The agent fetched the homepage, pricing, and services pages directly, retrieving the clinic's offerings and per-session rates, and honestly flagged that the site makes no comparison with alternatives. The site was readily navigable and its key facts were plainly published, though service descriptions and booking details were thin.

• ›Per-session pricing (€52 osteopathy-approach session, €62 home visit) is published on a dedicated /tarifas page that was reachable from the homepage menu, making the pricing question answerable without guesswork.
• ›The /servicios page lists 16 service names but gives almost no description of what each treatment is or who it helps, so the agent could report names but not explain them.
• ›No competitive positioning or 'why us' comparison exists on the site, so the 'how it differs from alternatives' part of the task could not be grounded in site content and was honestly reported as unknown.
• ›Booking method, insurance coverage, staff qualifications, and first-session details are absent, leaving important practical questions unanswered for a prospective patient.
• ›Agent summarized through a tool layer and noted a discrepancy (16 vs 17 services), advising verification against live pages, which signals that machine-readable structure on the site was not clean enough to trust without caveat.