Keep it simple. If you are supposed to get prefix using DHCPv6, then use that, don’t experiment too much with static addresses. If it works without accept-router-advertisements when you put prefix on WAN, then disable it (it’s default config). Then put the prefix on LAN where it should be. And then it’s time to play with packet sniffer. You want to know what happens on WAN interface when you are accessing internet from LAN, and also when you try to access devices in LAN from internet (e.g. using some online ping). I’d start with the latter. You want to see that ISP’s router sends those packets to yours.
Edit: And of course it doesn’t hurt if even before you start with the above, you makr sure that problem is not elsewhere, e.g. if you’re not just blocking too much using firewall.
It’s from 1995. 
About prefix size, as a client you can try DHCPv6 client’s prefix-hint parameter with values like ::/48, ::/56, ::/60, …
As for ISPs, original idea was to give /48 to each customer. It’s easy to understand for customer, because they have whole fourth block of address for themselves (xxx:xxx:xxxx:XXXX::). ISP should get /32 as starting point, so giving out /48 to everyone is enough for up to 65k customers. And they can get more than /32. But sure, it’s overkill for most, so another common choice is /56, which is enough for up 16M customers. There’s no good reason to give less. It’s still overkill for most, but it’s good for future.
You may think now that one subnet for main LAN, one for guests and perhaps one for IoT things is enough, so even /60 is five times more than you need. And it may be true now, but if future shows that it would be useful to have many more subnets, it will become bottleneck. In theory, if such need arises, it should be very easy to fix, no problem at all, ISPs will simply start giving out larger prefixes. But can you count on that? Look at them now, how “flexible” they are with even introducing IPv6. Of course the start is much more difficult, but I’m not optimist, because once they get stuck in own artificial limitations, changes will be problem too. And when you’re someone designing something new, that so far not yet available or known thing, it would be nice to know that you can do it. Because if half of the world will be stuck on /60 and it won’t be enough for it, it will be like inventing some IPv6-only service today - you can try, but it won’t catch on, because half of the world can’t use it. But maybe it’s doomed already when some ISPs are giving single /64, which is not enough today, and they don’t think they are doing anything wrong… [/end of unplanned rant]