@getollie/cli 0.0.1

package/library/management_systems-frontend_backend_platforms/web-based-inventory-management-system-small-online-shop-local-database.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 1516,
+  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Make sure the code you generate is executable for demonstration purposes. How do I write a web-based inventory management system suitable for a small online shop, with the database stored locally?",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the inventory management core functionality fully implemented?",
+      "description": "Review whether the code accurately implements essential inventory operations through HTML/JavaScript, including product CRUD operations (Create, Read, Update, Delete), stock level tracking, low stock alerts, and batch operations. Score 0 if core inventory logic is missing, 5 if only basic add/remove products is implemented, and 10 if comprehensive inventory management including stock adjustments, product categories, and search/filter functionality is fully included.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Is the local database storage properly implemented?",
+      "description": "Check whether the local storage implementation uses appropriate technologies (IndexedDB/WebSQL/localStorage) with proper data persistence, transaction handling, and data integrity checks. Evaluate if the database schema is well-designed for inventory needs. Deduct 5 points if data corruption risks exist, 3 points if no backup/export mechanism is provided, and 3 points if storage quota management is missing. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Is the small shop business logic accurately modeled?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the system addresses small shop specific needs: supplier management, purchase orders, sales tracking, profit margin calculations, and basic reporting. Check if multi-location inventory support and barcode scanning integration are considered. Deduct 5 points if essential business workflows are missing, 3 points if no sales analytics are provided, and 2 points if supplier relationship management is absent. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Is comprehensive data management and reporting constructed?",
+      "description": "Check whether the code includes complete data lifecycle management: inventory reports, sales analytics, stock movement history, and data export/import capabilities. Evaluate if real-time dashboard with key metrics is implemented. Deduct 5 points if historical data tracking is not implemented, 3 points if no visual charts/graphs are provided, and 2 points if data export functionality is missing. Give 10 points if fully implemented with professional reporting features.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 4,
+      "title": "Is the code robust?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as invalid product data, storage quota exceeded, concurrent operations, data corruption, etc.) and provide friendly error prompts or recovery mechanisms. Code with strong robustness should include input validation, error boundaries, and graceful degradation, giving 10 points. If the robustness is average, give 5 points, and if no exceptions are handled, give 0 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 5,
+      "title": "Are there any innovative features that are eye-catching?",
+      "description": "Check whether the code includes surprise features that enhance the small shop experience (e.g., 1. Automated reorder suggestions based on sales patterns 2. QR code generation for products 3. Mobile-responsive design for on-the-go inventory checks 4. Integration with popular e-commerce platforms). Add 3 points for each practical innovative feature implemented (maximum 10 points).",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 6,
+      "title": "Are there any redundant features?",
+      "description": "Strictly check three types of redundancy: 1. Redundant implementation of similar functions (e.g., multiple product search mechanisms coexisting) 2. Function modules unrelated to inventory management (e.g., built-in games or social features) 3. Overly complex features that don't fit small shop needs (e.g., enterprise-level workflow systems). Deduct 3 points for each redundancy found, and directly deduct 10 points if the core inventory functions are interfered with by redundant code.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 7,
+      "title": "Does the code have engineering quality?",
+      "description": "Review modular design (such as separating data layer/business logic/presentation layers), proper error handling, and code organization. Deduct 5 points if global state pollution is found or no design patterns are used; deduct 5 points if the code duplication rate is too high (over 30%); deduct 3 points if no data validation layer exists; deduct 2 points if performance optimization is ignored. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 8,
+      "title": "Does the interface vision meet professional design standards?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the overall design follows modern web application principles: 1) Clean and professional color scheme suitable for business use (no more than 3 primary colors) 2) Proper layout spacing with clear information hierarchy (element spacing follows 8px grid system) 3) Professional typography (body font size ≥ 14px, line height over 1.5 times) 4) Consistent iconography and visual elements. Deduct 3 points for each cluttered section, 5 points for unprofessional color combinations, and 5 points for poor information architecture. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 9,
+      "title": "Is the dynamic interaction smooth and seamless?",
