Enrichment is where agent workflows stall
The scrape part of a GTM agent is usually fine. It finds the company, reads the site, extracts the pricing page. Then someone asks for a named contact with a work email, and the project turns into a data integration: sign up with a provider, learn its schema, wire up billing, handle its auth. That’s the gap Firecrawl addressed on October 1, 2026, when it added three people-enrichment providers to Alexandria: Apollo, FullEnrich, and Data Legion.
The pitch is that the agent calls enrichment through the same Firecrawl API it already uses for search and scrape — same key, same credits, no second integration. Alexandria is reachable from Claude, ChatGPT, Codex, and anything that speaks MCP, so the workflow stays inside whatever tool your team already uses.
Three providers, three jobs
Each provider covers a different slice of the problem, per the Firecrawl announcement:
- Apollo — free person search by title and company domain, with work emails and employment history (up to ten people per call), plus company funding, headcount, tech stack, and job postings. Good for building account and lead lists from scratch.
- FullEnrich — searches by skills and past employers, not just current title, and returns mobile numbers and personal emails alongside work ones. It also does reverse lookup: given an email address, identify the person behind it.
- Data Legion — matches a person from almost any identifier (email, phone, social URL, name plus company) and a company from domain, name, or ticker. You can get a profile-only record without contact data, at a lower price.
Apollo’s person search is free; other calls show their credit price before you spend. People Data Labs is on the roadmap.
Why uniform pricing matters for agents
The underappreciated design decision here isn’t the providers — it’s that every capability is priced in the same unit and described in the same shape. That means an agent can compare two options on cost and pick before spending anything, and capability discovery itself is free. You describe the data you want; Alexandria returns matching providers ranked, with inputs and prices attached.
This is the same sellable-data pattern we looked at when Firecrawl packaged fantasy sports sources behind one API key: niche datasets become useful to agents only when discovery, pricing, and access are uniform. Contact data is the bigger market for that idea, because enrichment is where most GTM automations quietly die.
Terms handling is also thought through for agent runs. Unaccepted third-party terms return a THIRD_PARTY_DATA_TERMS_REQUIRED error with an action URL, and agents must have explicit authorization before accepting terms on your behalf — they skip providers you haven’t accepted and tell you which ones.
A practical caveat
Enrichment data comes with usage restrictions that vary by provider, and they matter. FullEnrich’s terms, for example, bar marketing to personal email addresses. The terms are published at acceptance, so read them before you build a pipeline on top of the data — cheap reverse lookups don’t help if your use case violates the provider’s rules.
If you’re building an agent that touches lead routing or account research, the practical next step is small: run the free Apollo person search against a handful of domains you care about and see whether the returned people match who you’d have found manually. That tells you, before spending credits, whether this replaces or merely supplements whatever enrichment you currently stitch together.