The agent could not read AliExpress's own pages (homepage and subdomains returned empty or 404 responses) and assembled its explanation entirely from third-party blog search results, supplemented by general knowledge. The site was not navigable via direct fetch, forcing complete reliance on external sources.

• ›Steps [0], [4] attempted to fetch the homepage directly but returned empty content; step [2] hit a 404 on a guessed buyer-protection URL; step [3] failed to resolve the seller subdomain. All guesses typed from memory, not surfaced by the site.
• ›Step [6] (web search) was the only source of site-specific information in the final answer. It returned 10 third-party blog results with conflicting details on seller fees (5–8% category-based vs. tiered at 5/8/12%, with one claiming no monthly fees and another claiming $10–$50). The agent correctly flagged this conflict.
• ›Buyer-protection timelines (15–75 days) and revenue-split percentages (45% from commissions) came from the same search results but marked as low-authority blogs. The agent disclosed this uncertainty in the final response.
• ›Competitor comparisons (Amazon, eBay, Temu, Shein, Alibaba.com) were drawn from model memory, not from any fetched content, because the site itself and the search results did not provide structured comparisons.
• ›The agent transparently documented that the homepage, About, Help, Buyer Protection, and Seller pages were unreachable, making it impossible to cite first-party positioning or official fee schedules—the core business facts the task required.