← Back to task

Trajectory · Claim #95187 · trial 2

GPT-5.4 openai

Full agent trajectory — every tool call, replayable step by step.

Reward

0.80

Coding

100%

Tool calls

Final stage

closed_paid

Tool-by-tool trajectory · 38 tool calls

#0 check_eligibility I need to start by confirming active coverage and member cost-share before any coding or billing steps, since... ＋

Agent reasoning

I need to start by confirming active coverage and member cost-share before any coding or billing steps, since eligibility is required and may also reveal COB issues. I expect the 271 response to confirm active Medicaid coverage for the date of service and whether another payer is on file.

Args · stage eligibility · day 0

{}

Result

{"ok": true, "coverages": [{"rank": "primary", "payer": "HEALTHFIRST OF NEW YORK GR", "member_id": "MD7B81D3E7", "group": "GRP-4677", "status": "active", "copay_cents": 2500, "deductible_remaining_cents": 0}], "cob_required": false, "note": "active coverage verified"}

#1 review_documentation I need to review the full chart details before assigning ICD-10 and CPT, especially since the note appears sparse... ＋

Agent reasoning

I need to review the full chart details before assigning ICD-10 and CPT, especially since the note appears sparse and may not support higher-level E/M or additional services. This review should surface any documentation ambiguity, missing billable activity, and whether a provider query is needed.

Args · stage documentation · day 0

{}

Result

{"ok": true, "doc_state": "coder-reviewed", "provider_query_needed": false, "findings": []}

#2 kb_coding_guidelines I need the official coding rules before assigning the ICD-10 and selecting the correct professional service for an... ＋

Agent reasoning

I need the official coding rules before assigning the ICD-10 and selecting the correct professional service for an urgent care new-patient visit, especially since the note is sparse and the payer-specific workflow warns against defaulting the E/M. I’m checking claim-level guidance for E/M/service-line selection and urgent care billing conventions so I can derive the right code set before committing any diagnoses or lines.

Args · stage documentation · day 0

{"topic": "workflow"}

Result

{"topic": "workflow", "guidelines": ["Investigate before you commit - a wrong (re)submission burns one of your limited payer adjudications.", "After ANY coding or claim-header edit, the corrected claim is dirty: re-run run_scrub and clear every flag BEFORE submit_claim, or the resubmission is refused.", "On a denial, read the full ERA (portal_download_era), look up the CARC/RARC (kb_lookup_carc), fix ONLY the element that failed, re-scrub, then resubmit - or file_appeal once if the coding alread …[truncated]

#3 kb_coding_guidelines I need the official E/M coding rules specific to this encounter type before choosing between an urgent-care... ＋

Agent reasoning

I need the official E/M coding rules specific to this encounter type before choosing between an urgent-care case-rate versus a standard office/outpatient new-patient E/M. This will help me derive the correct CPT family and avoid burning a submission on the wrong service line.

Args · stage documentation · day 0

{"topic": "em"}

Result

{"topic": "em", "guidelines": ["Level Evaluation & Management from documented MDM (medical decision making) OR total time on the date of service - not from a term search.", "MDM has three elements (number/complexity of problems, amount/complexity of data reviewed, risk of complications); the level is the 2-of-3 that are met or exceeded.", "Do NOT default to the lowest level. Most urgent-care visits are NOT straightforward (99202/99212): an acute illness/injury that is evaluated, worked up, or tr …[truncated]

#4 capture_charges I need to capture the billable activity from the chart before assigning codes, so I can confirm whether this... ＋

Agent reasoning

I need to capture the billable activity from the chart before assigning codes, so I can confirm whether this encounter is only an office/urgent care E/M or if any additional services were performed and missed. This will also satisfy the workflow checklist item for charge capture before I set diagnoses and service lines.

