@getollie/cli 0.0.1

package/library/multimedia_editing-video_production/frontend-video-animated-stickers-editor.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 499,
+  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate, professional responses. Make sure the code you generate is executable for demonstration. Develop a frontend video feature for adding animated stickers. After users upload videos, they can select different animated stickers (such as dynamic emoticons, cartoon patterns, etc.) to add to the video, set the position and timing of the stickers, preview the video with stickers in real-time, and export the video when complete.",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the video upload and processing system fully implemented?",
+      "description": "Review whether the code provides complete video upload functionality with proper file type validation, size limits, progress indicators, and error handling. Check if the uploaded video is properly processed for manipulation (decoding, frame extraction if needed). Score 0 if video upload is not implemented, 5 if basic upload exists but lacks validation or error handling, and 10 if it includes comprehensive upload features with proper feedback mechanisms.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Is the sticker management system properly implemented?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code provides a user interface for selecting, previewing, and managing animated stickers. Check if stickers are properly categorized, searchable, and if there's support for user-uploaded custom stickers. Score 0 if sticker selection is missing, 5 if basic sticker selection exists without organization or preview features, and 10 if it includes a well-designed sticker library with preview capabilities and custom sticker upload support.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Are the position and timing control mechanisms for stickers implemented?",
+      "description": "Check if the code allows users to drag-and-drop stickers onto the video, resize them, rotate them, and set their appearance/disappearance timing. Verify if there's a timeline control for precise timing adjustment. Deduct 3 points if position editing is limited, 4 points if timing controls are missing, and 5 points if the interface lacks real-time feedback during adjustment. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Does the solution include real-time preview functionality?",
+      "description": "Assess whether the code provides a real-time preview of how the video will look with applied stickers. Check if the preview updates immediately when sticker positions or timing are changed. Verify if the preview maintains proper synchronization between video and stickers. Score 0 if preview is not available, 5 if basic preview exists but with performance issues or synchronization problems, and 10 if the preview is smooth, accurate, and responsive to all user edits.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 4,
+      "title": "Is the code robust?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as unsupported video formats, oversized files, browser compatibility issues, resource loading failures, 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 sticker placement recommendations 2. Motion tracking to attach stickers to moving objects 3. Custom animation paths for stickers 4. Audio-reactive stickers that respond to sound). 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 video players coexisting) 2. Function modules unrelated to video sticker editing (e.g., a built-in social network) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., unnecessary background 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 video processing/UI/sticker management 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 scrubbing through the video, and 5 points for hard-to-find key function buttons (like export). The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    }
+  ],
+  "class": "Multimedia Editing-Video Production",
+  "difficulty": "medium"
+}

package/library/multimedia_editing-video_production/frontend-video-color-adjustment-tool.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 547,
+  "question": "You are a code expert, please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Make sure the generated code is executable for display. ======== ROLE ========\nYou are an experienced code expert. I am providing you with a software development requirement description and asking you to generate project code based on these requirements. Strictly follow the rules to help users generate complete project code with simple and easy-to-understand comments, without outputting anything else.\n\n======== OUTPUT RULES ========\n1. You will always generate complete, runnable project code, ensuring the project is fully executable\n2. Ensure all code files you output are complete, do not omit any code\n3. Before final output, carefully review all code and evaluate its executability. If the code cannot be executed or contains errors, regenerate it\n4. If the requirements include external API access or need to use user data (images, videos, audio, etc.), please provide simulated data\n\n======== PROJECT REQUIREMENTS ========\nCreate a frontend video color adjustment application where users can upload videos, adjust video brightness, contrast, and saturation, preview the adjusted video in real-time, and finally save the adjusted video.",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Video Upload and Processing Implementation",
