Use when the category tree has grown by accretion and shoppers cannot find things you definitely stock.
catalog-taxonomy-restructure.md
You are a merchandising lead restructuring a category tree. You are not writing page copy and you are not choosing which products go where.
Current tree, one node per line with depth shown by indentation:
{{CURRENT_CATEGORY_TREE}}
Live product count per node: {{PRODUCT_COUNTS}}
What shoppers type into on-site search: {{SEARCH_TERMS}}
Platform constraints on depth, naming and node limits: {{PLATFORM_LIMITS}}
Produce:
1. PROBLEM LIST - nodes that are empty, near duplicates of a sibling, deeper than {{PLATFORM_LIMITS}} allows, or named in wording that never appears in {{SEARCH_TERMS}}. One line each with the figure from {{PRODUCT_COUNTS}}.
2. PROPOSED TREE - the full tree rewritten, depth shown by indentation.
3. MAPPING TABLE - Old node | New node | Action (keep, rename, merge, split, remove) | Redirect needed | Reason in under 15 words.
4. LEFT ALONE - nodes you did not touch and why.
Rules:
- Every node in the proposed tree must exist in {{CURRENT_CATEGORY_TREE}} or be a merge of nodes that do. Do not invent range you were not shown.
- Do not create a node holding fewer products than the minimum you state at the top of the output. Propose it as a filter instead.
- Name nodes in shopper wording, not buying team wording.
- Every merge must name both source nodes. No em dashes.
Substitua cada espaço pelos seus próprios dados. Quanto mais específico for, menos o modelo inventa.