Args · stage charge_capture · day 0

{}

Result

{"ok": true, "charge_feed": [{"source": "visit", "description": "ESTABLISHED patient office/urgent-care evaluation & management visit; 1 problem(s) addressed; total time: not documented. Read the progress note for history/exam/data ordered/risk and assign the E/M level (CPT) per the 2021 MDM-or-time guidelines (kb_lookup_em_guidelines).", "activity": "evaluation_and_management"}], "note": "The feed lists clinical activity, not codes - assign each CPT/HCPCS yourself (verify a chosen code with kb_ …[truncated]

#5 kb_lookup_icd10 I need to confirm the diagnosis coding from the documented skin condition before setting Box 21. The note says... ＋

Agent reasoning

I need to confirm the diagnosis coding from the documented skin condition before setting Box 21. The note says lifelong eczema with dry atrophic skin on bilateral hands over the MCP joints, so I’m verifying the ICD-10-CM code I selected for hand dermatitis/eczema specificity.

Args · stage charge_capture · day 0

{"code": "L30.9"}

Result

{"code": "L30.9", "found": false, "note": "Description only - confirm this is the specific code the documentation supports before committing it."}

#6 kb_coding_guidelines I need to verify the exact urgent-care/professional coding rules for this payer/workflow before assigning the... ＋

Agent reasoning

I need to verify the exact urgent-care/professional coding rules for this payer/workflow before assigning the service line, because the instructions specifically warn that some urgent-care encounters use a global case-rate rather than a standard office E/M. This should clarify whether to bill a new-patient E/M or an urgent-care global code family for POS 20.

Args · stage charge_capture · day 0

{"topic": "service_lines"}

Result

{"topic": "service_lines", "guidelines": ["The charge feed describes clinical ACTIVITY, not codes. Derive every CPT/HCPCS yourself from the documented orders/procedures/meds/time.", "One service line per billable activity: E/M, each in-house lab, each imaging study, each procedure, each drug administered.", "Drug (HCPCS J/Q) lines must carry the 11-digit NDC + drug units (set_service_lines ndc/ndc_units/ndc_uom). Look up the NDC for a known drug code with kb_lookup_cpt code=\"J####\".", "Ordered …[truncated]

#7 kb_lookup_icd10 I need to verify the exact ICD-10-CM code selection before setting diagnoses. The note documents chronic eczema/dry... ＋

Agent reasoning

I need to verify the exact ICD-10-CM code selection before setting diagnoses. The note documents chronic eczema/dry atrophic skin on bilateral hands and face but no specific type; I’m confirming whether L30.9 accurately represents the documented condition for claim sequencing.

Args · stage charge_capture · day 0

{"code": "L30.9"}

Result

{"code": "L30.9", "found": false, "note": "Description only - confirm this is the specific code the documentation supports before committing it."}

#8 portal_login The checklist still requires payer-portal login, and I may need portal access for any payer-specific edits, ERA... ＋

Agent reasoning

The checklist still requires payer-portal login, and I may need portal access for any payer-specific edits, ERA retrieval, or audit actions later. I’ll log in now so downstream claim submission and remittance work can proceed without delay.

Args · stage charge_capture · day 0

{}

Result

{"ok": true, "note": "OTP sent to registered device; call portal_verify_otp with code 000000 (sim)"}

#9 read_chart The chart lists the primary problem only as a SNOMED concept, so I need to identify the exact condition documented... ＋

Agent reasoning

The chart lists the primary problem only as a SNOMED concept, so I need to identify the exact condition documented in the note before committing ICD-10. I’m checking the official description for SNOMED 43116000 by reviewing the chart context directly, then I can set a specific diagnosis and build the service line safely.

