Mesh node placement requires trial-and-error with no diagnostic help

Homeowners who buy 3-pack mesh WiFi systems (Eero, Google Nest WiFi, TP-Link Deco) must guess where to place satellite nodes. The setup apps say 'place within range of another node' but provide no signal strength meter, no heatmap, no indication of whether a node is too close (wasting a unit) or too far (weak backhaul). So what? Users place nodes suboptimally — often too close together in hallways, leaving dead zones in far bedrooms. So what? They experience buffering, dropped video calls, and smart home device disconnects in the rooms that need coverage most. So what? They buy a 4th or 5th node to brute-force coverage, spending another $100-150 per node. So what? They still have problems because adding nodes to a wireless-backhaul mesh actually increases congestion — each hop halves available bandwidth. This persists because mesh companies optimize for 'easy setup' marketing and deliberately hide complexity, and because real RF site surveys require $500+ professional tools (Ekahau, NetSpot Pro) that no consumer will buy. The apps could show inter-node signal quality and suggest repositioning but don't, because exposing poor placement would increase support calls.