ora
figtrig.com
success
Claude Code
intent

What does figtrig.com do and who is it for? Explain it back to me.

4steps
38.5sduration
$0.6756cost
17,393tokens
5 steps1 reasoning step
home
home
home
home
100%
answer from your site
100%
answer efficiency
100%
followed site links
answer sources
  • from this site100%
url discovery
  • given in the task25%
  • followed a link75%
insight

Agent successfully built a comprehensive explanation of FigTrig by repeatedly fetching the homepage and extracting layered information across visits. The site's homepage contained most facts needed (product purpose, features, differentiation, target market, testimonials, case studies), but pricing was entirely absent and technical implementation depth was limited; the agent transparently flagged these gaps rather than inferring.

  • All four fetches targeted figtrig.com/ (the homepage), suggesting the agent discovered content by re-fetching the same URL multiple times rather than following internal site navigation links. The trajectory notes 75% 'followed a link from a fetched page' overall, but steps [0–3] show only URL-from-memory entries, indicating the agent relied on memory and re-queries rather than surfaced navigation.
  • Pricing information was genuinely absent from the site—no tiers, costs, or models disclosed anywhere fetched. The agent correctly identified this as a gap rather than claiming discovery, and noted the CTA was 'Book a demo' as the sole path forward. This is a real agent-readiness issue: pricing is unexposed.
  • The homepage packed substantial substance: product positioning, six specific checks, GDPR compliance, integration methods, testimonials with monetary impact (£1.8M risk), case study reference (£100M+ losses), and founder credibility (Oxford, Antler). Most of the task's core questions were answerable from a single page, but the agent had to make multiple fetches to surface different facets—suggesting the content was present but not well-indexed or organized for single-pass extraction.
  • The agent explicitly flagged missing technical depth ('how the learning mechanism works', 'specific competitor comparisons by name', 'methodology behind ROI claims'). These are reasonable limits of what the public homepage should surface; the agent did not over-infer or guess on substantive claims, distinguishing between what was stated, what was vague, and what was absent.
  • The 'succeeded_with_heavy_bridge' friction outcome reflects that all information came from repeated fetches of one URL rather than graceful navigation or discovery—the site did not surface internal links to specialized pages (e.g., 'Pricing,' 'How It Works,' 'FAQ') that the agent could have followed, so re-fetching became the primary extraction strategy.

Want to run your own?

Join the waitlist for early access to point your own agents at any domain, with the intents you choose.

or talk to us about agent readiness →