@getollie/cli 0.0.1

package/library/svg_generation-svg_images/black-and-white-person-profile-square-photo.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 152,
+  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Pay attention to ensure that the code you generate is executable. Please help me implement this SVG image using code: a black and white photo of a person's profile in a square.",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the SVG profile image correctly implemented with proper element usage?",
+      "description": "Check whether the SVG implementation uses appropriate elements (path, circle, rect, etc.) to create the profile silhouette. SVG should have proper viewBox and dimensions. Score 0 if no SVG is created, 5 if basic shapes are used but profile is not recognizable, 10 if the profile is clearly identifiable as a person's silhouette.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Is the black and white effect properly implemented?",
+      "description": "Evaluate if the code correctly implements the black and white effect using appropriate SVG attributes (fill, stroke) or filters. Check that no colors other than black, white, and grayscale values are used. Deduct 5 points if colors are used, and 3 points if grayscale implementation is inefficient. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Is the profile image proportioned correctly in a square frame?",
+      "description": "Verify that the SVG has equal width and height (perfect square), and the profile image is properly contained within the boundaries without awkward cropping. Deduct 5 points if the frame isn't square, 3 points if the profile doesn't fit properly within the frame. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Does the implementation include human facial features with appropriate detail?",
+      "description": "Check if facial features (nose, lips, eye, ear outline, etc.) are properly defined in the profile view. Score 0 if no facial features are present, 5 if features are basic/crude, 10 if features are well-defined and proportionally accurate to create a realistic profile silhouette.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 4,
+      "title": "Is the code robust?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle different viewport sizes without distortion, includes appropriate fallbacks for SVG-unsupported browsers, and has clean, well-organized code structure. 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 responsiveness or fallbacks 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. Subtle animation on hover 2. Creative use of SVG filters for texture effects 3. Interactive elements that enhance the profile). 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. Unnecessary nested groups or elements 2. Verbose path definitions that could be simplified 3. Excessive filters or effects that don't contribute to the black and white profile aesthetic. Deduct 3 points for each redundancy found, and directly deduct 10 points if the core requirements are obscured by redundant code.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 7,
+      "title": "Does the code have engineering quality?",
+      "description": "Review coding best practices like proper indentation, meaningful class/ID names, optimization of SVG paths, and appropriate documentation/comments. Deduct 5 points for excessive inline styles when classes would be more appropriate; deduct 5 points if the SVG has unnecessary precision in path coordinates; deduct 5 points if there are no comments explaining complex path structures. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 8,
+      "title": "Does the interface vision meet professional design standards?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the design follows principles of good silhouette design: 1) Clear contrast between figure and ground 2) Balanced negative space around the profile 3) Professional level of detail appropriate for SVG format. Deduct 3 points for poor figure-ground relationship, 5 points for awkward composition within the square, and 5 points for inappropriate level of detail (either too simplistic or needlessly complex). The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 9,
+      "title": "Is the file size and performance optimized?",
+      "description": "Judge whether the SVG implementation is optimized for web use: 1) SVG code is minified or reasonably compact 2) Unnecessary metadata is removed 3) Path data is optimized without losing visual quality. Deduct 5 points for each unoptimized aspect: bloated path data, unnecessary attributes, or inefficient implementation that would cause rendering performance issues. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    }
+  ],
+  "class": "SVG Generation-SVG Images",
+  "difficulty": "easy"
+}

package/library/svg_generation-svg_images/black-and-white-picture-of-a-sliding-door.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 62,
+  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate, expert responses. Be sure that any code you create is executable and can be properly displayed. Please help me implement this SVG image using code: a picture of a black and white picture of a sliding door.",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the SVG sliding door structure accurately implemented?",
