@getollie/cli 0.0.1

package/library/multimedia_editing-video_production/video-transition-effect-editor.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 576,
+  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate, professional responses. Be sure to ensure that the code you generate is executable and can be demonstrated. Please create a transition effect editor that allows users to add various transition effects to different clips in a video, such as fade-in/fade-out, slide, dissolve, etc. Users should be able to preview each transition effect, adjust its duration, and ultimately generate a video with the transition effects.",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the transition effect editor interface fully implemented?",
+      "description": "Review whether the code creates a comprehensive UI with elements for video upload, clip management, transition selection, timeline visualization, and preview functionality. Score 0 if the core interface elements are missing, 5 if basic elements are present but not fully functional, and 10 if the interface includes drag-and-drop capabilities, clear visual indicators for transitions, and intuitive controls for adjusting transition parameters.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Are the core transition effects properly implemented?",
+      "description": "Check if the code implements at least the following transitions with proper parameterization: fade-in/fade-out, dissolve, wipe (multiple directions), slide (multiple directions), zoom, and rotation. Each effect should have customizable duration and easing functions. Deduct 2 points for each missing core transition effect. Give full points only if the transitions are implemented with proper rendering techniques (e.g., using WebGL for hardware acceleration when appropriate).",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Is the video preview functionality working correctly?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether users can preview the entire video with transitions or individual transitions in isolation. The preview should accurately represent how the final video will look. Check if the preview supports: play/pause, seeking to specific points, real-time application of transition changes, and correct timing. Deduct 3 points if preview performance is noticeably slow, 5 points if transitions don't render accurately in preview, and 2 points if seeking/timeline navigation is not implemented.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Is the final video generation functionality implemented?",
+      "description": "Assess if the code includes functionality to render and export the final video with all applied transitions. This should include proper video encoding (like H.264), maintaining original video quality, progress indicators during rendering, and options for output format and quality. Deduct 5 points if rendering is client-side only without server option for heavy processing, 3 points if video quality is significantly degraded, and 5 points if there's no export functionality at all.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 4,
+      "title": "Is the code robust?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as incompatible video formats, large files, browser compatibility issues, memory constraints) 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 transition recommendations 2. Template-based transition presets 3. Keyframe animation editor for custom transitions). 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 transitions (e.g., multiple fade implementations) 2. Function modules unrelated to video editing (e.g., unnecessary social sharing features) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., excessive UI 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/state 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, 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/video-transition-effects-editor.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 518,
+  "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. Develop a video transition effects editor where users can upload two video clips and choose from three common transition effects (such as cross-fade, push-pull transition, flip transition) to merge them into a complete video.",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the video upload and management system fully implemented?",
+      "description": "Review whether the code provides a complete solution for uploading, validating, and managing two video clips. Check for proper file validation (format checking, size limits), progress indicators during upload, and appropriate error handling. Score 0 if video upload functionality is missing, 5 if basic upload exists but lacks validation or error handling, and 10 if comprehensive upload management with proper feedback is implemented.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Are the three transition effects (cross-fade, push-pull, flip) properly implemented?",
+      "description": "Evaluate the quality and completeness of the transition effects implementation. Each effect should have customizable parameters (duration, direction if applicable) and accurate preview capability. Deduct 3 points for each missing effect. Deduct 2 points if an effect lacks parameter customization. Give full 10 points only if all three effects are implemented with proper customization options and accurate rendering.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Does the editor provide real-time preview functionality?",
+      "description": "Check if users can see a real-time or near-real-time preview of the transition effect before rendering the final video. The preview should accurately represent the final output, showing the actual transition at the correct timing. Deduct 5 points if preview is significantly delayed or inaccurate. Deduct 10 points if no preview functionality exists. Full score requires smooth, accurate preview with minimal latency.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Is the video rendering and export process complete?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the application can render the final video with the selected transition and provide download options in appropriate formats (MP4, WebM). Check for progress indicators during rendering, estimated time remaining, and ability to cancel the process. Deduct 5 points if rendering lacks progress feedback, 5 points if export options are limited, and 10 points if the rendering process is not implemented at all.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 4,
