The agent gathered a reasonably complete picture of Keyformat's positioning, services, and client roster by fetching their English homepage, services pages, projects/portfolio, and a manifesto article. However, the site does not publish pricing information—the agent explicitly noted this as missing and had to make educated guesses based on comparable agencies. The site was navigable for discovery and positioning but lacked transparent operational details (pricing, team, detailed case studies), forcing the agent to work around gaps rather than find answers.

• ›Content-bearing steps [6], [7], [12], [17], [18] returned service descriptions, homepage taglines, and manifesto content that populated the 'what they do' and 'how they're different' sections of the answer. Step [19] fetched project pages (Adnkronos, Royal Canin) that supplied client examples.
• ›The site's English homepage and services pages clearly articulate the 'human-driven, AI-powered' differentiator and mention specific services (branding, digital marketing, SEO, web development), but do not provide pricing tiers, fee ranges, or transparent cost structures—a critical gap for a commercial evaluation task.
• ›The agent had to rely on web search (67% of fetches) and prior knowledge of Milan agency rates to infer pricing, rather than finding it on the site itself. The missing About page (step [8] returned 404) further limited direct access to team/company context. The site is well-structured for brand positioning but poorly equipped for commercial due diligence.
• ›Case study depth was limited: the agent found Adnkronos and Royal Canin listed but notes that detailed project write-ups were sparse, making it harder to evaluate the agency's actual work quality or scope.