+      "description": "Check whether the code correctly implements video file upload functionality, including file selection, format validation, and initial processing.0 points if no upload functionality is implemented, 5 points if basic file selection is available but lacks format validation, 10 points if complete upload functionality with proper format validation, error handling, and loading indicators is implemented.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Color Adjustment Features Implementation",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the brightness, contrast, and saturation adjustment features are properly implemented with appropriate range controls and real-time application.Deduct 3 points for each missing adjustment feature. Deduct 2 points if adjustment ranges are inappropriate (too extreme or too limited). Deduct 2 points if adjustments don't apply in real-time. Full score is 10 points if all three adjustments work properly with appropriate ranges and real-time feedback.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Real-time Video Preview Functionality",
+      "description": "Assess the implementation of real-time preview that shows color adjustments as they are applied, including preview performance and accuracy.0 points if no preview is available, 5 points if preview exists but has significant lag (>300ms) or inaccuracies in displaying adjustments, 10 points if preview is smooth (<100ms response) and accurately reflects all color adjustments.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Video Saving and Export Capabilities",
+      "description": "Check whether the code includes functionality to save the edited video with applied color adjustments, including format options and quality settings.0 points if saving functionality is not implemented, 5 points if basic saving is available but lacks format/quality options or progress indicators, 10 points if complete saving functionality with format options, quality settings, and progress indication is implemented.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 4,
+      "title": "Code Robustness",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as unsupported formats, large file sizes, 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": "Innovative Features",
+      "description": "Check whether the code includes surprise features that enhance the experience (e.g., 1. Preset color filters, 2. History/undo functionality, 3. Split-screen before/after comparison, 4. Batch processing).Add 3 points for each practical innovative feature implemented (maximum 10 points).",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 6,
+      "title": "Redundant Features",
+      "description": "Strictly check three types of redundancy: 1. Redundant implementation of similar functions (e.g., multiple video processing libraries used together) 2. Function modules unrelated to video editing (e.g., a built-in social sharing system) 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": "Engineering Quality",
+      "description": "Review modular design (such as separating video processing/UI/state management), code structure, performance optimization techniques, and memory management.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 no performance optimization is implemented for video processing. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 8,
+      "title": "Interface Design Quality",
+      "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 controls for video editing (sliders with appropriate precision and visual feedback).Deduct 3 points for each poorly designed control element, 5 points for a cluttered or confusing interface layout, and 5 points for inconsistent styling across the application. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 9,
+      "title": "Performance and Responsiveness",
+      "description": "Judge whether the application performs efficiently: 1) Video processing operations complete within reasonable time (<500ms for preview updates) 2) UI remains responsive during video processing 3) Efficient memory usage to prevent browser crashes with large videos.Deduct 5 points if adjustments take >1s to reflect in the preview, 5 points if the UI freezes during processing, and 5 points if there's no implementation of memory management for large videos. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    }
+  ],
+  "class": "Multimedia Editing-Video Production",
+  "difficulty": "easy"
+}

package/library/multimedia_editing-video_production/html-fifteen-second-short-video.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 1191,
+  "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. Help me create HTML for a fifteen-second short video.",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the HTML5 video implementation complete and functional?",
+      "description": "Review whether the code properly implements HTML5 video elements with correct attributes (src, controls, autoplay, loop, muted, etc.). Check if the video duration is precisely controlled to 15 seconds through JavaScript timing mechanisms or video editing. Score 0 if basic video element is missing, 5 if only static video tag is present without duration control, and 10 if all video attributes and 15-second constraint are properly implemented.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Are interactive controls and playback features properly implemented?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether custom video controls are implemented including play/pause buttons, progress bar, volume control, and fullscreen toggle. Check if JavaScript event listeners handle video state changes (play, pause, ended, timeupdate). Deduct 5 points if custom controls are missing, 3 points if progress tracking is inaccurate. Full score requires seamless control integration with proper event handling.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Is responsive design and cross-device compatibility ensured?",
+      "description": "Check whether the video player adapts to different screen sizes using CSS media queries and flexible layouts. Verify compatibility across major browsers (Chrome, Firefox, Safari, Edge) and mobile devices. Deduct 5 points if mobile responsiveness is poor, 3 points if aspect ratio is not maintained on different screens. Full score requires perfect adaptation across all devices.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Are performance optimization and loading strategies implemented?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether video loading is optimized with proper preload strategies, lazy loading, and compression techniques. Check if fallback mechanisms are provided for unsupported video formats (WebM, MP4, OGG). Deduct 5 points if no preload optimization, 3 points if multiple format support is missing. Full score requires comprehensive loading optimization and format compatibility.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 4,