+      "title": "Is the code robust?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as unsupported video formats, interrupted uploads, 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. Additional transition effects beyond the required three 2. Audio crossfading during transitions 3. Custom keyframe support for transitions 4. Thumbnails timeline for easy navigation). 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 job) 2. Function modules unrelated to video editing (e.g., a built-in social media platform) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., excessive 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 video processing/UI/state 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 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/video-trimming-splicing-tool.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 477,
+  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Make sure the generated code is executable. Create a video trimming and splicing tool that allows users to upload multiple video clips, trim each video clip, then combine the trimmed video clips in a user-specified order to create a new video, and finally export the spliced video.",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the video upload functionality properly implemented?",
+      "description": "Check if the code implements a robust video upload system that supports multiple file formats (MP4, WebM, MOV, etc.), handles large file uploads with chunking, shows clear progress indicators, and validates video files before processing. Deduct 5 points if there's no format validation, 3 points if progress indicators are missing, and 5 points if there's no error handling for upload failures. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Is the video trimming functionality complete and accurate?",
+      "description": "Evaluate if the trimming interface provides frame-accurate in/out point selection, real-time preview of trimmed sections, and maintains original video quality. Check if the code handles keyframes correctly to prevent corrupt exports. Score 0 if trimming is not implemented, 5 if basic trimming exists but lacks precision or preview, and 10 if the implementation is complete with frame-accurate controls and real-time feedback.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Is the video sequencing/splicing mechanism properly implemented?",
+      "description": "Examine whether the code allows users to rearrange trimmed clips in a timeline, preview the sequence before final export, and maintains video and audio synchronization across splices. Check for transition handling between clips. Deduct 5 points if reordering functionality is missing, 3 points if preview before export isn't available, and 5 points if audio-video synchronization issues exist. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Is the video export functionality robust and complete?",
+      "description": "Assess if the export system offers quality/format options, provides clear progress indicators, handles errors gracefully, and successfully combines all clips without quality loss. The code should use efficient rendering approaches (e.g., WebAssembly for client-side or proper server rendering). Score 10 points for complete implementation with multiple export options, 5 for basic export with limited options, and 0 if export functionality is broken or missing.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 4,
+      "title": "Is the code robust?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as unsupported codecs, corrupted video files, browser compatibility issues, memory constraints, 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 smart trimming 2. Automated scene detection 3. Basic color correction/filters 4. Audio normalization across clips). 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 player implementations) 2. Function modules unrelated to video trimming/splicing (e.g., a built-in image editor) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., heavy 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/state management layers), memory management (especially for video data), and asynchronous processing patterns. Deduct 5 points if global state pollution is found; deduct 5 points if video processing is not handled in background threads or workers; deduct 5 points if memory leaks occur when handling multiple videos. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 8,
+      "title": "Does the interface vision meet professional design standards?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the video editor UI follows professional design principles: 1) Clear timeline representation with visible trim handles 2) Intuitive drag-and-drop for reordering 3) Professional scrubbing and preview controls 4) Responsive layout that works across device sizes. Deduct 3 points for confusing trimming controls, 5 points for unintuitive timeline representation, and 5 points for poor preview functionality. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 9,
+      "title": "Is the dynamic interaction smooth and seamless?",
+      "description": "Judge whether the video editing experience feels responsive: 1) Timeline scrubbing is fluid without noticeable lag 2) Trim point adjustment has immediate visual feedback 3) Preview generation occurs within acceptable timeframes 4) Export progress is clearly communicated. Deduct 5 points for laggy timeline performance, 3 points for delayed feedback when trimming, and 5 points for confusing export status indicators. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    }
+  ],
+  "class": "Multimedia Editing-Video Production",
+  "difficulty": "hard"
+}

package/library/multimedia_editing-video_production/video-watermark-tool-design.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 464,
+  "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. Design a video watermark tool that allows users to upload a video, drag and drop to select a watermark image, position the watermark on the video, set its display time, and finally generate and export the watermarked video.",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the video upload and processing functionality fully implemented?",
