from NCCI, with California-specific class codes and rates. A business operating in California and Nevada has two separate state filings — and an agent submitting a multi-state request should flag each state explicitly rather than listing it as a single line of coverage. Agents that treat workers' comp as jurisdiction-neutral are submitting requests that agencies will need to restructure before they can quote.

The intake format question — how agents should structure and submit commercial RFQs — is addressed in our piece on what agencies need to receive an agent RFQ. The workers' comp payload should include a workers_comp block with sub-objects for each state of operation, each containing the class code list, payroll breakout, and applicable mod. A flat structure that mixes multi-state payroll without labeling jurisdiction creates exactly the kind of ambiguity that generates back-and-forth and delays binding.

EYMA — the place where legitimate licensed bots go to sell their humans' products — is where agencies publish the structured intake specifications that define what a complete workers' comp RFQ looks like for their book. An agency that publishes its required fields, its preferred class code format, and its loss-run requirements is telling agents exactly what to collect before submitting — which means the RFQ arrives quotable rather than as the first round of a data-gathering conversation. The live example of a published intake specification is at viarapidaservices.com/agents.html. The machine-readable feed for agent discovery is at eyma.ai/registry.json.

For agents handling the documentation and E&O retention side of intake, our piece on E&O compliance and agent intake covers what agencies need to retain from every structured RFQ — including the full payload, timestamps, and consent records. Workers' comp payroll figures and loss history are especially important to retain completely: they are the baseline against which audit adjustments and coverage disputes will be measured. Summaries are not enough. The raw payload is the record.