+      "description": "Review whether the code correctly uses SVG elements to construct a sliding door structure, including door frames, door panels, tracks, and handles. Check if the geometric proportions are realistic and the structural relationships are logical. Score 0 if basic door structure is missing, 5 if only simple rectangles represent doors, and 10 if detailed architectural elements like frames, panels, tracks, and hardware are properly modeled with accurate proportions.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Is the black and white visual styling properly executed?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the SVG implements proper black and white styling with appropriate use of grayscale values, stroke weights, and fill patterns. Check for consistent monochrome palette, proper contrast ratios, and effective use of shadows/highlights to create depth. Deduct 5 points if colors other than black, white, and gray are used. Deduct 3 points if contrast is insufficient for clear visibility. Full score requires sophisticated grayscale gradients and shading.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Does the sliding door demonstrate functional sliding mechanics?",
+      "description": "Check whether the implementation includes interactive sliding functionality through CSS animations or JavaScript, with realistic door movement along tracks. Evaluate if the sliding motion follows proper physics (easing, momentum) and visual feedback. Score 0 if no sliding interaction exists, 5 if basic CSS transitions are present, and 10 if smooth, realistic sliding mechanics with proper track constraints and momentum are implemented.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Are architectural details and hardware components accurately represented?",
+      "description": "Assess whether the code includes realistic architectural details such as door handles, lock mechanisms, track systems, frame joints, and panel divisions. Check if hardware elements are proportionally correct and positioned logically. Deduct 3 points for missing essential hardware components, 5 points if proportions are unrealistic, and 2 points for each misplaced architectural element. Full score requires comprehensive detailing.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 4,
+      "title": "Is the code robust?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as invalid SVG parameters, browser compatibility issues, animation glitches, etc.) and provide graceful degradation. Code with strong robustness should effectively handle edge cases like viewport resizing, interaction conflicts, and rendering failures. Give 10 points if fully robust, 5 points if average robustness, 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 visual experience (e.g., 1. Realistic shadow casting based on light source 2. Multiple door panels with synchronized movement 3. Interactive sound effects for sliding motion 4. Perspective transformation for 3D effect). 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 SVG elements that don't contribute to the door visualization 2. Unnecessary animations or effects unrelated to sliding door functionality 3. Overly complex path definitions that could be simplified. Deduct 3 points for each redundancy found, and directly deduct 10 points if core door visualization is interfered with by redundant code.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 7,
+      "title": "Does the code have engineering quality?",
+      "description": "Review SVG code organization (such as proper grouping with <g> elements, reusable <defs> and symbols), clean markup structure, and maintainable CSS/JavaScript integration. Deduct 5 points if SVG structure is poorly organized or lacks semantic grouping; deduct 5 points if code duplication rate is too high (over 30%); deduct 5 points if inline styles are overused instead of CSS classes. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 8,
+      "title": "Does the interface vision meet professional design standards?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the SVG design follows professional architectural illustration principles: 1) Consistent line weights and stroke styles 2) Proper use of negative space and composition balance 3) Clear visual hierarchy with appropriate scale relationships 4) Professional drafting standards for technical illustration. Deduct 3 points for each inconsistent visual element, 5 points for poor composition balance, and 5 points for unprofessional line work quality. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 9,
+      "title": "Is the dynamic interaction smooth and seamless?",
+      "description": "Judge whether the sliding animations conform to realistic motion characteristics: 1) Smooth acceleration/deceleration curves 2) Proper timing functions (300-500ms for door sliding) 3) Visual continuity without jarring transitions 4) Responsive interaction feedback. Deduct 5 points for each choppy animation, 3 points for unrealistic motion physics, and 5 points for poor interaction responsiveness. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    }
+  ],
+  "class": "SVG Generation-SVG Images",
+  "difficulty": "medium"
+}

package/library/svg_generation-svg_images/black-white-outline-map-new-zealand.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 184,
+  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to provide accurate, technical responses. Make sure the code you generate is executable for display purposes. Please help me implement the following requirements using SVG code. The requirement is to create: a detailed black and white outline map of New Zealand.",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the New Zealand map outline accurately represented?",