+      "description": "Review whether the code supports multiple video formats (MP4, AVI, MOV, WebM) with proper format validation and file size limits. Check if video metadata extraction (duration, resolution, frame rate) is implemented correctly. Evaluate progress tracking during upload and proper error handling for corrupted files. Score 0 if basic upload is missing, 5 if only single format supported with basic validation, and 10 if comprehensive multi-format support with robust error handling is implemented.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Is the drag-and-drop watermark positioning system accurately implemented?",
+      "description": "Check whether the drag-and-drop interface provides real-time visual feedback with accurate coordinate mapping to video frames. Evaluate if the system includes snap-to-grid functionality, boundary constraints, and precise pixel-level positioning. Review if watermark scaling and rotation controls are implemented with proper aspect ratio maintenance. Deduct 5 points if drag boundaries are not enforced, 3 points if visual feedback is laggy (>50ms delay). Full score requires smooth real-time preview with sub-pixel accuracy.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Is the watermark timing and display control system properly designed?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the timeline interface allows precise start/end time selection with frame-accurate control. Check if the system supports multiple watermark layers with independent timing controls and z-index management. Review fade-in/fade-out effects implementation and keyframe-based animation support. Deduct 5 points if timing granularity exceeds 100ms, 3 points if timeline scrubbing is not smooth. Full score requires professional-grade timeline control with multi-layer support.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Is the video export and rendering engine efficiently implemented?",
+      "description": "Check whether the rendering engine supports hardware acceleration (WebGL/WebAssembly) for efficient processing. Evaluate output quality options (resolution, bitrate, codec selection) and progress tracking during export. Review whether the system maintains original video quality while properly compositing watermarks. Deduct 5 points if export time exceeds 3x video duration for standard processing, 5 points if output quality degradation is noticeable. Full score requires optimized rendering with quality preservation.",
+      "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 during processing, network interruption during upload, invalid watermark images, 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. Batch watermarking for multiple videos 2. Animated watermarks with transparency effects 3. Template library with preset watermark styles 4. Real-time preview with playback controls). 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 handlers coexisting) 2. Function modules unrelated to video watermarking (e.g., built-in video editing suite) 3. Fancy effects that affect processing performance (e.g., excessive real-time filters during preview). Deduct 3 points for each redundancy found, and directly deduct 10 points if the core watermarking 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), memory management for large video files, and proper cleanup of temporary resources. Deduct 5 points if memory leaks are found or Web Workers are not used for heavy processing; deduct 5 points if the code duplication rate is too high (over 30%); deduct 5 points if no progress indicators are implemented for long operations. 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 with proper contrast ratios for video editing interface 2) Proper layout spacing with clear separation between video preview, controls, and timeline 3) Professional typography with readable labels and timestamps. Deduct 3 points for each crowded control panel, 5 points for poor video-to-UI contrast that affects usability, and 5 points for chaotic timeline or 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 professional video editing standards: 1) Drag operations provide immediate visual feedback ≤ 16ms (60fps) 2) Video preview updates maintain smooth playback without stuttering 3) Timeline scrubbing responds instantly with frame-accurate seeking 4) Export progress updates smoothly without blocking UI. Deduct 5 points for each laggy interaction, 3 points for choppy video preview during watermark positioning, and 5 points for unresponsive controls during processing. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    }
+  ],
+  "class": "Multimedia Editing-Video Production",
+  "difficulty": "hard"
+}

package/library/multimedia_editing-video_production/web-based-video-editing-tool.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 981,
+  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Be sure to provide executable code whenever possible. Can you help me generate code for a web-based video editing tool?\n\nHTML web version\nFunctional requirements:\n- Ability to upload videos\n- Automatic video editing\n- Save videos\n- Text-to-speech with popular streamer voices\n- Automatic subtitle extraction",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the video upload and processing functionality fully implemented?",
+      "description": "Review whether the code implements multi-format video upload (MP4, AVI, MOV, WebM) with proper file validation, progress tracking, and preview generation. Check if video metadata extraction (duration, resolution, codec) is included and if chunked upload for large files is supported. Score 0 if basic upload is missing, 5 if only simple upload works, and 10 if all formats are supported with robust error handling.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Is the automatic video editing engine properly implemented?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the automatic editing includes intelligent scene detection, transition effects, and timeline management. Check if the system can perform cuts, trims, and arrange clips automatically based on content analysis. Must include video rendering pipeline and export functionality. Deduct 5 points if no timeline visualization, 3 points if rendering is unstable. Full score requires AI-powered editing suggestions.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Is the text-to-speech with voice cloning accurately implemented?",
+      "description": "Check whether the TTS system includes multiple voice models, proper audio synthesis, and voice quality controls. Evaluate if popular streamer voice simulation is implemented with acceptable quality (>80% similarity). Must include audio waveform visualization and timing synchronization with video. Deduct 5 points if voice quality is poor, 3 points if no voice selection options.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Is the automatic subtitle extraction and synchronization system complete?",
