There’s no misconception. Until I commented, there was no disclaimer stating that the code was not ready for production use and was for research purposes only.

Very few people are qualified to review and critique this type of codebase so it’s dangerous to market a repository backed by multiples professors and PhDs as “it does X, Y, and Z”

It would be great to live in a world where people did a serious review of projects before downloading them but that’s not the reality we live in.

OP didn’t provide any context either that this was focused on reviewing the paper and concepts in it so I think what you mean is that “you think people should focus on the paper” but “we focused on the code”, that’s not a misconception, it’s a lack of clarity by both OP and the project website about what’s important.

If the code was irrelevant, it should be removed from the website so that the audience could focus solely on the paper.