+      "description": "Check if the SVG path accurately depicts New Zealand's shape including North Island, South Island, Stewart Island and other significant islands. The outline should be geographically accurate with proper proportions. Score 3 if only main islands are included, 7 if main islands with proper proportions, and 10 if all significant islands are accurately represented with correct geographical features.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Is the map properly scaled and positioned within the SVG viewBox?",
+      "description": "Evaluate if the map uses appropriate viewBox dimensions and positioning to display the entire country without unnecessary empty space or cropping. The aspect ratio should match New Zealand's actual geography (roughly 3:10 height to width). Deduct 3 points if there's significant empty space, 5 points if any part of the map is cropped, and 3 points if the aspect ratio is distorted.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Are internal geographical features included?",
+      "description": "Check whether important internal geographical features are included, such as major lakes (like Lake Taupo), significant mountain ranges, and regional boundaries. Score 3 if only outlines are present, 7 if major lakes and mountains are included, and 10 if detailed internal geography is represented.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Is the black and white styling appropriately implemented?",
+      "description": "Review the use of stroke and fill attributes to create a clean black and white map. Proper contrast should be maintained with appropriate line weights. Deduct 3 points for inconsistent line weights, 5 points for poor contrast choices, and 2 points for unnecessary color usage.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 4,
+      "title": "Is the code robust?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle browser rendering differences, has appropriate fallbacks, and includes proper SVG namespace declarations. Code with strong robustness should be cross-browser compatible and handle scaling appropriately. Give 10 points for robust implementation, 5 points for average implementation with minor issues, and 0 points if the SVG might fail in common browsers.",
+      "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. Hover effects for regional information 2. Smooth zoom or pan functionality 3. Interactive landmarks or points of interest). 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. Unnecessarily complex path definitions that could be simplified 2. Duplicate path segments or overlapping elements 3. Unused SVG elements or attributes that bloat the code. Deduct 3 points for each redundancy found, and directly deduct 10 points if the core representation is compromised by redundant code.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 7,
+      "title": "Does the code have engineering quality?",
+      "description": "Review modular structure (e.g., logical grouping of elements), appropriate use of SVG features (like defs, symbols, groups), and code readability. Deduct 5 points if no SVG groups (<g>) are used to organize related elements; deduct 3 points if paths are not optimized; deduct 5 points if the SVG lacks appropriate reusable components. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 8,
+      "title": "Does the visual representation meet professional cartographic standards?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the map follows professional cartographic principles: 1) Appropriate level of detail for the intended scale 2) Proper stroke weights that scale with view size 3) Clear visual hierarchy between different types of boundaries and features. Deduct 3 points for inconsistent detail levels, 5 points for poor stroke weight choices, and 5 points for unclear visual hierarchy. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 9,
+      "title": "Is the SVG optimized for performance and filesize?",
+      "description": "Judge whether the SVG implementation is efficient: 1) Path data uses appropriate precision without unnecessary decimal places 2) Path commands are optimized (using relative commands where appropriate) 3) No unnecessary nested groups or transformations. Deduct 3 points for excessive path precision, 4 points for unoptimized path commands, and 5 points for unnecessary nesting or transformations that impact performance. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    }
+  ],
+  "class": "SVG Generation-SVG Images",
+  "difficulty": "medium"
+}

package/library/svg_generation-svg_images/black-white-vector-microscope.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 194,
+  "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 when possible. Please help me implement the following requirement using code: create a black and white vector image of a microscope using SVG code.",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the microscope's basic structure accurately represented in SVG?",
+      "description": "Check if the code includes all essential components of a microscope (eyepiece, objective lenses, stage, body tube, base, light source). Score 0 if fewer than 3 components are present, 5 if most components are included but with proportional issues, and 10 if all components are present with proper proportions and accurate representation.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Does the SVG properly utilize vector graphics principles?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the implementation uses appropriate SVG elements (path, rect, circle, line) instead of bitmap approaches. Check if the code leverages vector advantages like precise shape definitions and mathematical curves. Deduct 3 points if basic shapes are used when paths would be more appropriate, 5 points if the implementation relies on overly complex paths when simpler elements would suffice, and 5 points if the microscope lacks smooth curves where needed.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Is the black and white requirement strictly followed?",