+      "description": "Review whether the subtitle system uses speech recognition APIs (Web Speech API or external services) with accurate timing synchronization. Check if subtitle editing, styling (fonts, colors, positioning), and export formats (SRT, VTT) are supported. Must include real-time preview and manual correction capabilities. Deduct 5 points if timing is off by >500ms, 3 points if no styling options.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 4,
+      "title": "Is the code robust?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (large file uploads, unsupported formats, network interruption, memory limitations, browser compatibility issues) and provide friendly error prompts or recovery mechanisms. Code with strong robustness should effectively handle edge cases with graceful degradation, giving 10 points. If 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 thumbnail generation 2. Real-time collaboration editing 3. Social media format optimization 4. Background music auto-sync 5. Voice emotion detection). 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 editing (e.g., built-in games or social features) 3. Performance-heavy effects that don't add value (e.g., excessive animations during rendering). Deduct 3 points for each redundancy found, and directly deduct 10 points if core functions are interfered with by redundant code.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 7,
+      "title": "Does the code have engineering quality?",
+      "description": "Review modular design (separating video processing/UI/storage layers), proper error handling, and performance optimization. Check for memory management during video processing and proper cleanup of resources. Deduct 5 points if global state pollution or poor separation of concerns; deduct 5 points if code duplication rate exceeds 30%; deduct 5 points if no performance optimization for large video files. Full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 8,
+      "title": "Does the interface vision meet professional design standards?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the video editing interface follows professional video editing software standards: 1) Clear timeline visualization with proper scaling 2) Intuitive tool placement and iconography 3) Proper contrast ratios for video preview 4) Consistent spacing following 8px grid system 5) Professional color scheme suitable for long editing sessions. Deduct 3 points for each cluttered UI element, 5 points for poor video preview quality, and 5 points for confusing navigation. Full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 9,
+      "title": "Is the dynamic interaction smooth and seamless?",
+      "description": "Judge whether video editing interactions are responsive and professional: 1) Video scrubbing responds within 100ms 2) Timeline drag-and-drop operations are smooth 3) Preview playback has no stuttering 4) Export progress is clearly indicated 5) Tool switching provides immediate feedback. Deduct 5 points for each laggy interaction, 3 points for unclear loading states, and 5 points for missing keyboard shortcuts for common operations. Full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    }
+  ],
+  "class": "Multimedia Editing-Video Production",
+  "difficulty": "hard"
+}

package/library/multimedia_editing-video_production/web-dynamic-graphic-video-tool.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 620,
+  "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 whenever possible. ======== ROLE ========\nYou are an experienced code expert. Given a software development requirement description, you are required to generate project code based on the project requirements. Strictly follow the rules to help users generate the complete project code with simple and easy-to-understand language comments. Do not output anything else.\n\n======== OUTPUT RULES ========\n1. You will always generate complete, runnable project code. Please ensure the project is complete and executable\n2. Ensure that all code files you output are complete, do not omit 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 include external API access or need to use user data (images, videos, audio, etc.), please provide simulated data\n\n======== PROJECT REQUIREMENTS ========\nCreate a web-based dynamic graphic video generation tool where users can add various graphics (such as shapes, lines, icons), set animation paths and effects for them, adjust animation order and rhythm, and export as a video file. Provide real-time preview functionality.",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the graphic element creation system fully implemented?",
+      "description": "Review whether the code allows users to add various graphics (shapes, lines, icons) with customizable properties (size, color, position, etc.). Check if the implementation includes a comprehensive library of shapes and if custom SVG/path imports are supported. Score 0 if basic shapes creation is missing, 5 if only basic shapes with limited customization are available, and 10 if a complete graphic creation system with extensive customization options is implemented.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Is the animation path and effect system robust?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code implements a complete animation system that allows setting paths (linear, curved, custom), timing functions (ease-in, ease-out, bounce, etc.), and transformation effects (scale, rotate, opacity, etc.). Check if keyframe-based animation is supported with editable control points. Deduct 5 points if only basic linear animations are implemented, 3 points if timing functions are limited, and 2 points if transformation options are restricted. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Is the animation sequencing and timing control comprehensive?",
+      "description": "Check whether the code provides a timeline interface for adjusting animation order, duration, delays, and overlaps. Examine if the system supports grouping animations, setting dependencies (one animation triggering another), and creating complex sequences. Verify if there's a mechanism to preview specific segments. Deduct 5 points if animations can't be reordered, 3 points if timing adjustments are limited, and 2 points if there's no way to create animation dependencies. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Is the video export functionality properly implemented?",