+      "description": "Judge whether the user interactions conform to modern web application standards: 1) Form submissions and data operations provide immediate feedback (≤ 100ms) 2) Loading states and transitions are smooth (300-500ms duration) 3) Clear navigation and workflow guidance 4) Responsive design works across devices. Deduct 5 points for each operation without proper feedback, 3 points for jarring transitions or slow performance, and 5 points for confusing navigation or hidden critical functions. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    }
+  ],
+  "class": "Management Systems-Frontend/Backend Platforms",
+  "difficulty": "medium"
+}

package/library/management_systems-frontend_backend_platforms/web-based-mysql-data-reporting-tool.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 823,
+  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Be sure to ensure the generated code is executable. Help me create a web-based universal data calling template tool that connects to MySQL databases. The tool should allow users to visually drag database table fields into the tool and perform SQL query searches on the data. It should enable visual report creation, save report templates, automatically generate reports in the same format for different time periods, and allow creation of different templates.",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the database connection and management system properly implemented?",
+      "description": "Review whether the code includes secure MySQL connection handling with proper authentication, connection pooling, and error handling. Check if the implementation includes database configuration options, SSL support, and connection timeout settings. Score 0 if connection functionality is missing, 5 if basic connection is implemented without security measures, and 10 if a complete, secure, and robust connection system is implemented with proper error handling.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Is the visual drag-and-drop interface for database fields fully functional?",
+      "description": "Evaluate the implementation of the drag-and-drop interface for database tables and fields. Check if it includes field metadata display, proper visual feedback during drag operations, and accurate drop target handling. The interface should correctly render different field types with appropriate icons. Deduct 3 points if drag-and-drop is buggy, 5 points if it lacks visual feedback, and 2 points if it doesn't handle all MySQL field types properly. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Is the SQL query builder properly implemented with validation?",
+      "description": "Check if the SQL query builder allows users to visually construct queries with proper conditions, joins, grouping, and sorting. Verify that it includes SQL injection prevention, query validation, and query optimization suggestions. Score 0 if the query builder is not implemented, 5 if it only supports basic queries without validation, and 10 if it fully supports complex queries with proper validation, optimization, and security measures.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Is the report template creation and management system complete?",
+      "description": "Assess whether users can create, save, edit, and delete report templates. Check if templates support various visualizations (tables, charts, etc.), conditional formatting, and custom layouts. Verify that the system includes template versioning, sharing capabilities, and template categories. Deduct 5 points if template saving is not implemented, 3 points if template editing is limited, and 5 points if there's no template management interface. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 4,
+      "title": "Is the code robust?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as invalid database credentials, SQL errors, network interruptions, browser compatibility issues, etc.) and provide friendly error prompts or recovery mechanisms. Code with strong robustness should be able to effectively handle these edge cases, giving 10 points. If the robustness is average, give 5 points, and if no exceptions are handled, give 0 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 5,
+      "title": "Are there any innovative features that are eye-catching?",
+      "description": "Check whether the code includes surprise features that enhance the experience (e.g., 1. AI-assisted query suggestions 2. Natural language to SQL conversion 3. Real-time collaborative editing 4. Advanced data visualization options). Add 3 points for each practical innovative feature implemented (maximum 10 points).",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 6,
+      "title": "Are there any redundant features?",
+      "description": "Strictly check three types of redundancy: 1. Redundant implementation of similar functions (e.g., multiple query builders coexisting) 2. Function modules unrelated to data reporting (e.g., a built-in file manager) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., excessive animations when switching between reports). Deduct 3 points for each redundancy found, and directly deduct 10 points if the core functions are interfered with by redundant code.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 7,
+      "title": "Does the code have engineering quality?",
+      "description": "Review modular design (such as separating database/UI/templating layers), unit test coverage, and build process automation. Deduct 5 points if global state pollution is found or design patterns are not used; deduct 5 points if the code duplication rate is too high (over 30%); deduct 5 points if the build process is not automated. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 8,
+      "title": "Does the interface vision meet professional design standards?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the overall design follows modern design principles: 1) Harmonious color matching (no more than 3 primary colors) 2) Proper layout spacing (element spacing follows the 8px multiple principle) 3) Professional font system (body font size ≥ 14px, line height over 1.5 times). Deduct 3 points for each crowded visual element, 5 points for a glaring color combination, and 5 points for chaotic text-image layout. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 9,
