The agent assembled a comprehensive overview of Curan & Ahlers by combining web search results and targeted page fetches, but had to rely heavily on external sources (search results, third-party review sites) because the firm's website itself lacks standard navigation and transparent information architecture. The site's sparse structure and missing pricing/services pages forced the agent to compensate with search queries and prior knowledge, yet the agent still delivered a satisfactory answer grounded in discoverable facts about the firm's practice areas, pricing model, and competitive positioning.

• ›Steps [8], [11], [12], [13] were search queries that returned third-party aggregator links and review sites (Yelp, FindLaw, TopInjuryLawyersList) as the primary discovery mechanism—these results contained the firm's track record ($50M+ recovered), credentials (Martindale-Hubbell ratings), and reviews (4.9/5 stars), none of which the agent extracted directly from curanahlers.com itself.
• ›Steps [9] and [10] confirmed the site does have location-specific practice area pages (car-accident-attorneys-white-plains, slip-and-fall-accidents) that returned 200s, but the agent could not retrieve their rendered content—these pages existed but were not accessible as machine-readable text, limiting what the agent could surface.
• ›Steps [2], [3], [4] revealed the site lacks standard navigation: /services, /about, /pricing all returned 404s, forcing the agent to either guess content structure or rely on search discovery rather than browsing the site's own information hierarchy.
• ›The agent correctly identified that specific contingency fee percentages and detailed attorney bios were not published on the main site, and cited this as a transparency gap—accurate assessment of what the site *does not* expose.
• ›Step [14] fetched the WP REST API endpoint for the homepage content but the response was truncated and did not yield actionable structured data, suggesting the site's API is present but not optimized for agent consumption.