+      "description": "Assess whether the code includes a working video export system that can render animations to a standard video format with various quality options. Check if the implementation handles the complex process of converting DOM/Canvas animations to video frames, maintaining consistent frame rates, and showing export progress. Verify support for different resolutions and formats. Score 0 if export is missing, 5 if only basic screenshot/GIF export is available, and 10 if full video export with options is implemented.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 4,
+      "title": "Is the code robust?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as large file imports, memory constraints with complex animations, browser compatibility issues, etc.) and provide friendly error prompts or recovery mechanisms. Code with strong robustness should prevent project data loss during crashes, implement undo/redo functionality, and include proper error boundaries. Give 10 points for comprehensive error handling, 5 points for basic error handling, and 0 points if no exception handling exists.",
+      "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 animation suggestions 2. Audio synchronization capabilities 3. Template library with preset animations). 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 animation functions (e.g., multiple tweening engines coexisting) 2. Function modules unrelated to animation creation (e.g., unnecessary social features) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., excessive background effects in the editor itself). 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 logic/UI layers), unit test coverage, and build process automation. Check for performance optimizations like canvas rendering vs. DOM manipulation, worker threads for heavy processing, and efficient data structures for animation state. 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). Check if the UI provides clear workspace separation between canvas, timeline, and tools panels. 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) Real-time preview updates without noticeable lag 3) Drag-and-drop interactions for timeline adjustments feel natural with proper snapping. Check if the scrubbing through timeline provides smooth frame updates and if canvas transformations (zoom, pan) are fluid. Deduct 5 points for each operation without feedback, 3 points for visual stuttering during preview, and 5 points for unintuitive interaction patterns. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    }
+  ],
+  "class": "Multimedia Editing-Video Production",
+  "difficulty": "hard"
+}

package/library/multimedia_editing-video_production/webgl-short-video-effects-editor.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 681,
+  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. I am a code expert. Please use my professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Try to ensure the generated code is executable. \n\n======== ROLE ========\nYou are an experienced code expert. I am providing you with a software development requirement description and asking you to generate project code according to this requirement. Strictly follow the rules to help users generate complete project code that is fully commented in simple and easy-to-understand language. Don't output anything else.\n\n======== OUTPUT RULES ========\n1. You should always generate complete, runnable project code. Please ensure the project is complete and executable\n2. Ensure all code files you output are complete, don't omit any code\n3. Before final output, carefully review and check all code to evaluate its executability. If the code cannot run or contains errors, it needs to be regenerated\n4. If the requirements include external API access or user data (images, videos, audio, etc.), please provide mock data\n\n======== PROJECT REQUIREMENTS ========\nPlease develop a short video effects editor that allows users to upload short videos and add various filter effects (such as black and white, vintage, warm tone, etc.) and dynamic stickers through WebGL. Users should be able to add text, emojis, and animation effects to the video through drag and drop, with precise control over their appearance time points and duration. Finally, support exporting the edited video in mp4 format.",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the video upload and processing system fully implemented?",
+      "description": "Review whether the code accurately implements video file upload functionality through HTML5 File API, includes video format validation (mp4, webm, mov), and proper video loading with metadata extraction. Check if video frame extraction and canvas rendering are properly implemented for editing operations. Score 0 if basic video loading is not implemented, 5 if only basic upload without processing is implemented, and 10 if complete video processing pipeline including frame-by-frame manipulation is included.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Are WebGL filter effects comprehensively implemented?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the WebGL implementation includes multiple shader-based filter effects (black and white, vintage, warm tone, etc.) with proper fragment and vertex shader programs. Check if the rendering pipeline efficiently processes video frames in real-time without performance degradation. Deduct 5 points if filters cause significant frame drops (>16.67ms per frame), and 3 points if shader compilation errors occur. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Is the timeline-based editing system with precise control implemented?",
+      "description": "Check whether the code includes a comprehensive timeline interface allowing users to control appearance time points and duration of effects/stickers/text with frame-level precision. Evaluate if drag-and-drop functionality is properly implemented with collision detection and snap-to-grid features. Deduct 5 points if timeline synchronization is inaccurate (>100ms deviation), and 3 points if drag-and-drop operations lack visual feedback. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Is the video export functionality with MP4 encoding properly constructed?",