+      "title": "Is the dynamic interaction smooth and seamless?",
+      "description": "Judge whether the dynamic effects conform to human perception characteristics: 1) Click feedback delay ≤ 100ms 2) Transition animation duration controlled between 300-500ms 3) Clear visual focus guidance when working with data fields and report elements. Deduct 5 points for each operation without feedback, 3 points for visual after-images during fast scrolling through data tables, and 5 points for hard-to-find key function buttons. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    }
+  ],
+  "class": "Management Systems-Frontend/Backend Platforms",
+  "difficulty": "hard"
+}

package/library/management_systems-frontend_backend_platforms/web-based-roll-call-system.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 1100,
+  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Make sure the code you generate is executable for demonstration. I am currently at Harbin Preschool Teachers College. My information technology teacher has asked me to create a web-based roll call system using a computer. How should I proceed?",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the roll call system core functionality fully implemented?",
+      "description": "Review whether the code accurately implements a student database, attendance tracking mechanism, and date/time management. Check if the system can record present/absent/late statuses for each student. Score 0 if core functionality is missing, 5 if only basic attendance recording is implemented, and 10 if comprehensive attendance tracking with various statuses and timestamps is included.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Is the student management system complete?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the system allows adding, editing, and removing students from the database. Check if student information (name, ID, profile photo, etc.) can be properly managed. Deduct 3 points if bulk import/export functionality is missing, 2 points if student search/filter is not implemented, and 3 points if data validation is inadequate. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Is the attendance record storage and retrieval mechanism properly designed?",
+      "description": "Check whether the system properly stores attendance records (using localStorage, IndexedDB, or server-side database) and allows retrieving historical data. Verify if attendance reports can be generated and exported. Deduct 5 points if data persistence is missing, 3 points if historical data cannot be accessed easily, and 3 points if there's no reporting functionality. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Is the user interface suitable for a classroom environment?",
+      "description": "Assess whether the UI is designed for quick roll call in a classroom setting. Look for features like a grid/list view of students, clear visual indicators of attendance status, and quick-access buttons for marking attendance. Deduct 5 points if the interface requires too many clicks for basic operations, 3 points if status indicators are not clearly visible, and 3 points if the layout is not optimized for classroom use. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 4,
+      "title": "Is the code robust?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as incorrect data inputs, browser refresh/reload, network issues for server-based solutions, etc.) and provide friendly error prompts or recovery mechanisms. Code with strong robustness should be able to effectively handle these edge cases, giving 10 points. If the robustness is average, give 5 points, and if no exceptions are handled, give 0 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 5,
+      "title": "Are there any innovative features that are eye-catching?",
+      "description": "Check whether the code includes surprise features that enhance the experience (e.g., 1. Automated roll call using webcam/facial recognition 2. Voice command interface 3. Absence notification system to parents/guardians 4. Statistical dashboard for attendance trends). Add 3 points for each practical innovative feature implemented (maximum 10 points).",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 6,
+      "title": "Are there any redundant features?",
+      "description": "Strictly check three types of redundancy: 1. Redundant implementation of similar functions (e.g., multiple ways to perform the same attendance task) 2. Function modules unrelated to roll call (e.g., a built-in game system) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., excessive animations when marking attendance). Deduct 3 points for each redundancy found, and directly deduct 10 points if the core functions are interfered with by redundant code.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 7,
+      "title": "Does the code have engineering quality?",
+      "description": "Review modular design (such as separating data/UI/controller layers), code organization, and use of appropriate design patterns. Deduct 5 points if global state pollution is found or appropriate patterns are not used; deduct 5 points if the code duplication rate is too high (over 30%); deduct 5 points if the code lacks comments or documentation. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 8,
+      "title": "Does the interface vision meet professional design standards?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the overall design follows modern design principles: 1) Harmonious color matching (no more than 3 primary colors) 2) Proper layout spacing (element spacing follows the 8px multiple principle) 3) Professional font system (body font size ≥ 14px, line height over 1.5 times). Deduct 3 points for each crowded visual element, 5 points for a glaring color combination, and 5 points for chaotic text-image layout. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 9,
+      "title": "Is the dynamic interaction smooth and seamless?",
