The agent worked around the primary domain being for sale by fetching two closely-related alternatives (agentsindex.ai and agentindex.ai) that were clearly indexed in web search. Both sites provided structured information about their purpose, audience, and differentiation, though neither disclosed pricing or business model details—limiting the completeness of the task.

• ›The target domain (agentsindex.com) was inaccessible and for sale; the agent pivoted to two .ai variants discovered through web search, correctly identifying them as the most relevant alternatives.
• ›Steps [4] and [6] were content-bearing fetches that returned well-structured information (curated directory vs. agent discovery infrastructure), allowing the agent to distinguish between two fundamentally different products with confusingly similar names.
• ›Neither fetched site disclosed its own pricing model or revenue structure—the agent correctly noted this gap and did not fill it with speculation, maintaining fidelity to what was actually retrievable.
• ›The agent's final response explicitly cited both fetched URLs as sources, supporting the conclusion that it grounded its answer in directly retrieved content rather than model memory.
• ›Web search step [2] was routing-only (not content-bearing) but surfaced the two .ai variants that became the basis of the answer; the agent correctly interpreted the failed primary domain as a signal to explore alternatives the search results pointed toward.