The agent answered the core task—what Keria does, who it's for, how it's priced, and how it differs—by fetching the homepage, About page, and FAQ. The site surfaces this information across multiple pages in a navigable form, though pricing details remain intentionally vague and several important topics (competitors, data retention, team) are absent or unexplained. The agent assembled a usable explanation from fragments but had to acknowledge substantial gaps.

• ›Pricing is deliberately opaque: pilot offers 10 free attestations, but post-pilot per-unit pricing and referral commission amounts are never published—the FAQ says only that price depends on volume and is set in a 'first call.' The agent could not find concrete figures.
• ›The homepage mentions a pilot page (pilot-keria.html) but that URL returned 404; the pilot terms were sourced instead from the FAQ, showing the site has broken or unreachable links.
• ›The site names no competitors and offers no market positioning—the FAQ contrasts Keria only against generic 'bank simulations' and 'accords de principe,' not against named tools or services. The agent explicitly noted this absence.
• ›Key technical jargon ('Cézam,' 'PTZ,' 'HCSF') appears without explanation in the core pages; the agent had to infer or model-fill meaning. No glossary or technical docs are linked from the main navigation.
• ›Brokerage and professional referral income are core revenue mechanisms but their terms are vague: the FAQ states commission eligibility and compliance requirements but provides no formula, cap, or typical range. The agent had to flag this as 'not stated.'