Working notes, not a finished report.

This is generated automatically from a read-only read of the catalogue, as part of a prototype still in development. Nothing in BigCommerce has been changed. Some of these may be deliberate choices on your end that simply look odd from the outside — if so, telling us is the useful outcome.

Coffee data — things worth a look

39 coffees read from the catalogue; 36 have enough detail for the finder to use. Ordered by how much each one affects a real customer, most first. Café Campesino · prepared by Lowthian Design

1 — highest impact

3 coffees can't be recommended at all

A coffee with no Acidity, Body or Flavor can't be matched to anyone, and won't appear when a shopper filters by those things. It's effectively invisible to anybody who doesn't already know its name.

Affects the live site. Acidity, Body, Roast Level are switched on as product filters on cafecampesino.com, so this changes what shoppers see when they filter — not just what this tool can do.

CoffeeIDMissing
Honduras Bird Friendly Certified Honey Processed Coffee472Roast Level, Body, Acidity, Flavor, Aroma
Single Origin Sampler456Roast Level, Body, Acidity, Flavor, Aroma
Historic Grounds473Body, Acidity, Flavor, Aroma

A further 1 coffee is usable but incomplete — matched on what's there, with the gap counting against it:

CoffeeIDMissing
Fuller Center Blend Medium Roast Coffee480Roast Level

Quickest win: the Honduras Bird Friendly Certified Honey Processed Coffee already describes itself in its own product copy — “pronounced sweetness and less acidity”. Those five fields could be filled from the description that's already written.

2 — high impact

12 coffees where the description and the data disagree

The product page says one thing in the description and another in the filterable field. Both can't be right, and a shopper can see both at once — they filter for low acidity, land on a coffee, and read that it's bright.

CoffeeIDWhat doesn't line up
Carter Butterfly Trail Medium Roast Coffee390the description says "medium-bodied", but the Body field says "Light-to-medium"
the description calls the acidity low or soft, but the Acidity field says "Medium"
Colombia French Roast Coffee162the description calls the acidity low or soft, but the Acidity field says "Medium"
Fuller Center Blend Medium Roast Coffee480the description calls the acidity bright or lively, but the Acidity field says "Low-to-Medium"
Georgia Conservancy Blend465the description says "full-bodied", but the Body field says "Medium"
Georgia Organics Special Blend Medium Roast Coffee178the description says "medium-bodied", but the Body field says "Light-to-medium"
Good Morning Americus Blend186the description says "medium-bodied", but the Body field says "Light-to-medium"
Half Caff Blend Full City Roast Coffee187the description says "full-bodied", but the Body field says "Light-to-medium"
House Blend Decaf Full City Roast Coffee189the description says "medium-bodied", but the Body field says "Light-to-medium"
Mad Poet Blend Viennese Roast Coffee175the description says "full-bodied", but the Body field says "Light-to-medium"
Maty's Blend Full City Roast Coffee181the description calls the acidity low or soft, but the Acidity field says "Medium"
Peru Full City Roast Coffee154the description says "medium-bodied", but the Body field says "Medium-to-full"
Sweet Auburn Blend Full City Roast Coffee195the description calls the acidity low or soft, but the Acidity field says "Medium"

Needs a taster, not a developer. We can't tell which side is right from the outside — only someone who cups these can say whether the description or the field should change.

3 — medium impact

Filter values that split when they shouldn't

Acidity: Soft is on 2 coffees and Low on 3. They describe the same point on the scale, so the filter offers a shopper two options that mean the same thing — and whichever they pick, they miss the other group.

Suggested fix: pick one word and use it for both. Which one is your call — it's a house-style question, not a data one.

4 — worth checking

Different coffees carrying identical tasting notes

These share exactly the same Roast, Body, Acidity, Flavor and Aroma values:

Shared profile: medium roast, light-to-medium body, medium acidity, tasting of caramel, grapefruit, sweet.

Possibly fine. If these genuinely are the same roast under different labels, nothing needs changing — we just need to know, because the finder currently shows only one of them and treats the rest as duplicates.

(2 further matches were the same coffee in a different format — bags, pods, filter packs — which is expected and not listed here.)

5 — future improvement

Details we don't hold yet

Not errors — just things that would make the finder noticeably better if they existed.

FieldWhere it stands
Process (washed / natural / honey)Not recorded anywhere. Mentioned in the description on 2 of 39 coffees. It's one of the strongest predictors of how a coffee tastes.
CaffeineSet on 0 of 39. The finder currently works it out from the product name, which happens to work but is fragile.
Milk-friendlyOne yes/no from whoever cups these. Around a third of customers take milk, and it changes which coffees suit them.
Impact tagsWomen-led, Bird Friendly, indigenous-led, supports-a-nonprofit. All in the descriptions, but only on some products — so it can't be read reliably.