July 9, 2026 · Updated September 5, 2026
A quoting AI agent is software that uses AI as part of completing a quoting task. Depending on the product, it may read information, choose among supported steps, operate a browser, and return a result. The label does not establish which carriers it supports or how much of the task it completes.
For an agency owner, the useful question is concrete: can a colleague use the returned work, and can they understand how it was prepared?
Look for the full task
A convincing demonstration starts with the information available to the agency. That might be a dec page, application, schedule, or confirmed client answers. It should show what the tool does with those inputs and what happens when something is missing.
For a configured browser workflow, inspect the selected carrier path, information entered, interruptions, and returned outcome. Ask what actions the tool is allowed to perform and which require the team.
| Part of the task | What to establish |
|---|---|
| Source | Current documents, confirmed answers, and unresolved conflicts |
| Scope | Carrier, line, state, transaction, and approved access |
| Actions | What is entered, saved, requested, or submitted |
| Outcome | Indication, quote, referral, decline, or unfinished work |
| Review | Facts, terms, conditions, and outstanding requirements |
| Handoff | The next owner and final agency record |
A quote is not the only possible result
The carrier may ask another question, refer the risk, decline, or return terms with conditions. Those are materially different outcomes. A tool should not present an incomplete task as a finished quote simply because it reached the end of its script.
Even a returned quote can have conditions, an expiration date, and steps required before binding. Preserve those details in the review and proposal. The agency's authority and carrier process govern the next action.
Compare with the rating tools you already use
Comparative raters can provide supported carrier results from one set of information. Their capabilities vary. A browser agent can be another path for specifically supported site work. Neither category has a universal completion percentage.
Use the same representative account to compare the paths available to your agency. The rater and portal automation guide provides an evaluation checklist. Keep an existing connection when it already does the job well.
Ask for an exception demonstration
Try a file with a missing exposure or conflicting date in a permitted test. Ask the provider to show how the issue reaches a reviewer. Check what happens if authentication expires or a carrier rejects a field.
The useful outcome may be a clear question to the team. It should not be an invented value chosen to finish the task. Review the last confirmed action so resuming the work does not create a duplicate submission.
Measure what your team actually gains
Count usable results, preparation time, review time, corrections, and completed handoffs. Include representative difficult cases. A short demonstration establishes that a task can be shown; repeated observed work establishes whether it fits the agency.
Ask for current pricing and support terms for the specific workflow. Avoid calculating savings from a generic per-portal time or assuming all staff time becomes new revenue.
Evaluating Relay
Relay's AI Quoting workflow operates within the scope configured for the agency. Confirm carrier, line, state, authentication, and task support during setup. Your team reviews the returned details and retains responsibility for client advice and decisions within its authority.
The workbench also supports evaluations of applications, proposals, certificates, and questions from client files. Quoting can be the first useful task, followed by the next piece of work the team needs to complete.
See a quoting task from the starting information to the result your team reviews.