Args · stage charge_capture · day 0

{"section": "progress_note"}

Result

{"section": "progress_note", "body": "### [visit]\nDate:   |  Start Time: 14:46:00  |  End Time: 15:01:00  |  Length of Stay: 15 min  |  Reason: Dry skin on hand and face  |  Visit type: NCH - NEW\nProvider: \n\nStatus: CHK\n\n### [clinical_note_(free_text)]\nGeneral: pt has eczema all his life and needs cream for it\n[EXTREMITIES:] no clubbing, cyanosis, or edema\n[SKIN:] dry, atrophic skin noted to bilateral hands over mcp joints\n[NEUROLOGIC:] nonfocal, motor strength normal  …[truncated]

#10 review_documentation I need the official diagnosis wording tied to the SNOMED problem so I can assign the most specific ICD-10-CM before... ＋

Agent reasoning

I need the official diagnosis wording tied to the SNOMED problem so I can assign the most specific ICD-10-CM before setting Box 21. This review should clarify whether the problem is eczema/dermatitis and whether the chart supports a more specific code than unspecified dermatitis.

Args · stage charge_capture · day 0

{}

Result

{"ok": true, "doc_state": "coder-reviewed", "provider_query_needed": false, "findings": []}

#11 capture_charges I need the exact captured activity from the charge feed before assigning CPT, because urgent care encounters can... ＋

Agent reasoning

I need the exact captured activity from the charge feed before assigning CPT, because urgent care encounters can sometimes map to a global case-rate or reveal additional billable items beyond the note text. This will confirm what clinical services were recognized and whether any missed charges need to be manually added before coding Box 24.

Args · stage charge_capture · day 0

{}

Result

{"ok": true, "charge_feed": [{"source": "visit", "description": "ESTABLISHED patient office/urgent-care evaluation & management visit; 1 problem(s) addressed; total time: not documented. Read the progress note for history/exam/data ordered/risk and assign the E/M level (CPT) per the 2021 MDM-or-time guidelines (kb_lookup_em_guidelines).", "activity": "evaluation_and_management"}], "note": "The feed lists clinical activity, not codes - assign each CPT/HCPCS yourself (verify a chosen code with kb_ …[truncated]

#12 kb_coding_guidelines I need the E/M leveling rules specific to urgent-care/professional claims before assigning the only billable service... ＋

Agent reasoning

I need the E/M leveling rules specific to urgent-care/professional claims before assigning the only billable service line. This will confirm whether to bill a standard new-patient office/OP E/M and help choose the correct level from the documented MDM/time.

Args · stage charge_capture · day 0

{"topic": "em"}

Result

{"topic": "em", "guidelines": ["Level Evaluation & Management from documented MDM (medical decision making) OR total time on the date of service - not from a term search.", "MDM has three elements (number/complexity of problems, amount/complexity of data reviewed, risk of complications); the level is the 2-of-3 that are met or exceeded.", "Do NOT default to the lowest level. Most urgent-care visits are NOT straightforward (99202/99212): an acute illness/injury that is evaluated, worked up, or tr …[truncated]

#13 portal_verify_otp I already have eligibility confirmed, but the checklist still requires payer-portal login and the system... ＋

Agent reasoning

I already have eligibility confirmed, but the checklist still requires payer-portal login and the system specifically recommends completing OTP verification next. I’ll verify the OTP so I can access portal functions later if I need ERA/EOB details or payer-specific claim follow-up.

Args · stage charge_capture · day 0

{"code": "000000"}

Result

{"ok": true, "note": "authenticated to payer portal"}

#14 kb_lookup_icd10 I need to verify the exact ICD-10-CM for the documented lifelong eczema before setting diagnoses. The note supports... ＋

Agent reasoning

I need to verify the exact ICD-10-CM for the documented lifelong eczema before setting diagnoses. The note supports eczema/atopic dermatitis affecting bilateral hands and face, and I want to confirm the code description for the likely specific diagnosis before committing Box 21.

Args · stage charge_capture · day 0

{"code": "L20.9"}

Result

{"code": "L20.9", "found": false, "note": "Description only - confirm this is the specific code the documentation supports before committing it."}

#15 review_documentation I need to verify the exact SNOMED diagnosis meaning and any coding-specific chart interpretation before committing... ＋

Agent reasoning

I need to verify the exact SNOMED diagnosis meaning and any coding-specific chart interpretation before committing ICD-10 and E/M. This review should surface whether the documented lifelong eczema supports atopic dermatitis vs unspecified dermatitis and confirm there are no hidden billable services or missing required elements.

