How should AI-generated code documentation be reviewed?

Short answer

Explain who relies on the instructions and how they are validated against the real product. Incorrect documentation can be a service issue even if the underlying code works.

An illustrative example

A guide instructs customers to disable a security setting.

This is a hypothetical situation, not a real customer outcome or a coverage determination.

Three facts to prepare

• Documentation version
• Validation process
• Customer use

Use a brief, accurate summary. Separate confirmed facts from assumptions; keep passwords, identity numbers, private customer records and confidential documents out of an initial marketplace request.

A question to bring to the right professional

Does our insured service include documentation and customer instruction?

Clarify who creates, approves, distributes and relies on the material. Legal review of rights and claims is distinct from insurance review. The examples are prompts for a professional conversation, not conclusions that a generated asset is lawful, original, safe or insured.

Sources and scope

• NIST: AI Risk Management Framework

  A voluntary framework for organizing AI risk. It is not an insurance contract, certification or determination of legal compliance.

• Travelers: technology errors and omissions risk examples

  Insurer-authored context on technology service allegations and differences in policy wording. Product descriptions apply to that source; they are not LunarQuote offers or evidence of a partnership.

Sources supply the stated background, not a determination about the illustrative case. The example, checklist and discussion prompt are LunarQuote educational material. Source links checked October 5, 2026.