docs: add technical summary to MVVM pattern analysis

- Add concise technical summary section for supervisor presentation
- Include clear research question and direct answer (NO to MVVM)
- Provide evidence-based analysis with domain mismatch details
- Add pattern prerequisites comparison table
- Include authoritative evidence from MVVM creator
- Document current architecture strengths
- Provide clear recommendation and research impact assessment
- Structure content for 10-minute technical presentation

Author: josecelano

docs/research/mvvm-pattern-analysis/README.md

@@ -10,6 +10,53 @@ This research investigates whether the **Model-View-ViewModel (MVVM)** architect
 
 **Research Conclusion**: After comprehensive analysis including authoritative source research and detailed application evaluation, **MVVM does not fit this application's domain and requirements**. The current **Three-Level Architecture Pattern** is more appropriate for this CLI-based deployment automation tool.
 
+## 📊 Technical Summary
+
+### Research Question
+
+Should we adopt the MVVM architectural pattern for the Torrust Tracker Deploy Rust application?
+
+### Answer: **NO** - MVVM is not suitable for this application
+
+### Key Findings
+
+#### 1. **Domain Mismatch**
+
+- **MVVM is designed for**: Interactive applications with complex UIs, data binding, and reactive user interfaces
+- **Our application is**: CLI-based deployment automation tool with procedural workflows
+- **Verdict**: Fundamental architectural mismatch
+
+#### 2. **Pattern Prerequisites Analysis**
+
+| MVVM Requirement                  | Our Application                 | Status            |
+| --------------------------------- | ------------------------------- | ----------------- |
+| Strong data binding support       | CLI has no binding capabilities | ❌ Missing        |
+| Complex UI with user interactions | Basic command-line interface    | ❌ Missing        |
+| Designer-developer separation     | Single technical team           | ❌ Not needed     |
+| UI state management needs         | Stateless command execution     | ❌ Not applicable |
+
+#### 3. **Authoritative Evidence**
+
+- **John Gossman** (MVVM creator) warns: _"MVVM is overkill for simple UIs"_
+- Our CLI tool fits perfectly into Gossman's "overkill" warning category
+- MVVM adds complexity without providing any benefits for CLI applications
+
+#### 4. **Current Architecture Strength**
+
+- **Three-Level Architecture** (Commands → Steps → Remote Actions) is optimal for deployment automation
+- Excellent separation of concerns, testability, and maintainability
+- Perfect domain alignment with deployment workflows
+
+### Recommendation
+
+**Maintain current Three-Level Architecture** - no changes needed. MVVM would introduce unnecessary complexity and abstractions that provide no value for deployment automation tools.
+
+### Research Impact
+
+- **Development**: Continue with current architectural approach
+- **Documentation**: Formalize current pattern as "Three-Level Deployment Architecture"
+- **Future**: Monitor for domain changes, but MVVM remains inappropriate even as application grows
+
 ## 🎯 Research Objectives
 
 1. **Learn about MVVM Pattern**