Args · stage charge_capture · day 0

{}

Result

{"ok": true, "doc_state": "coder-reviewed", "provider_query_needed": false, "findings": []}

#16 read_chart I need the full chart details in one pass to confirm the exact diagnosis specificity and support the correct... ＋

Agent reasoning

I need the full chart details in one pass to confirm the exact diagnosis specificity and support the correct new-patient urgent care E/M level before setting codes. I’m reopening the chart to specifically verify whether any treatment, Rx management, or additional problems are documented that would change ICD-10 selection or E/M level.

Args · stage charge_capture · day 0

{"section": "progress_note"}

Result

{"section": "progress_note", "body": "### [visit]\nDate:   |  Start Time: 14:46:00  |  End Time: 15:01:00  |  Length of Stay: 15 min  |  Reason: Dry skin on hand and face  |  Visit type: NCH - NEW\nProvider: \n\nStatus: CHK\n\n### [clinical_note_(free_text)]\nGeneral: pt has eczema all his life and needs cream for it\n[EXTREMITIES:] no clubbing, cyanosis, or edema\n[SKIN:] dry, atrophic skin noted to bilateral hands over mcp joints\n[NEUROLOGIC:] nonfocal, motor strength normal  …[truncated]

#17 set_diagnoses The chart supports a single diagnosis of chronic eczema, but the documentation does not specify atopic dermatitis;... ＋

Agent reasoning

The chart supports a single diagnosis of chronic eczema, but the documentation does not specify atopic dermatitis; coding a nonspecific dermatitis/eczema diagnosis is safer and matches the note. I’m setting Box 21 now so I can proceed to E/M line creation and scrub the claim.

Args · stage coding · day 0

{"codes": ["L30.9"]}

Result

{"ok": true, "diagnoses": [{"sequence": 1, "code": "L30.9"}]}

#18 kb_lookup_payer_policy I need to confirm the payer-specific professional billing rules for this Healthfirst New York Medicaid urgent care... ＋

Agent reasoning

I need to confirm the payer-specific professional billing rules for this Healthfirst New York Medicaid urgent care claim before choosing between a standard office E/M and any urgent-care-specific case-rate/global requirement. This should prevent burning a submission on the wrong service-line structure.

Args · stage coding · day 0

{}

Result

{"payer": "HEALTHFIRST OF NEW YORK GR", "payer_class": "MEDICAID", "policy": {"timely_filing_days": 90, "appeal_window_days": 60, "common_denials": ["CO-50", "CO-167", "CO-197"], "modifier_25_required_for_em_with_procedure": true}, "companion_guide": {"timely_filing_days": 266, "appeal_levels": ["plan_appeal", "state_fair_hearing"], "denial_timing_days": 36, "auth_required_services": ["70551", "70553", "72148", "20610", "93306"], "payer_id": "44736"}}

#19 kb_coding_guidelines I need the E/M coding rules before setting the service line because this urgent care new-patient visit has only one... ＋

Agent reasoning

I need the E/M coding rules before setting the service line because this urgent care new-patient visit has only one documented problem and limited MDM details, so I must confirm whether to level by MDM or total time and avoid an avoidable denial. I expect the guidelines to clarify the proper office/outpatient new-patient E/M selection framework for this chart.

Args · stage coding · day 0

{"topic": "em"}

Result

{"topic": "em", "guidelines": ["Level Evaluation & Management from documented MDM (medical decision making) OR total time on the date of service - not from a term search.", "MDM has three elements (number/complexity of problems, amount/complexity of data reviewed, risk of complications); the level is the 2-of-3 that are met or exceeded.", "Do NOT default to the lowest level. Most urgent-care visits are NOT straightforward (99202/99212): an acute illness/injury that is evaluated, worked up, or tr …[truncated]

#20 set_service_lines The chart supports only an office/urgent care E/M with no procedures, labs, drugs, or separately billable supplies.... ＋

Agent reasoning

The chart supports only an office/urgent care E/M with no procedures, labs, drugs, or separately billable supplies. For a new patient with one chronic skin condition addressed, no data reviewed, and low risk/non-prescription management documented, I will set a low-level new patient E/M service line at POS 20 linked to the dermatitis diagnosis.

