Agent gathered core facts about Prizvox's positioning, pricing, and differentiation from the homepage, comparison page, and FAQ. The site's structure made discovery straightforward, but several critical details were contradictory (trial terms), undisclosed (GEO scoring formula), or stale (comparison date), forcing the agent to flag gaps rather than provide complete clarity.

• ›Trial terms contradicted across pages: homepage claimed all plans had 14-day trials, but FAQ clarified only Audit tier had one, with card required upfront; other tiers charged immediately. Agent resolved this by citing FAQ as authoritative but noted the conflict.
• ›GEO methodology unpublished: the site described GEO as querying four chat engines with 5–10 custom queries and returning a score, but provided no formula, weighting, sample size, prompt set, or refresh frequency. A Methodology page was mentioned without a link and was never fetched.
• ›Comparison page dated 'May 2026' (6 months in the future from reported run date), undermining its freshness claim and suggesting either an error or forward-dated content.
• ›Ownership ambiguity: FAQ referred to 'Chalk Theory staff' accessing diagnostic data, but the site never explained that entity's relationship to Prizvox, creating transparency confusion.
• ›Refund and price-change policies were incomplete: refunds required email contact within 14 days with no mention of future price-change handling, limiting the agent's ability to explain long-term cost stability.