+      "description": "Judge whether the dynamic effects conform to human perception characteristics: 1) Click feedback delay ≤ 100ms 2) Transition animation duration controlled between 300-500ms 3) Clear visual focus guidance. Deduct 5 points for each operation without feedback, 3 points for visual after-images during fast operations, and 5 points if key functions are difficult to locate. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    }
+  ],
+  "class": "Management Systems-Frontend/Backend Platforms",
+  "difficulty": "hard"
+}

package/library/management_systems-frontend_backend_platforms/web-module-for-security-expense-management.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 358,
+  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Make sure the code you generate is executable for demonstration. Create a web module that includes factory area dropdown buttons, department filter keys, cost code filter keys, date range filter keys, and the ability to import security personnel, security unit prices, annual/monthly/daily security expenses, and annual/monthly/daily security budget.",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the factory area dropdown implementation complete?",
+      "description": "Check whether the code properly implements the factory area dropdown with proper data structure, event handling, and state management. The dropdown should be populated dynamically from a data source, have proper selection handling, and trigger appropriate filter actions. Deduct 5 points if the dropdown is static/hardcoded, 3 points if it lacks visual feedback on selection, and 3 points if it doesn't properly trigger filtering actions. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Are all required filter components implemented?",
+      "description": "Evaluate the implementation of the department filter, cost code filter, and date range filter components. Each filter should have appropriate UI controls (e.g., multi-select checkboxes for departments, dropdown or search for cost codes, and date pickers for date range). Each missing filter deducts 4 points, incomplete implementation deducts 2 points per filter. Date range filter must support both single date and range selection. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Is the data import functionality for security personnel properly implemented?",
+      "description": "Review whether the code supports importing security personnel data through CSV/Excel file upload or manual entry form. Check for validation of input data (e.g., name format, ID validation, role assignment), data transformation, and storage handling. Deduct 5 points if there's no data validation, 3 points if the import process lacks error handling or feedback, and 3 points if there's no preview before final import. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Are the security expense calculations and budget comparison features implemented?",
+      "description": "Check if the module can correctly calculate security expenses at annual/monthly/daily levels based on personnel data and unit prices, and compare them with the corresponding budget values. Verify the calculation logic for different time periods. Deduct 4 points if calculations are incorrect, 3 points if comparison visualization is missing, and 3 points if there's no variance analysis or highlighting of over-budget scenarios. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 4,
+      "title": "Is the code robust?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as invalid data imports, network errors during data fetching, invalid filter combinations, etc.) and provide friendly error prompts or recovery mechanisms. Code with strong robustness should be able to effectively handle these edge cases, giving 10 points. If the robustness is average, give 5 points, and if no exceptions are handled, give 0 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 5,
+      "title": "Are there any innovative features that are eye-catching?",
+      "description": "Check whether the code includes surprise features that enhance the experience (e.g., 1. Dashboard visualization with charts showing expense trends 2. Automatic alerts for budget overruns 3. Personnel allocation optimization suggestions). Add 3 points for each practical innovative feature implemented (maximum 10 points).",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 6,
+      "title": "Are there any redundant features?",
+      "description": "Strictly check three types of redundancy: 1. Redundant implementation of similar filters or calculations 2. Function modules unrelated to security management/budgeting 3. Fancy effects that affect performance or distract from core functionality. Deduct 3 points for each redundancy found, and directly deduct 10 points if the core functions are interfered with by redundant code.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 7,
+      "title": "Does the code have engineering quality?",
+      "description": "Review modular design (such as separating data/UI/calculation logic), component reusability, state management approach, and build process. Deduct 5 points if global state pollution is found or design patterns are not used; deduct 5 points if the code duplication rate is too high (over 30%); deduct 5 points if the build process is not automated or dependencies are poorly managed. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 8,
+      "title": "Does the interface vision meet professional design standards?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the overall design follows modern design principles: 1) Harmonious color matching (no more than 3 primary colors) 2) Proper layout spacing (element spacing follows the 8px multiple principle) 3) Professional font system (body font size ≥ 14px, line height over 1.5 times). Deduct 3 points for each crowded visual element, 5 points for a glaring color combination, and 5 points for chaotic text-image layout. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 9,