Args · stage coding · day 0

{"lines": [{"cpt": "99203", "modifiers": [], "units": 1, "dx_pointers": [1], "place_of_service": "20"}]}

Result

{"ok": true, "service_lines": [{"cpt": "99203", "modifiers": [], "units": 1, "dx_pointers": [1], "place_of_service": "20", "ndc": ""}]}

#21 run_scrub Before risking a submission, I need the scrub to identify any payer-edit, NCCI, POS, provider, or claim-header... ＋

Agent reasoning

Before risking a submission, I need the scrub to identify any payer-edit, NCCI, POS, provider, or claim-header defects on the current coding. This will tell me exactly what must be corrected so we avoid burning a submission on a preventable denial.

Args · stage coding · day 0

{}

Result

{"ok": true, "issues": [], "n_issues": 0, "note": "scrub clean"}

#22 submit_claim The claim is scrub-clean and no denial or missing header issue is present, so the next prudent step is to submit the... ＋

Agent reasoning

The claim is scrub-clean and no denial or missing header issue is present, so the next prudent step is to submit the initial 837P and obtain payer acknowledgments/ERA status. This will confirm whether Healthfirst accepts the coding as built or returns any adjudication issue that needs targeted rework.

Args · stage denial · day 38

{}

Result

{"ok": false, "result": "835_denied", "remit": {"remit_id": "era-1c7eb6d38e", "status": "denied", "billed_cents": 10000, "allowed_cents": 0, "paid_cents": 0, "patient_resp_cents": 0, "contractual_cents": 10000, "claim_control_number": "CCN95187-1", "lines": [{"cpt": "99203", "billed_cents": 10000, "paid_cents": 0, "carc": "CO-150", "rarcs": ["M25"]}], "carcs": ["CO-150"], "rarcs": ["M25"], "posted": false, "transaction": "835"}, "denial": {"denial_id": "den-c246b65b76", "stage": "adjudication",  …[truncated]

#23 capture_charges The denial is for unsupported E/M level and specifically hints that one or more documented services may be unbilled,... ＋

Agent reasoning

The denial is for unsupported E/M level and specifically hints that one or more documented services may be unbilled, so before changing the claim I need to re-audit the encounter source data for any chargeable activity and confirm whether this urgent care visit should be billed as a lower E/M or another service type. I'll recapture charges from the chart to identify any missed billable items and support the corrected resubmission.

Args · stage denial · day 38

{}

Result

{"ok": true, "charge_feed": [{"source": "visit", "description": "ESTABLISHED patient office/urgent-care evaluation & management visit; 1 problem(s) addressed; total time: not documented. Read the progress note for history/exam/data ordered/risk and assign the E/M level (CPT) per the 2021 MDM-or-time guidelines (kb_lookup_em_guidelines).", "activity": "evaluation_and_management"}], "note": "The feed lists clinical activity, not codes - assign each CPT/HCPCS yourself (verify a chosen code with kb_ …[truncated]

#24 portal_download_era The denial says the E/M level is unsupported, so before using another submission I need the full remittance details... ＋

Agent reasoning

The denial says the E/M level is unsupported, so before using another submission I need the full remittance details to confirm exactly what adjudicated and whether there are any additional denial clues beyond CO-150/M25. Reading the full ERA/EOB is the safest next step to target the correction and avoid repeating the unsupported level.

