Hi @7DEV.io — thank you so much for taking the time to inspect the package and write such a detailed technical review.
I'm a solo indie dev and I started looking into this the moment I saw your comment. You're catching me right as I'm preparing the v2.0 update for the kit. I'm auditing the release archive right now against every point you raised — the missing 10-suite standalone headless test corpus, the Blender fracture-baking bridge script, and strengthening the embedded demo determinism and showcase assertions so they verify actual geometry/collision outputs rather than just cell counts or execution completion.
I'll reply here with a full update as soon as I've verified the packaging discrepancy and pushed the fixed build. I genuinely appreciate thorough feedback like this — it helps me make the toolkit much better for everyone. Thank you for the support!