The agent retrieved and synthesized the homepage and pricing section to answer most of the task, but stopped short of reading the FAQ, terms, and feature detail pages. The site is moderately navigable: core facts (what it does, who it's for, basic pricing) are present on the homepage, but pricing ambiguities (monthly vs. annual billing prices) and missing details (company info, refund policy, VAT rate, specialist qualifications) forced the agent to note gaps rather than provide complete answers.

• ›Pricing page mixes annual-billing and 'normal' prices without clearly stating the monthly-billing price; the agent had to flag this ambiguity rather than resolve it from the site.
• ›No company information, legal entity, address, or team found on homepage — agent had to explicitly call out the absence rather than cite it.
• ›Update frequency claims ('legislation refreshed every two days', 'cao updates daily') are stated on the site but lack sources or verification; agent noted this without fact-checking.
• ›The site does not plainly surface the distinction that the MCP add-on excludes chatting inside MijnJurist; agent had to infer and clarify this from feature descriptions.
• ›Trial, features, and pricing are accessible from the homepage, but deeper policy, terms, and legal status require following links the agent did not traverse; agent transparently acknowledged this limitation.