The agent assembled a coherent explanation of Directimo's buyer-focused model, pricing, and differentiation from homepage and about-page fetches plus web search results, but had to work around a sparse site structure where key pages (pricing, services, how-it-works) return 404 errors and pricing details were only available through search snippets, not a dedicated pricing page.

• ›Homepage [1] and /about [6] were the only successful fetches of the target domain and provided high-level service positioning; all intentional navigations to /pricing, /services, /for-buyers, /how-it-works returned 404, forcing reliance on web search.
• ›Pricing information (€49/month subscription, 0% vs. 2.5% commission split, free trial terms) came entirely from web search results [9], not from a published pricing page on directimo.com—the agent had to cite search results as its source for the core billing model.
• ›The nine-point due diligence checklist was sourced from search results [11], not from a dedicated buyer-protection or services page, indicating the site publishes detailed operational info via blog and scattered content rather than structured service documentation.
• ›The agent correctly identified and called out navigability gaps: buyer mandate details, subscription duration/necessity, geographic expansion plans, and competitor positioning are absent or scattered, requiring the user to contact the company for specifics.
• ›The site's information architecture appears to favor blog content and property listings over dedicated service/pricing/process pages, making it difficult for machine navigation but not preventing the agent from gathering a usable overview through search augmentation.