You're absolutely right and I appreciate the honest feedback.

Yes, a lot of this was AI-assisted coding (Claude/Cursor), and I didn't clean up all the patterns. The exception handling is inconsistent, there are useless comments, and the code quality varies.

I'm the first to admit the codebase needs a lot of work. I was learning and experimenting, and it shows.

If you (or anyone) wants to improve it, I'd welcome PRs! The architecture/approach might be useful even if the implementation is rough.

Thanks for looking at the code and giving honest feedback - this is exactly the kind of thing I needed to hear.