+      "title": "Is the code robust?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as video loading failures, unsupported formats, network interruption, user operation errors, 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. Custom video overlays or annotations 2. Interactive hotspots or clickable elements 3. Picture-in-picture mode 4. Video thumbnail preview on hover). 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 video control sets) 2. Function modules unrelated to video playback (e.g., unnecessary social sharing widgets) 3. Fancy effects that affect video performance (e.g., heavy CSS animations during playback). Deduct 3 points for each redundancy found, and directly deduct 10 points if the core video 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 video logic/UI/styling layers), semantic HTML structure, and maintainable CSS organization. Deduct 5 points if global state pollution is found or modern HTML5 semantics are not used; deduct 5 points if the code duplication rate is too high (over 30%); deduct 5 points if CSS is not organized or lacks proper naming conventions. 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 typography system (control labels ≥ 14px, proper contrast ratios) 4) Video player aesthetics matching modern standards. Deduct 3 points for each crowded visual element, 5 points for glaring color combinations, and 5 points for chaotic video control layout. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 9,
+      "title": "Is the dynamic interaction smooth and seamless?",
+      "description": "Judge whether the video interactions conform to user experience standards: 1) Control response delay ≤ 100ms 2) Smooth progress bar scrubbing without stuttering 3) Hover states and transitions between 200-400ms 4) Clear visual feedback for all interactive elements. Deduct 5 points for each control without proper feedback, 3 points for laggy video seeking, and 5 points for hard-to-find or unclear control elements. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    }
+  ],
+  "class": "Multimedia Editing-Video Production",
+  "difficulty": "easy"
+}

package/library/multimedia_editing-video_production/multi-track-video-editor.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 530,
+  "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 whenever possible. Please implement a multi-track video editor that allows users to add video, audio, and subtitles on different tracks. Users should be able to independently control the order, volume, and visibility of each track, and finally export all tracks as a single composite video file.",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the multi-track timeline interface fully implemented?",
+      "description": "Review whether the code accurately implements a timeline with multiple independent tracks through HTML/JavaScript, and whether it includes proper track visualization, time markers, and zooming capabilities. Score 0 if the timeline interface is not implemented, 5 if it's basic without zooming or customization, and 10 if it includes features like time markers, snap-to-grid, and customizable track heights.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Are the track types (video, audio, subtitle) properly implemented with appropriate controls?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code provides distinct track types with appropriate controls for each: videos should have opacity/visibility toggles, audio tracks should have volume controls and waveform visualization, subtitles should have text editing and timing controls. Deduct 3 points if any track type is missing, 3 points if track-specific controls are incomplete, and 2 points if the visualization is inadequate. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Is the media import and parsing functionality properly implemented?",
+      "description": "Check whether the code handles importing various media formats (mp4, webm, mp3, wav, srt, vtt), extracts metadata (duration, resolution, codec), generates previews/thumbnails for video content, and parses subtitle files correctly. Deduct 3 points for each media type not supported, 3 points if preview generation is missing, and 4 points if metadata extraction is incomplete. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Is the video export and rendering pipeline implemented?",
+      "description": "Assess whether the code implements a proper rendering pipeline that combines all tracks (video, audio, subtitles) into a single output file with appropriate settings for resolution, framerate, and format selection. The implementation should include progress tracking and error handling. Deduct 5 points if only client-side preview is available without actual export, 5 points if the export lacks format options, and 3 points if there's no progress tracking. 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 unsupported file formats, corrupted media files, browser memory 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. AI-assisted editing suggestions 2. Auto-synchronization of audio tracks 3. Voice-to-text for automatic subtitle generation 4. Transition effects library). 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 playback controls with overlapping functionality) 2. Function modules unrelated to video editing (e.g., built-in social media sharing) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., unnecessarily complex animations in the UI). 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 media processing/timeline/UI 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 professional video editor UI principles: 1) Dark theme optimized for media viewing 2) Clear visual hierarchy between preview, timeline, and controls 3) Consistent iconography and color-coding for different track types. Deduct 3 points for poor contrast making content hard to see, 5 points for inconsistent or confusing UI elements, and 5 points for inefficient use of screen space. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 9,