+      "title": "Is the dynamic interaction smooth and seamless?",
+      "description": "Judge whether the dynamic effects conform to human perception characteristics: 1) Filter application feedback delay ≤ 100ms 2) Transition animation duration controlled between 300-500ms 3) Clear visual focus guidance when navigating between filter and reporting views. Deduct 5 points for each operation without feedback, 3 points for laggy transitions during filter updates, and 5 points for hard-to-find key function buttons. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    }
+  ],
+  "class": "Management Systems-Frontend/Backend Platforms",
+  "difficulty": "hard"
+}

package/library/management_systems-frontend_backend_platforms/webpage-queue-number-system.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 1384,
+  "question": "You are a code expert, please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Pay attention to ensure the code you generate is executable for demonstration. Develop a queue number system webpage using HTML+JavaScript.",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the core queue management system fully implemented?",
+      "description": "Review whether the code accurately implements queue data structures and operations (enqueue, dequeue, display current/next number). Score 0 if the core queue logic is not implemented, 5 if basic queue operations exist but lack proper state management, and 10 if the complete queue lifecycle with appropriate events is handled.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Are the essential UI components for a queue system present?",
+      "description": "Check if the interface includes: current number display, next number button, new ticket generation, queue status indicator, and estimated wait time. Deduct 2 points for each missing essential component. The interface should clearly distinguish between customer view and service counter view. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Is the queue number generation and tracking mechanism implemented?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the system generates unique sequential numbers, maintains correct queue order, and properly handles number transitions. Deduct 3 points if uniqueness isn't guaranteed, 4 points if the queue order can be corrupted, and 3 points if there's no visual indication of state changes when numbers advance. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Is data persistence implemented for queue state?",
+      "description": "Check if the queue state persists across page refreshes (via localStorage, sessionStorage, or similar). Verify that queue history is maintained and that the system can recover from browser refreshes without losing state. Award 0 points if no persistence exists, 5 points for basic persistence, and 10 points for comprehensive state management with history.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 4,
+      "title": "Is the code robust?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as rapid clicking, out-of-sequence operations, browser storage limitations, etc.) and provide friendly error prompts or recovery mechanisms. Code with strong robustness should be able to effectively handle these edge cases, giving 10 points. If the robustness is average, give 5 points, and if no exceptions are handled, give 0 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 5,
+      "title": "Are there any innovative features that are eye-catching?",
+      "description": "Check whether the code includes surprise features that enhance the experience (e.g., 1. Audio announcements for next numbers 2. Visual estimation of waiting times 3. Priority queue handling for special cases 4. Real-time statistics dashboard). Add 3 points for each practical innovative feature implemented (maximum 10 points).",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 6,
+      "title": "Are there any redundant features?",
+      "description": "Strictly check three types of redundancy: 1. Redundant implementation of similar functions (e.g., multiple ways to reset the queue) 2. Function modules unrelated to queue management (e.g., a built-in calculator) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., excessive animations when numbers change). Deduct 3 points for each redundancy found, and directly deduct 10 points if the core functions are interfered with by redundant code.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 7,
+      "title": "Does the code have engineering quality?",
+      "description": "Review modular design (such as separating queue logic/UI/storage layers), code organization, and maintainability. Deduct 5 points if global state pollution is found or design patterns are not used; deduct 5 points if the code duplication rate is too high (over 30%); deduct 5 points if there's no clear separation between business logic and presentation. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 8,
+      "title": "Does the interface vision meet professional design standards?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the overall design follows modern design principles: 1) Harmonious color matching (no more than 3 primary colors) 2) Proper layout spacing (element spacing follows the 8px multiple principle) 3) Professional font system (body font size ≥ 14px, line height over 1.5 times). Deduct 3 points for each crowded visual element, 5 points for a glaring color combination, and 5 points for chaotic text-image layout. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 9,
+      "title": "Is the dynamic interaction smooth and seamless?",
+      "description": "Judge whether the dynamic effects conform to human perception characteristics: 1) Click feedback delay ≤ 100ms 2) Transition animation for number changes between 300-500ms 3) Clear visual focus on the current serving number. Deduct 5 points for each operation without feedback, 3 points for jarring transitions when updating queue numbers, and 5 points for confusing UI state during queue operations. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    }
