Add test coverage checklist, report template, and stack matrix for ecommerce project

- Created a test coverage checklist to ensure comprehensive testing of backend and frontend components.
- Added a test report template to standardize reporting on test execution results and gaps.
- Introduced a test stack matrix to guide the selection of testing tools and frameworks for backend and frontend.
- Established a skill for repairing failing tests, including a failure triage checklist and a test repair template.
- Documented recommended MCP stack for ecommerce development with FastAPI and React/Next.js.
- Developed a detailed README outlining the project structure, agent capabilities, and recommended workflows.
- Compiled a comprehensive workflow guide detailing step-by-step commands for project setup, testing, and SEO implementation.

site-fullstack/.github/skills/ecommerce-seo-review/SKILL.md

@@ -0,0 +1,56 @@
+---
+name: ecommerce-seo-review
+description: 'Review implemented ecommerce SEO and produce a structured findings report. Use for auditing metadata, schema, canonicals, sitemaps, robots rules, internal linking, indexation, Core Web Vitals risks, and content-template SEO after changes are shipped.'
+argument-hint: 'Describe whether to review the whole site or specific page types such as categories, products, metadata, or technical SEO'
+---
+# Ecommerce SEO Review
+
+## When to use
+- After applying SEO changes in code.
+- After launching a new ecommerce site or a major SEO release.
+- When you need a structured list of SEO gaps, risks, regressions, and missed opportunities.
+
+## Goal
+- Audit the current project state against .ai/SEO-PLAN.md, .ai/STORE-BRIEF.md, and the live codebase.
+- Produce .ai/SEO-REVIEW.md with prioritized findings, risks, and next actions.
+- Focus on practical issues that affect crawling, indexation, relevance, page quality, internal linking, and performance.
+
+## Preconditions
+- Prefer having .ai/SEO-PLAN.md when the project has already gone through the SEO strategy step.
+- If .ai/SEO-PLAN.md is missing, review the current site from code and documented assumptions instead of blocking.
+
+## Required workflow
+1. Read .ai/SEO-PLAN.md first when it exists.
+2. Read .ai/STORE-BRIEF.md and AGENTS.md if they exist.
+3. Audit the codebase against [SEO review checklist](./assets/seo-review-checklist.md).
+4. Score issues using [severity rubric](./assets/severity-rubric.md).
+5. Write or update .ai/SEO-REVIEW.md using [SEO review template](./assets/seo-review-template.md).
+6. Group findings into critical, high, medium, and low priority.
+7. Separate confirmed issues from assumptions or areas that require runtime validation.
+8. End with a remediation plan ordered by business impact and engineering cost.
+
+## Review coverage
+- Metadata systems and missing or duplicate titles and descriptions.
+- Canonical logic, noindex logic, and index-bloat risks.
+- Sitemap and robots policy.
+- Schema markup accuracy and visible-content alignment.
+- Category, product, brand, collection, and editorial template SEO.
+- Internal linking and breadcrumbs.
+- Search, filter, sort, pagination, cart, account, and utility route handling.
+- Performance and Core Web Vitals risks visible from the codebase.
+- Content depth and thin-page risks where they are inferable from templates and data flow.
+
+## Constraints
+- Do not claim runtime behavior that cannot be confirmed from code.
+- Clearly mark assumptions, unknowns, and items that need browser or production validation.
+- Prefer actionable findings over generic SEO advice.
+
+## Outputs
+- .ai/SEO-REVIEW.md.
+- A prioritized findings list.
+- A short remediation plan with quick wins and structural fixes.
+
+## References
+- [SEO review checklist](./assets/seo-review-checklist.md)
+- [severity rubric](./assets/severity-rubric.md)
+- [SEO review template](./assets/seo-review-template.md)