The agent successfully understood Daya's core business, target market, pricing, and competitive positioning, but had to work around a content-sparse website by relying heavily on external news coverage and prior knowledge. The daya.co homepage and about page (steps [1], [4]) returned minimal machine-readable content, forcing the agent to supplement with web searches (steps [11], [12], [14], [15]) that contained substantive reporting on the company's funding, product vision, and market positioning.

• ›The homepage and about page (steps [1], [4]) returned JavaScript-heavy HTML with little extractable text content; the agent explicitly noted the site was 'heavy on JavaScript and light on text' and could not extract detailed explanations directly from daya.co.
• ›Six attempted navigations to expected information architecture pages (/pricing, /features, /developers, /docs, /solutions) all returned 404s, indicating the site lacks structured content pages; the agent had to guess these URLs based on conventions rather than discover them from the homepage.
• ›All substantive answers about what Daya does, who it's for, pricing structure (0.1%-0.3%), how it differs from Flutterwave/Wise, and funding came from external news articles (TechCabal, Yahoo Finance, Unchained, DashDevs) retrieved via web search, not from daya.co itself.
• ›The agent's final response cites six external sources and zero content directly from daya.co's public pages, indicating the site does not publish its core value proposition, pricing, or positioning in a format machines or users can easily extract.
• ›The agent correctly identified critical gaps: no explicit pricing tier documentation, no supported currency/country list, no competitor positioning page, no developer docs visible—all items a well-structured site would publish at known URLs.