+  ],
+  "class": "Management Systems-Frontend/Backend Platforms",
+  "difficulty": "easy"
+}

package/library/management_systems-frontend_backend_platforms/webpage-video-image-text-content-sharing.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 1119,
+  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Be sure to ensure that the code you generate is executable. Develop a web page that allows users to upload videos and images, edit text, and distribute content to other computers on the same local area network. Please list each step in detail and provide the script code required for each implementation step.",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the file upload system correctly implemented?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code includes proper HTML5 file input controls with multiple file selection capabilities, file type validation (MIME type checking for images/videos), and progress indicators during upload. Check if client-side validation prevents exceeding maximum file sizes. Deduct 5 points if only basic file selection is implemented without validation, 3 points if progress indicators are missing, and 3 points if there's no handling for large files. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Is the media preview functionality properly implemented?",
+      "description": "Verify that uploaded images can be displayed with proper scaling/cropping options, and videos have functional preview with basic playback controls. Check if the implementation handles various image formats (JPEG, PNG, GIF, WebP) and video codecs (MP4, WebM). Deduct 3 points if preview is basic without editing capabilities, 5 points if video previews don't work across browsers, and 2 points if there's no thumbnail generation. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Is the text editing capability comprehensive?",
+      "description": "Assess whether the text editor includes rich text formatting (bold, italic, lists, headings), text styling options (font, size, color), and proper content layout controls. Verify that the editor handles text alongside uploaded media elements. Score 0 if only plain text input is available, 5 if basic formatting exists without media integration, and 10 if there's a complete WYSIWYG editor with media placement capabilities. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Is the local network content distribution mechanism implemented?",
+      "description": "Review the implementation of local network discovery and content sharing. Check if WebRTC, WebSockets or similar technologies are used for peer-to-peer communication, or if a lightweight server solution is implemented. Evaluate network discovery methods (like mDNS, SSDP or manual IP input). Deduct 5 points if only the server code exists without client discovery, 3 points if security measures are absent, and 3 points if distribution is one-way only without acknowledgment. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 4,
+      "title": "Is the code robust?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as upload failures, network interruption, browser compatibility issues, etc.) and provide friendly error prompts or recovery mechanisms. Code with strong robustness should be able to effectively handle these edge cases, giving 10 points. If the robustness is average, give 5 points, and if no exceptions are handled, give 0 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 5,
+      "title": "Are there any innovative features that are eye-catching?",
+      "description": "Check whether the code includes surprise features that enhance the experience (e.g., 1. Real-time collaborative editing 2. Automatic media optimization 3. Offline mode with synchronization when reconnected). Add 3 points for each practical innovative feature implemented (maximum 10 points).",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 6,
+      "title": "Are there any redundant features?",
+      "description": "Strictly check three types of redundancy: 1. Redundant implementation of similar functions (e.g., multiple file upload methods coexisting) 2. Function modules unrelated to content sharing (e.g., a built-in game) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., excessive animations). Deduct 3 points for each redundancy found, and directly deduct 10 points if the core functions are interfered with by redundant code.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 7,
+      "title": "Does the code have engineering quality?",
+      "description": "Review modular design (such as separating UI/network/storage layers), unit test coverage, and build process automation. Deduct 5 points if global state pollution is found or design patterns are not used; deduct 5 points if the code duplication rate is too high (over 30%); deduct 5 points if the build process is not automated. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 8,
+      "title": "Does the interface vision meet professional design standards?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the overall design follows modern design principles: 1) Harmonious color matching (no more than 3 primary colors) 2) Proper layout spacing (element spacing follows the 8px multiple principle) 3) Professional font system (body font size ≥ 14px, line height over 1.5 times). Deduct 3 points for each crowded visual element, 5 points for a glaring color combination, and 5 points for chaotic text-image layout. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 9,
+      "title": "Is the dynamic interaction smooth and seamless?",
+      "description": "Judge whether the dynamic effects conform to human perception characteristics: 1) Click feedback delay ≤ 100ms 2) Transition animation duration controlled between 300-500ms 3) Clear visual focus guidance. Deduct 5 points for each operation without feedback, 3 points for visual after-images during fast sliding, and 5 points for hard-to-find key function buttons. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    }