+      "description": "Verify that the SVG only uses black, white, and grayscale values (using fill, stroke with appropriate opacity/values). Deduct 5 points for each non-grayscale color used. Check that the creator effectively uses contrasting shades to create visual depth despite the monochrome limitation. Deduct 3 points if the image appears flat due to poor contrast management.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Are SVG viewBox and dimensions properly configured?",
+      "description": "Check if the SVG has appropriate viewBox settings ensuring the microscope is properly framed and scales correctly. Evaluate whether the coordinate system is efficiently used (not too much empty space, not cropped). Deduct 5 points if scaling issues are present, 5 points if significant parts of the drawing extend outside the viewBox, and 3 points if there's excessive unused space.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 4,
+      "title": "Is the code robust?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code follows SVG best practices (proper element nesting, attribute formatting, namespace declaration). Check if it works across major browsers without rendering issues. Deduct 5 points for browser-specific implementations, 3 points for improper nesting causing z-index issues, and 5 points for missing essential SVG attributes that affect rendering.",
+      "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 visualization (e.g., 1. Light ray effect from the microscope base 2. Detailed lens reflections 3. Interactive elements like hover effects). 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. Overlapping shapes that could be simplified 2. Unnecessary grouping of elements 3. Overly detailed components that complicate the SVG without adding visual value. Deduct 3 points for each redundancy found, and directly deduct 10 points if the redundant code significantly increases file size or affects rendering performance.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 7,
+      "title": "Does the code have engineering quality?",
+      "description": "Review code organization (logical grouping of SVG elements), meaningful IDs/classes, and code comments explaining complex paths. Deduct 5 points if SVG elements aren't logically grouped, 3 points if there's no descriptive naming for important elements, and 5 points if complex paths lack explanatory comments. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 8,
+      "title": "Does the visual representation meet professional design standards?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the microscope design follows proper visual principles: 1) Accurate proportions between components 2) Proper use of negative space 3) Clean, precise lines with appropriate stroke weights. Deduct 3 points for disproportionate elements, 5 points for inconsistent line weights, and 5 points for poor spatial arrangement of components. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 9,
+      "title": "Is the level of detail appropriate and well-balanced?",
+      "description": "Judge whether the microscope has appropriate detail level: 1) Important parts (lenses, focusing knobs) should have higher detail 2) Background elements should be simplified 3) Overall balance between simplicity and detail should be maintained. Deduct 5 points for excessive detail causing visual noise, 5 points for oversimplification of key components, and 3 points for inconsistent detail levels across the drawing. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    }
+  ],
+  "class": "SVG Generation-SVG Images",
+  "difficulty": "easy"
+}

package/library/svg_generation-svg_images/building-monument-statue.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 129,
+  "question": "You are a code expert, please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Take care to ensure that the code you generate is executable for demonstration. Please help me implement this SVG image using code. Building monument statue.",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the monument statue accurately implemented in SVG?",
+      "description": "Review whether the SVG code creates a recognizable monument statue with proper proportions and structure. Check for essential architectural elements (base, column, statue/figure on top). Score 0 if the monument is unrecognizable, 5 if basic elements are present but with significant inaccuracies, and 10 if the monument is detailed and visually accurate.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Is the SVG code properly structured with semantic element naming?",
+      "description": "Evaluate the structure of the SVG code: proper use of groups (<g>), logical organization of elements, semantic ID/class naming, and appropriate layering for visual hierarchy. Deduct 3 points if elements are not grouped logically, 3 points if naming conventions are inconsistent or meaningless, and 4 points if the code structure makes maintenance difficult. Full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Is the monument statue visually detailed with appropriate texturing and shadowing?",
+      "description": "Check if the SVG includes visual details like texture (using patterns or gradient fills), shadows (using filters or opacity), and dimensional effects that enhance realism. Score 0 if no texturing/shadowing exists, 5 if basic techniques are applied, and 10 if advanced SVG filters and effects are used to create realistic monument rendering.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Are viewBox and responsive design principles implemented?",