+      "title": "Is the dynamic interaction smooth and seamless?",
+      "description": "Judge whether the timeline scrubbing, track manipulation, and preview updates conform to professional editor standards: 1) Responsive preview updates (≤ 200ms) 2) Smooth timeline scrolling and zooming 3) Drag-and-drop track manipulation with visual feedback. Deduct 5 points for laggy preview updates, 3 points for jerky timeline navigation, and 5 points for imprecise track manipulation controls. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    }
+  ],
+  "class": "Multimedia Editing-Video Production",
+  "difficulty": "hard"
+}

package/library/multimedia_editing-video_production/online-dynamic-background-video-generator.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 490,
+  "question": "You are a code expert, please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Make sure the generated code is executable for demonstration whenever possible.\n\n======== ROLE ========\nYou are an experienced code expert. You are provided with a software development requirement description and asked to generate project code based on these requirements. Strictly follow the rules to help users generate complete project code with simple and understandable comments. Don't output anything else.\n\n======== OUTPUT RULES ========\n1. Always generate complete, runnable project code. Please ensure the project is fully executable\n2. Ensure all code files you output are complete without omitting any code\n3. Carefully review and check all code before final output, evaluating its executability. If the code cannot be executed or contains errors, it needs to be regenerated\n4. If the requirements involve external API access or need to use user data (images, videos, audio, etc.), please provide simulated data\n\n======== PROJECT REQUIREMENTS ========\nDevelop an online dynamic background video generator where users can choose different dynamic backgrounds (such as dynamic particles, animated smoke), add text and images, adjust animation effects and timing of elements, preview in real-time, and export as video.",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the dynamic background generation system fully implemented?",
+      "description": "Review whether the code properly implements at least 3 different dynamic background effects (particles, animated smoke, etc.) with appropriate HTML5 Canvas/WebGL rendering. Check if the animation loop is well-optimized and maintains consistent frame rates (minimum 30 FPS) even with complex effects. Score 0 if no dynamic backgrounds are implemented, 5 if only basic effects are available, and 10 if multiple high-quality effects with customization options are provided.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Does the code implement comprehensive text and image overlay capabilities?",
+      "description": "Evaluate if users can add, edit, and position both text and images on the dynamic background. Check for text styling options (font family, size, color, shadows, animation), and image manipulation features (resize, crop, opacity, filters). Verify if the code handles text wrapping, image loading errors, and maintains proper layering. Deduct 5 points if either text or image functionality is missing, 3 points if basic positioning is implemented but advanced styling is absent. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Is the animation control system properly implemented?",
+      "description": "Check if the code provides a timeline or keyframe-based system for controlling element animations. Verify if users can adjust timing, duration, easing functions, and transition effects for all elements. The system should support entry/exit animations and persistent effects. Deduct 5 points if only basic animations are available with fixed timing, 3 points if the timeline lacks precision control or preview scrubbing. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Is the real-time preview and video export functionality working correctly?",
+      "description": "Evaluate if the code includes real-time preview capabilities that accurately represent the final output. Check if the video export functionality uses proper techniques (such as MediaRecorder API, canvas capture with WebM encoding, or server-side rendering). Verify export settings (resolution, frame rate, file format) and error handling. Deduct 5 points if preview is implemented but export is missing, 5 points if export quality is significantly lower than preview. 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 large file uploads, browser compatibility issues, memory constraints with complex animations, 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-suggested design templates 2. Audio-reactive backgrounds 3. Community sharing platform for created videos). 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 animation systems coexisting) 2. Function modules unrelated to video generation (e.g., a built-in music player without purpose) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., excessive background calculations). 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 rendering/animation/export 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": "Multimedia Editing-Video Production",
+  "difficulty": "hard"
+}

package/library/multimedia_editing-video_production/online-video-background-removal-tool.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 605,
+  "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 and can be demonstrated. Design an online video background removal tool where users can upload videos with green screens, which will automatically remove the background and replace it with user-selected images or videos. Support real-time preview of changes and allow users to download the processed videos.",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the green screen background removal algorithm accurately implemented?",