+  ],
+  "class": "Management Systems-Frontend/Backend Platforms",
+  "difficulty": "hard"
+}

package/library/management_systems-frontend_backend_platforms/website-login-approval-data-query-pages.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 822,
+  "question": "You are a coding expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Make sure that the code you generate is executable for demonstration. Design a website structure with a login page, an approval page, a data entry page, and a query page.",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the login page implementation complete and secure?",
+      "description": "Check whether the login page implements proper authentication mechanisms, including input validation, secure password handling (hashing), CSRF protection, and proper error messages. Score 0 if basic authentication is missing, 5 if it has basic validation but lacks security features, and 10 if it includes all security best practices including rate limiting and proper session management.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Is the approval page workflow properly implemented?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the approval page includes user role verification, approval hierarchy, status tracking, and notification systems. The code should handle different approval states (pending, approved, rejected) and maintain an audit trail. Score 0 if the approval logic is missing, 5 if basic approval functionality exists but lacks comprehensive workflow, and 10 if it includes complete workflow with notifications and history tracking.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Is the data entry page functional and user-friendly?",
+      "description": "Assess the data entry page for proper form validation (client and server-side), data sanitization, field constraints, and user feedback. The implementation should include handling for different input types and proper error messages. Deduct 5 points if client-side validation is missing, 3 points if there's no feedback on submission, and 2 points if complex inputs (like dates, numbers) aren't properly handled.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Is the query page search functionality comprehensive?",
+      "description": "Check if the query page implements efficient search algorithms, pagination, sorting capabilities, filters, and exports results in useful formats. Evaluate the search response time and result display. Score 0 if basic search is missing, 5 if it has basic search without advanced features, and 10 if it includes comprehensive search with optimization for large datasets and multiple export options.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 4,
+      "title": "Is the code robust?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as invalid inputs, server errors, network interruptions, etc.) and provide friendly error prompts or recovery mechanisms. Code with strong robustness should be able to effectively handle these edge cases, giving 10 points. If the robustness is average, give 5 points, and if no exceptions are handled, give 0 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 5,
+      "title": "Are there any innovative features that are eye-catching?",
+      "description": "Check whether the code includes surprise features that enhance the experience (e.g., 1. Dark mode toggle 2. Dashboard with usage analytics 3. Progressive Web App capabilities 4. Accessibility features). Add 3 points for each practical innovative feature implemented (maximum 10 points).",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 6,
+      "title": "Are there any redundant features?",
+      "description": "Strictly check three types of redundancy: 1. Redundant implementation of similar functions (e.g., multiple validation systems coexisting) 2. Function modules unrelated to the core website requirements 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., excessive animations or large media files). Deduct 3 points for each redundancy found, and directly deduct 10 points if the core functions are interfered with by redundant code.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 7,
+      "title": "Does the code have engineering quality?",
+      "description": "Review modular design (such as separating UI components, services/API calls, and state management), code reusability, and build process automation. Deduct 5 points if global state pollution is found or design patterns are not used; deduct 5 points if the code duplication rate is too high (over 30%); deduct 5 points if the build process is not automated or lacks proper configuration. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 8,
+      "title": "Does the interface vision meet professional design standards?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the overall design follows modern design principles: 1) Harmonious color matching (no more than 3 primary colors) 2) Proper layout spacing (element spacing follows the 8px multiple principle) 3) Professional font system (body font size ≥ 14px, line height over 1.5 times) 4) Consistent design language across all pages. Deduct 3 points for each crowded visual element, 5 points for a glaring color combination, and 5 points for chaotic text-image layout. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 9,
+      "title": "Is the dynamic interaction smooth and seamless?",
+      "description": "Judge whether the dynamic effects conform to human perception characteristics: 1) Click feedback delay ≤ 100ms 2) Transition animation duration controlled between 300-500ms 3) Clear visual focus guidance 4) Consistent navigation patterns across pages. Deduct 5 points for each operation without feedback, 3 points for visual after-images during page transitions, and 5 points for hard-to-find key function buttons. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    }
+  ],
+  "class": "Management Systems-Frontend/Backend Platforms",
+  "difficulty": "hard"