+      "description": "Assess whether the SVG uses proper viewBox attributes, preserveAspectRatio settings, and relative units to ensure the monument displays correctly across different screen sizes. Deduct 5 points if fixed dimensions are used instead of responsive techniques, 3 points if the viewBox is improperly configured, and 2 points if the monument distorts on resize. 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 browser compatibility issues, rendering in different contexts, and fallbacks for unsupported features). Code with strong robustness should include browser-specific prefixes where needed, fallbacks for filters/effects, and clean rendering across browsers, giving 10 points. If the robustness is average, give 5 points, and if no compatibility considerations exist, 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. Interactive elements that respond to hover/click 2. Subtle animations that bring the monument to life 3. Day/night lighting effects). 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. Unnecessary duplicate elements or path definitions 2. Over-detailed components that don't contribute to visual clarity 3. Excessive filters or effects that slow down rendering without significant visual improvement. Deduct 3 points for each redundancy found, and directly deduct 10 points if the core visual presentation is impaired by redundant code.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 7,
+      "title": "Does the code have engineering quality?",
+      "description": "Review code efficiency (optimized paths, use of symbols for repeated elements), readability (proper indentation, comments for complex sections), and maintainability (modular structure). Deduct 5 points if paths aren't optimized or have excessive nodes; deduct 3 points for lack of comments on complex sections; deduct 2 points if the code isn't modularized properly. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 8,
+      "title": "Does the visual design meet professional design standards?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the monument design follows professional aesthetic principles: 1) Harmonious color palette appropriate for stone/metal materials 2) Proper proportions following classical architectural principles 3) Attention to detail in ornamental elements. Deduct 3 points for inappropriate color choices, 4 points for disproportionate structural elements, and 3 points for lack of refined details. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 9,
+      "title": "Is the dynamic interaction smooth and seamless?",
+      "description": "Judge whether any included dynamic effects enhance the user experience: 1) Smooth transitions if animations are present 2) Purposeful interactivity that adds value 3) Performance optimization for complex visual elements. Deduct 4 points for jerky animations, 3 points for gratuitous effects that don't enhance understanding, and 3 points for interactions that lack visual feedback. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    }
+  ],
+  "class": "SVG Generation-SVG Images",
+  "difficulty": "medium"
+}

package/library/svg_generation-svg_images/burkina-faso-flag-with-star.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 131,
+  "question": "You are a coding expert, please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Make sure that the generated code can be executed for display whenever possible.\nPlease help me implement the following requirement using SVG code: Create an image of the Burkina Faso flag, featuring a star.",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the flag's aspect ratio correctly implemented?",
+      "description": "Check if the SVG dimensions maintain the official 2:3 ratio (height:width) of the Burkina Faso flag. The viewBox should be properly set to preserve this ratio. Score 0 if completely incorrect, 5 if approximate but not precise, 10 if exactly matching the official 2:3 ratio.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Are the flag colors accurately represented?",
+      "description": "Verify that the flag uses the exact official colors: red (#EF2B2D) for the top half, green (#009E49) for the bottom half, and yellow (#FCD116) for the star. Deduct 3 points for each incorrect color or if approximate colors are used without the correct hex codes. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Is the star correctly positioned and proportioned?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the yellow star is properly centered in the flag and correctly sized (approximately 1/3 of the flag's height). The star must have the proper shape with 5 points of equal length and correct angles. Deduct 5 points if the star is misplaced, 5 points if incorrectly sized, and 5 points if the star shape is malformed. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Is the SVG implementation efficient and well-structured?",
+      "description": "Review whether the SVG uses the most appropriate elements (rect for the rectangles, polygon or path for the star). Check for optimal implementation without unnecessary complexity or redundant elements. Deduct 5 points if inappropriate elements are used, 3 points if there are redundant shape definitions, and 5 points if the code is excessively verbose. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 4,