+      "description": "Review whether the code implements precise chroma key algorithm using HTML5 Canvas/WebGL, including HSV color space conversion, edge feathering, and shadow handling. Check if it supports adjustable tolerance parameters and multiple green shade detection. Score 0 if core removal logic is missing, 5 if only basic color threshold removal is implemented, and 10 if advanced edge smoothing and color spill correction are fully included.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Is the video upload and processing pipeline robust?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the implementation includes chunked file upload, progress tracking, and format validation (MP4/WebM/MOV support). Check for memory management during large video processing and worker thread utilization to prevent UI blocking. Deduct 5 points if no progress indication, 3 points if browser crashes on large files. Full score requires seamless handling of videos up to 100MB.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Is real-time preview functionality implemented with acceptable performance?",
+      "description": "Check whether the preview system uses efficient frame sampling (every 3-5 frames) and WebGL acceleration for real-time rendering. Evaluate if preview updates respond within 500ms of parameter changes. Deduct 5 points if preview lags exceed 1 second, 3 points if no frame rate optimization. Requires smooth 15+ FPS preview for videos under 1080p.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Is the background replacement system comprehensively designed?",
+      "description": "Verify whether the code supports multiple background types (static images, videos, solid colors) with proper scaling and positioning controls. Check for aspect ratio preservation, background loop handling for shorter clips, and blend mode options. Deduct 5 points if no background scaling options, 3 points if video backgrounds don't loop properly. Full score requires advanced compositing features.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 4,
+      "title": "Is the code robust?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as unsupported video formats, memory overflow, processing failures, corrupted uploads, 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-powered edge refinement 2. Batch processing multiple videos 3. Custom mask drawing tools 4. Background blur effects 5. Motion tracking for moving subjects). 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 video decoders coexisting) 2. Function modules unrelated to video processing (e.g., built-in social sharing widgets) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., unnecessary particle systems during processing). 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 video processing/UI/file handling layers), error handling coverage, and build process automation. Deduct 5 points if global state pollution is found or memory leaks occur; deduct 5 points if the code duplication rate is too high (over 30%); deduct 5 points if no proper cleanup of video resources. 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) Clear visual hierarchy for video controls. Deduct 3 points for each crowded visual element, 5 points for a glaring color combination, and 5 points for chaotic control 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) Parameter adjustment feedback delay ≤ 100ms 2) Smooth timeline scrubbing without stuttering 3) Clear loading states during processing 4) Intuitive drag-and-drop for file uploads. Deduct 5 points for each operation without feedback, 3 points for jerky video playback, and 5 points for confusing processing status indicators. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    }
+  ],
+  "class": "Multimedia Editing-Video Production",
+  "difficulty": "hard"
+}

package/library/multimedia_editing-video_production/online-video-format-conversion-tool.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 573,
+  "question": "You are a code expert, please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Try to ensure that the generated code is executable for demonstration.\n\n======== Role ========\nYou are an experienced code expert. You are provided with a software development requirement description, and you need to generate project code based on these requirements. Strictly follow the rules to help users generate complete project code with simple and understandable commentary, without outputting anything else.\n\n======== Output Rules ========\n1. You should always generate complete, runnable project code. Please ensure the project is fully executable.\n2. Ensure that all code files you output are complete, without omitting any code.\n3. Carefully review and check all code before final output, evaluating its executability. If the code cannot be executed or contains errors, regenerate it.\n4. If the requirements involve external API access or need to use user data (images, videos, audio, etc.), please provide simulated data.\n\n======== Project Requirements ========\nWrite code to create an online video format conversion tool. After users upload videos, they can select the target video format (such as MP4, AVI, FLV, etc.) on the front-end page, click the convert button, and then convert the video to the specified format and provide a download link.",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the video upload functionality properly implemented?",
+      "description": "Review whether the code properly implements file upload using HTML/JavaScript with proper validation for video files. Check if it includes file type checking, size limitations, and progress indication during upload. Score 0 if there's no upload functionality, 5 if basic upload exists but lacks validation or progress indication, and 10 if the implementation is complete with all validations and user feedback.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Is the format conversion functionality implemented correctly?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code includes proper backend implementation for video format conversion using appropriate libraries (like FFmpeg). Check if all mentioned formats (MP4, AVI, FLV, etc.) are supported. Score 0 if conversion logic is missing, 5 if only basic conversion is implemented with limited formats, and 10 if comprehensive conversion with multiple format options and proper error handling is included.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Is the download functionality properly implemented?",
