The agent assembled a mostly complete picture of Edu-Afrique's purpose, audience, and basic pricing from two pages (homepage and pricing), but could not answer the differentiation question because the site names no competitors and makes no comparative claims. Several pricing details (Caisse and Établissement costs, higher-tier Scolarité prices, WhatsApp quota scaling, tax treatment) are not published on the site, leaving those gaps genuine rather than agent-navigable.

• ›The pricing page deliberately hides two of three package prices (Caisse and Établissement), showing only Scolarité's base tier (300,000 FCFA for ≤250 students). Prices for larger cohorts are unlisted. This is a site design choice, not a fetch failure.
• ›The agent correctly identified that comparative differentiation cannot be claimed from the site itself—no competitors are named, no feature matrices compare Edu-Afrique to alternatives. The agent declined to invent this via model memory, staying grounded in retrieved content.
• ›Core features and positioning are clearly surfaced on the homepage and pricing page in prose and tables; the agent extracted and reorganized this into a coherent summary without ambiguity.
• ›Offline sync behavior, data hosting, backup practices, and security audit status are mentioned in broad terms on the homepage but not elaborated. The site does not provide implementation details.
• ›The two-page crawl was sufficient to answer 'what, who, and how priced' but not 'how different'—the site's own structure (no competitor mentions, no comparison) made this incompletable, not a navigation failure.