+      "description": "Assess whether the code implements complete video export functionality using MediaRecorder API or WebCodecs API to generate MP4 files. Check if the export process maintains video quality, applies all effects correctly, and provides progress feedback. Deduct 5 points if export fails to preserve applied effects, and 3 points if no progress indication is provided during export. Give 10 points if fully functional with quality preservation.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 4,
+      "title": "Is the code robust?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as unsupported video formats, large file uploads, WebGL context loss, memory overflow, 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 preview with smooth playback 2. Advanced animation keyframe editor 3. Custom shader effect creator 4. Batch processing capabilities 5. Audio waveform visualization). 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 pipelines coexisting) 2. Function modules unrelated to video editing (e.g., built-in social sharing) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., unnecessary particle systems during editing). Deduct 3 points for each redundancy found, and directly deduct 10 points if the core video editing 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/effects layers), WebGL resource management, and memory leak prevention. Deduct 5 points if WebGL context is not properly managed or shaders leak memory; deduct 5 points if the code duplication rate is too high (over 30%); deduct 5 points if video processing blocks the main thread without proper worker implementation. 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 video editing interface principles: 1) Professional dark theme with high contrast for video editing 2) Clear timeline visualization with proper scaling 3) Intuitive tool panels with recognizable icons 4) Proper video preview aspect ratio maintenance. Deduct 3 points for each poorly designed UI element, 5 points for unprofessional color schemes that strain eyes during long editing sessions, and 5 points for confusing timeline or control layouts. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 9,
+      "title": "Is the dynamic interaction smooth and seamless?",
+      "description": "Judge whether the video editing interactions conform to professional standards: 1) Real-time preview maintains 30fps during editing 2) Drag operations provide immediate visual feedback 3) Timeline scrubbing is smooth without stuttering 4) Effect application shows instant preview. Deduct 5 points for each laggy interaction, 3 points for delayed preview updates (>200ms), and 5 points for non-responsive timeline controls. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    }
+  ],
+  "class": "Multimedia Editing-Video Production",
+  "difficulty": "hard"
+}

package/library/multimedia_editing-video_production/webpage-upload-add-watermark-to-videos.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 944,
+  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Be careful to ensure that the code you generate is executable. Create a webpage code that supports uploading videos and adding digital watermarks to videos.",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the video upload functionality fully implemented?",
+      "description": "Check if the code provides a complete video upload solution including file selection, validation, progress indication and error handling. The implementation should handle various video formats (MP4, WebM, MOV, AVI) and validate file size. Score 0 if upload functionality is missing, 5 if only basic upload is implemented without validation, and 10 if it includes comprehensive validation, progress tracking and error handling.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Is the digital watermark application functionality properly implemented?",
+      "description": "Evaluate if the code successfully applies watermarks to videos. It should support text watermarks (with customizable font, size, color, opacity) and image watermarks (with position control, scaling and opacity adjustment). Check if the watermark preview is available before processing. Deduct 5 points if only one type of watermark is supported, and 3 points if customization options are limited. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Is the video processing mechanism efficient and properly implemented?",
+      "description": "Assess the video processing implementation. The code should use efficient methods like HTML5 Canvas, WebAssembly or Web Workers to handle video frames without freezing the UI. Check if it supports batch processing and provides processing status feedback. Deduct 5 points if processing is done entirely on the main thread causing UI blocks, 3 points if there's no optimization for large files. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Is the watermarked video preview and download functionality implemented?",
+      "description": "Check if users can preview the watermarked video before downloading and if download functionality is properly implemented. The preview should be responsive and the download should retain original video quality while including the watermark. The code should support different output formats and quality settings. Deduct 5 points if preview is missing, 3 points if download options are limited. 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, browser compatibility issues, memory limitations, processing 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. Real-time watermark positioning using drag-and-drop 2. Animated watermarks support 3. Watermark templates gallery 4. Batch processing with different watermarks). 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 loaded) 2. Function modules unrelated to watermarking (e.g., a built-in social sharing system) 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 UI/processing logic/file handling), error handling coverage, and resource 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 memory leaks could occur during video processing. 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) Upload and processing feedback is clear and timely 2) Transition animation duration controlled between 300-500ms 3) Clear visual indication of processing stages. Deduct 5 points for each operation without feedback, 3 points for jarring transitions between processing steps, and 5 points for confusing workflow that doesn't guide users through the watermarking process. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    }
+  ],
+  "class": "Multimedia Editing-Video Production",
+  "difficulty": "medium"
+}