The agent worked around a 403 access restriction by pivoting to web search, assembling a coherent overview of nccourts.gov's core functions, audiences, and free/paid tiers from search snippets and inferred facts. However, it could not verify details directly or fully explore the site's interface, and acknowledged gaps in comparative and pricing specifics.

• ›All content in the final answer came from search result snippets (steps 5–8), never from direct fetches of the target domain — the 403 errors in steps 1–3 created a hard block that forced reliance on external indexing.
• ›Search results surfaced relevant landing pages and help sections (e.g., 'Fees and Payments', 'eCourts', 'General Public'), but the agent did not fetch these URLs despite citing them in sources — the snippets alone supplied the factual content.
• ›The agent's statements about 'Key Differences' (statewide unified system, free document prep, modernization rollout, accessibility focus) blend search-derived facts with inferences and generalizations; no fetched source explicitly compared NC courts to other states' systems.
• ›Pricing details were confirmed as existing (e.g., 'cost charts exist on the site', 'effective January 1, 2025') but the agent did not access the actual PDF or detailed cost page — only reference to their existence was found.
• ›The agent explicitly flagged its own transparency limitation: 'I couldn't directly access the website… so I relied entirely on search results rather than examining the site myself,' showing honest boundary-setting rather than over-claiming.