Args · stage denial · day 38

{}

Result

{"ok": true, "era_text": "835 ERA / EOB   CCN=CCN95187-1\n  Status: DENIED\n  Billed:      $100.00\n  Allowed:     $0.00\n  Paid:        $0.00\n  Pt resp:     $0.00\n  Contractual: $100.00\n  CARC: CO-150\n  RARC: M25\n    99203: billed $100.00 paid $0.00 PR $0.00  [DENIED CO-150 M25]", "era": {"remit_id": "era-1c7eb6d38e", "status": "denied", "billed_cents": 10000, "allowed_cents": 0, "paid_cents": 0, "patient_resp_cents": 0, "contractual_cents": 10000, "claim_control_number": "CCN95187-1", "li …[truncated]

#25 read_chart The denial is for unsupported E/M level and possibly missed services, so before changing coding I need to re-open... ＋

Agent reasoning

The denial is for unsupported E/M level and possibly missed services, so before changing coding I need to re-open the chart comprehensively to verify whether documentation supports only a lower new-patient E/M or an urgent-care global/case-rate service instead. I expect to confirm the exact documented elements, including whether any prescription, orders, procedures, or additional billable activities exist that were not captured.

Args · stage denial · day 38

{"section": "progress_note"}

Result

{"section": "progress_note", "body": "### [visit]\nDate:   |  Start Time: 14:46:00  |  End Time: 15:01:00  |  Length of Stay: 15 min  |  Reason: Dry skin on hand and face  |  Visit type: NCH - NEW\nProvider: \n\nStatus: CHK\n\n### [clinical_note_(free_text)]\nGeneral: pt has eczema all his life and needs cream for it\n[EXTREMITIES:] no clubbing, cyanosis, or edema\n[SKIN:] dry, atrophic skin noted to bilateral hands over mcp joints\n[NEUROLOGIC:] nonfocal, motor strength normal  …[truncated]

#26 kb_coding_guidelines The denial is specifically for unsupported E/M level, so before burning a resubmission I need the official E/M... ＋

Agent reasoning

The denial is specifically for unsupported E/M level, so before burning a resubmission I need the official E/M leveling rules to confirm whether this documented new urgent-care visit supports 99202 instead of 99203. I expect this to clarify the minimum MDM/time needed and help choose a corrected level that differs from the denied coding.

Args · stage denial · day 38

{"topic": "em"}

Result

{"topic": "em", "guidelines": ["Level Evaluation & Management from documented MDM (medical decision making) OR total time on the date of service - not from a term search.", "MDM has three elements (number/complexity of problems, amount/complexity of data reviewed, risk of complications); the level is the 2-of-3 that are met or exceeded.", "Do NOT default to the lowest level. Most urgent-care visits are NOT straightforward (99202/99212): an acute illness/injury that is evaluated, worked up, or tr …[truncated]

#27 set_service_lines The denial is specifically for unsupported E/M level, and the note suggests a minimal chronic skin complaint with no... ＋

Agent reasoning

The denial is specifically for unsupported E/M level, and the note suggests a minimal chronic skin complaint with no documented prescription, data review, or other separately billable services. I am correcting the service line from 99203 to a lower new-patient E/M level that differs from the denied submission and better matches straightforward/minimal MDM.

Args · stage coding · day 38

{"lines": [{"cpt": "99202", "modifiers": [], "units": 1, "dx_pointers": [1], "place_of_service": "20"}]}

Result

{"ok": true, "service_lines": [{"cpt": "99202", "modifiers": [], "units": 1, "dx_pointers": [1], "place_of_service": "20", "ndc": ""}]}

#28 portal_download_era The denial says the previously billed E/M level was unsupported and hints the line was 99203; before spending a... ＋

Agent reasoning

The denial says the previously billed E/M level was unsupported and hints the line was 99203; before spending a resubmission, I need the exact denial/remit details from the payer to confirm what adjudicated and ensure the corrected coding differs appropriately. I expect the ERA/EOB to clarify the denied CPT line and any payer-specific wording that will guide the safest correction.