+}

package/library/management_systems-frontend_backend_platforms/wechat-alipay-developer-platform.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 1523,
+  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Be sure to ensure that any code you generate is executable for demonstration. What I need is something similar to the WeChat Pay developer platform or Alipay developer platform.",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the payment gateway API integration fully implemented?",
+      "description": "Review whether the code accurately implements standard payment gateway protocols (RESTful or SOAP), includes proper authentication mechanisms (OAuth 2.0, API keys, or digital signatures), and handles payment lifecycles (initiation, confirmation, refund). Score 0 if the core payment API integration is missing, 5 if only basic payment flow is implemented without security considerations, and 10 if all standard payment protocols with proper security measures are included.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Are the developer authentication and authorization mechanisms implemented?",
+      "description": "Check whether the platform includes a complete developer onboarding process, sandbox environment, API key management system, and permission control. Deduct 5 points if multi-environment support (development, testing, production) is missing, and 3 points if there's no mechanism for API usage monitoring and rate limiting. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Is the payment notification and callback system properly designed?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the system implements asynchronous notification mechanisms (webhooks), includes signature verification for callbacks, has retry logic for failed notifications, and provides a notification history dashboard. Deduct 5 points if notification verification is weak or missing, and 3 points if there's no retry mechanism for failed notifications. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Is the developer documentation and SDK implementation complete?",
+      "description": "Check whether the code includes comprehensive API documentation, interactive API explorers, code samples in multiple languages, and well-structured SDKs. Deduct 5 points if the documentation lacks practical examples, 3 points if there's no interactive testing capability, and 5 points if SDKs for major programming languages are missing. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 4,
+      "title": "Is the code robust?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as network timeouts, invalid parameters, duplicate transactions, etc.) and provide meaningful error codes with documentation. Code with strong robustness should implement idempotency for payment operations, transaction reconciliation mechanisms, and proper exception handling, giving 10 points. If the robustness is average, give 5 points, and if no exceptions are handled, give 0 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 5,
+      "title": "Are there any innovative features that are eye-catching?",
+      "description": "Check whether the code includes surprise features that enhance the experience (e.g., 1. Real-time payment analytics dashboard 2. Fraud detection system with machine learning 3. Interactive transaction flow visualization 4. Multi-currency support with automatic exchange rates). Add 3 points for each practical innovative feature implemented (maximum 10 points).",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 6,
+      "title": "Are there any redundant features?",
+      "description": "Strictly check three types of redundancy: 1. Redundant implementation of similar payment flows (e.g., multiple checkout processes coexisting) 2. Function modules unrelated to payment processing (e.g., a built-in social media feed) 3. Heavy UI elements that affect performance (e.g., unnecessary animations in transaction processing screens). Deduct 3 points for each redundancy found, and directly deduct 10 points if the core payment functions are interfered with by redundant code.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 7,
+      "title": "Does the code have engineering quality?",
+      "description": "Review modular design (such as separating API/business logic/data layers), unit test coverage especially for payment calculation logic, and build process automation. Deduct 5 points if global state pollution is found or design patterns are not used; deduct 5 points if the code duplication rate is too high (over 30%); deduct 5 points if the build process is not automated. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 8,
+      "title": "Does the interface vision meet professional design standards?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the developer portal design follows modern design principles: 1) Harmonious color matching that aligns with financial services (professional blues, whites, with accent colors) 2) Proper layout spacing for clear data visualization (8px grid system) 3) Professional typography system (readable monospace fonts for code samples, minimum 14px body text). Deduct 3 points for each crowded visual element, 5 points for inconsistent branding elements, and 5 points for poor information hierarchy. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 9,
+      "title": "Is the dynamic interaction smooth and seamless?",
+      "description": "Judge whether the developer platform interactions prioritize clarity and efficiency: 1) API response time indicators 2) Clear loading states for all asynchronous operations 3) Intuitive navigation between documentation, sandbox testing, and production monitoring. Deduct 5 points for operations lacking feedback, 3 points for confusing navigation patterns, and 5 points for critical functions (like API key generation) that lack confirmation dialogs. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    }
+  ],
+  "class": "Management Systems-Frontend/Backend Platforms",
+  "difficulty": "hard"
+}