The agent successfully assembled a comprehensive overview of Which? by combining content from the site's homepage, about pages, membership pages, and category pages. The site was moderately navigable but lacked a single consolidated pricing/membership reference page, forcing the agent to stitch together information from multiple fragments and rely on prior knowledge to fill gaps around exact pricing tiers and subscription boundaries.

• ›Steps [1], [3], [6] provided identity-layer content: mission, structure (not-for-profit), and independence positioning were all explicitly stated on the about-which section, giving clear positioning against alternatives.
• ›Steps [4], [8], [9] contained membership/pricing information but fragmented: [4] (/join) was a signup flow landing page (content truncated); [8] and [9] were benefit pages listing 14 membership benefits and member perks, but neither exposed a pricing table or tier comparison. The agent noted this as a confusing gap and had to supplement with prior knowledge and web search.
• ›Step [2] (404 on /membership) shows the site lacks a dedicated, discoverable pricing/membership index page — a critical reference point for agent discoverability was absent.
• ›Steps [7], [10], [11] were web searches that returned external links (GrouponUK, LinkedIn, third-party blogs) rather than Which? pages; they surfaced no new Which?-hosted content but validated the brand and use case.
• ›Step [13] (/technology) proved the site publishes distinct product category pages, showing horizontal content structure but no vertical pricing/subscription clarity.
• ›The final response cites all fetched pages and acknowledges three unresolved friction points: missing pricing tiers view, unclear free vs. paid boundaries, and prominent promotional pricing obscuring standard rates. This grounding in trajectory shows the agent was transparent about what it could and could not extract from the site itself.