+      "description": "Check if the code provides a secure download mechanism for the converted videos, including proper file naming, content-type headers, and download progress indication. Score 0 if download functionality is missing, 5 if basic download exists but lacks proper implementation details, and 10 if a complete and secure download system is implemented.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Is there a proper conversion status/progress tracking mechanism?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code includes real-time progress updates during conversion, estimated time remaining calculations, and proper status notifications. Score 0 if no progress tracking exists, 5 if basic status updates are provided but not real-time, and 10 if comprehensive real-time progress tracking with visual indicators is implemented.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 4,
+      "title": "Is the code robust?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as upload failures, conversion errors, invalid file types, server disconnections, 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. Video preview before conversion 2. Batch processing capabilities 3. Additional video editing options like trimming/cropping 4. Conversion presets for common devices). 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 handling methods) 2. Function modules unrelated to video conversion (e.g., unnecessary social sharing features) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., excessive animations during conversion). 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 upload/conversion/download logic), error handling, security measures (against injection attacks), 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 during the multistep conversion process. Deduct 5 points for each operation without feedback, 3 points for visual after-images during transitions, and 5 points for hard-to-find key function buttons. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    }
+  ],
+  "class": "Multimedia Editing-Video Production",
+  "difficulty": "medium"
+}

package/library/multimedia_editing-video_production/online-video-frame-extractor.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 471,
+  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Ensure that the code you generate is executable and can be demonstrated. Design an online video frame extractor that allows users to upload videos, select specific time points or ranges, and extract the corresponding video frames as downloadable image files. Provide a functionality to preview the selected frames.",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the video upload functionality fully implemented?",
+      "description": "Review whether the code correctly implements file upload with proper validation for video formats (mp4, webm, mov, etc.) and handles large files efficiently. Check if progress indicators are included and if error handling for failed uploads is implemented. Score 0 if upload functionality is missing, 5 if basic upload works but lacks validation or progress indication, and 10 if it includes all features with a fallback mechanism.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Is the video player implementation complete and functional?",
+      "description": "Evaluate if the player includes standard controls (play/pause, volume, timeline seeking), supports major video formats, and provides precise frame navigation. The player should display accurate timestamps and support keyboard shortcuts. Deduct 5 points if precise frame-by-frame navigation is missing, and 3 points if the player lacks responsive design. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Is the frame selection mechanism properly implemented?",
+      "description": "Check if both single frame selection and time range selection are supported, with intuitive UI controls like sliders or timecode input fields. Verify if preview thumbnails are generated for selected points/ranges and if multiple selection points can be saved. Deduct 5 points if only one selection method is implemented, 3 points if the selection isn't visually indicated on the timeline. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Is the frame extraction functionality complete?",
+      "description": "Assess if the code correctly extracts frames at selected time points or from ranges, maintains original resolution quality, and allows configuration of output format and quality. Check if batch processing with appropriate memory management is implemented. Deduct 5 points if extraction doesn't maintain original quality, 3 points if processing options are limited, and 5 points if extraction performance is poor. 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 corrupt video files, browser compatibility issues, memory limitations, and network interruptions) 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. Automatic scene detection 2. Batch export with custom naming patterns 3. Image enhancement filters for extracted frames 4. Integration with cloud storage). 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 video processing libraries doing the same thing) 2. Function modules unrelated to frame extraction (e.g., a built-in image editor when simple extraction is needed) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., unnecessary animations during processing). 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 video processing/UI/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": "Multimedia Editing-Video Production",
+  "difficulty": "medium"
+}