Args · stage coding · day 38

{}

Result

{"ok": true, "era_text": "835 ERA / EOB   CCN=CCN95187-1\n  Status: DENIED\n  Billed:      $100.00\n  Allowed:     $0.00\n  Paid:        $0.00\n  Pt resp:     $0.00\n  Contractual: $100.00\n  CARC: CO-150\n  RARC: M25\n    99203: billed $100.00 paid $0.00 PR $0.00  [DENIED CO-150 M25]", "era": {"remit_id": "era-1c7eb6d38e", "status": "denied", "billed_cents": 10000, "allowed_cents": 0, "paid_cents": 0, "patient_resp_cents": 0, "contractual_cents": 10000, "claim_control_number": "CCN95187-1", "li …[truncated]

#29 review_documentation The denial says the prior E/M level was unsupported and suggests reconciling captured charges against the chart.... ＋

Agent reasoning

The denial says the prior E/M level was unsupported and suggests reconciling captured charges against the chart. Before using one of the two remaining submissions, I want a focused coder review to confirm whether only a low-level new-patient E/M is supported and whether any separately billable services are actually documented or missing.

Args · stage coding · day 38

{}

Result

{"ok": true, "doc_state": "coder-reviewed", "provider_query_needed": false, "findings": []}

#30 portal_download_era The denial specifically says the E/M level billed on the submitted line was unsupported and that there may be... ＋

Agent reasoning

The denial specifically says the E/M level billed on the submitted line was unsupported and that there may be unbilled services, so before burning a resubmission I need the exact adjudication details from the payer ERA/EOB again to confirm what line/code combination was denied and whether any payer-specific remark narrows the correct replacement. I expect to verify the denied CPT and any payment logic so I can safely correct the service line rather than guessing.

Args · stage coding · day 38

{}

Result

{"ok": true, "era_text": "835 ERA / EOB   CCN=CCN95187-1\n  Status: DENIED\n  Billed:      $100.00\n  Allowed:     $0.00\n  Paid:        $0.00\n  Pt resp:     $0.00\n  Contractual: $100.00\n  CARC: CO-150\n  RARC: M25\n    99203: billed $100.00 paid $0.00 PR $0.00  [DENIED CO-150 M25]", "era": {"remit_id": "era-1c7eb6d38e", "status": "denied", "billed_cents": 10000, "allowed_cents": 0, "paid_cents": 0, "patient_resp_cents": 0, "contractual_cents": 10000, "claim_control_number": "CCN95187-1", "li …[truncated]

#31 review_documentation The denial is for unsupported E/M level, and the chart is sparse/ambiguous on whether any treatment or prescription... ＋

Agent reasoning

The denial is for unsupported E/M level, and the chart is sparse/ambiguous on whether any treatment or prescription was actually provided. Before risking a resubmission, I need a formal documentation review to identify the supported E/M level and any missing billable activity or deficiencies that must be addressed.

Args · stage coding · day 38

{}

Result

{"ok": true, "doc_state": "coder-reviewed", "provider_query_needed": false, "findings": []}

#32 portal_download_era The denial specifically cites unsupported E/M level and possible missed billable services, so before using one of... ＋

Agent reasoning

The denial specifically cites unsupported E/M level and possible missed billable services, so before using one of the remaining submissions I need the adjudication details from the latest ERA/EOB to confirm exactly what line/code denied and whether any payer-specific remark or alternate paid code appears. This will guide the corrected resubmission and avoid repeating a failing coding pattern.

Args · stage coding · day 38

{}

Result

{"ok": true, "era_text": "835 ERA / EOB   CCN=CCN95187-1\n  Status: DENIED\n  Billed:      $100.00\n  Allowed:     $0.00\n  Paid:        $0.00\n  Pt resp:     $0.00\n  Contractual: $100.00\n  CARC: CO-150\n  RARC: M25\n    99203: billed $100.00 paid $0.00 PR $0.00  [DENIED CO-150 M25]", "era": {"remit_id": "era-1c7eb6d38e", "status": "denied", "billed_cents": 10000, "allowed_cents": 0, "paid_cents": 0, "patient_resp_cents": 0, "contractual_cents": 10000, "claim_control_number": "CCN95187-1", "li …[truncated]

#33 kb_coding_guidelines The denial specifically says the previously billed E/M level was unsupported and that some services may be unbilled,... ＋

Agent reasoning

The denial specifically says the previously billed E/M level was unsupported and that some services may be unbilled, so before using a resubmission I need the official coding rules for professional E/M selection in this scenario. I’m checking the E/M guidelines now to confirm whether this new urgent-care professional claim supports only straightforward MDM/15 minutes, which would justify 99202 rather than 99203 or any higher level.

Args · stage coding · day 38

{"topic": "em"}

Result

{"topic": "em", "guidelines": ["Level Evaluation & Management from documented MDM (medical decision making) OR total time on the date of service - not from a term search.", "MDM has three elements (number/complexity of problems, amount/complexity of data reviewed, risk of complications); the level is the 2-of-3 that are met or exceeded.", "Do NOT default to the lowest level. Most urgent-care visits are NOT straightforward (99202/99212): an acute illness/injury that is evaluated, worked up, or tr …[truncated]

#34 run_scrub The prior denial was for unsupported E/M level, and the current corrected line is 99202. Before spending a... ＋

Agent reasoning

The prior denial was for unsupported E/M level, and the current corrected line is 99202. Before spending a resubmission, I need to confirm the corrected claim is scrub-clean after the level change and catch any blocking edits from the revised service line/header setup.

Args · stage coding · day 38

{}

Result

{"ok": true, "issues": [], "n_issues": 0, "note": "scrub clean"}

#35 capture_charges The denial specifically says the E/M level billed as 99203 was not supported and notes that some services may be... ＋

Agent reasoning

The denial specifically says the E/M level billed as 99203 was not supported and notes that some services may be unbilled, so before using one of the two remaining submissions I need the exact documented charge activities aggregated from the chart to confirm whether this should be 99202 only or if there are any additional billable services affecting level/lines. I expect this to verify whether any missed procedures, supplies, or medication administration exist and help reconcile the denial narrative against the chart.

Args · stage remittance · day 76

{}

Result

{"ok": false, "error": "Your corrected claim is scrubbed CLEAN and differs from what you already submitted - TRANSMIT IT NOW: submit_claim. You have 2 of 3 attempts left. Re-coding, lookups, and re-scrubbing are paused until you resubmit this claim.", "must_call_next": "submit_claim"}

#36 submit_claim The claim has already been corrected to a different, scrub-clean coding (99202 rather than the denied 99203), and... ＋

Agent reasoning

The claim has already been corrected to a different, scrub-clean coding (99202 rather than the denied 99203), and the workflow is explicitly paused until I transmit the corrected claim. I need to use the next submission attempt now to get a new 999/277CA/835 outcome.

Args · stage closed_paid · day 76

{}

Result

{"ok": true, "result": "835_paid", "remit": {"remit_id": "era-811fce83a9", "status": "paid", "billed_cents": 12600, "allowed_cents": 12500, "paid_cents": 12500, "patient_resp_cents": 0, "contractual_cents": 100, "claim_control_number": "CCN95187-2", "lines": [{"cpt": "99202", "billed_cents": 12600, "allowed_cents": 12500, "paid_cents": 12500, "patient_resp_cents": 0, "contractual_cents": 100}], "carcs": [], "rarcs": [], "posted": false, "transaction": "835"}, "era_text": "835 ERA / EOB   CCN=CCN …[truncated]

#37 post_remittance The claim has already been accepted and paid on the corrected second submission, and the remaining required... ＋

Agent reasoning

The claim has already been accepted and paid on the corrected second submission, and the remaining required checklist item is to post the paid ERA to reconcile the account. I’m posting the remittance now to finalize payment posting, contractual adjustment, and patient responsibility of $0.

Args · stage None · day None

{}

Result

{"ok": true, "posted": true, "note": "ERA posted; case closed paid"}