+      "title": "Is the code robust?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code includes proper SVG structure with namespaces, appropriate viewBox settings, and will render correctly across different browsers and screen sizes. Check if there are fallbacks or alternative rendering methods if needed. Code with strong robustness should handle various display environments effectively, giving 10 points. If the robustness is average, give 5 points, and if there are obvious rendering issues, 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 visual experience (e.g., 1. Subtle animation when hovering over the flag 2. Interactive elements that provide information about Burkina Faso 3. Responsive design adaptations). 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 graphical elements or shapes that could be simplified 2. Unnecessary attributes or styling that don't contribute to the flag's appearance 3. Excessive animation or effects that distract from the flag's representation. Deduct 3 points for each redundancy found, and directly deduct 10 points if the core representation is interfered with by redundant code.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 7,
+      "title": "Does the code have engineering quality?",
+      "description": "Review the code organization (such as proper indentation, meaningful variable names), efficiency (minimal use of path operations), and maintainability. Deduct 5 points if there's inconsistent formatting; deduct 5 points if there's excessive nesting or complexity; deduct 5 points if the code lacks comments or documentation for complex parts. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 8,
+      "title": "Does the implementation meet professional design standards?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the overall design follows flag design principles: 1) Clean edges and precise positioning 2) Proper contrast between elements 3) Faithful reproduction of the official flag. Deduct 3 points for each visible rendering artifact, 5 points for poor color contrast, and 5 points for significant deviation from the official design. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 9,
+      "title": "Is the code accessible and compatible?",
+      "description": "Judge whether the implementation includes accessibility features such as: 1) Appropriate title and description tags 2) ARIA attributes where applicable 3) Compatible with assistive technologies. Also check if the SVG works across different browsers and devices. Deduct 5 points for missing accessibility features, 3 points for compatibility issues, and 5 points if the SVG doesn't scale appropriately. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    }
+  ],
+  "class": "SVG Generation-SVG Images",
+  "difficulty": "medium"
+}

package/library/svg_generation-svg_images/camera-photo-shutter-svg-code.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 90,
+  "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.\nPlease help me implement the following requirement using code. Create a camera taking a photo with a shutter using SVG code.",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the SVG camera structure accurately implemented?",
+      "description": "Review whether the code accurately implements the camera body structure through SVG elements, including essential components like camera body, lens, viewfinder, and flash. The structure should be proportionally correct and visually recognizable as a camera. Score 0 if basic camera shape is missing, 5 if only basic rectangular body is implemented, and 10 if all major camera components are detailed and proportionally accurate.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Is the shutter mechanism fully functional?",
+      "description": "Check whether the shutter animation is implemented with realistic behavior, including shutter blade movement, opening/closing sequence, and proper timing. The shutter should have visual feedback that mimics real camera operation. Deduct 5 points if shutter animation is too simplistic, and 3 points if timing feels unnatural. Full score requires smooth, realistic shutter blade animation with proper easing functions.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Is the photo-taking interaction complete?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the photo-taking process includes complete user interaction flow: shutter button press, camera shake effect, flash animation, and capture confirmation. The interaction should feel responsive and provide clear visual feedback. Deduct 5 points if missing flash effect, 3 points if no camera shake simulation, and 2 points if shutter button lacks proper hover/active states. Full implementation scores 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Are the visual effects and animations polished?",
+      "description": "Check whether the code includes polished visual effects such as lens reflection, proper lighting gradients, shadow effects, and smooth transitions. The camera should have realistic material textures and professional visual appeal. Deduct 5 points if effects look flat or amateur, 3 points if gradients and shadows are poorly implemented, and 2 points if lens lacks realistic reflection effects. Full score requires professional-grade visual polish.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 4,
+      "title": "Is the code robust?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as rapid clicking, browser compatibility issues, animation interruptions, etc.) and provide stable performance across different scenarios. Code with strong robustness should effectively handle edge cases and maintain smooth operation. Give 10 points for excellent error handling, 5 points for average robustness, and 0 points if no exception handling is present.",
+      "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. Multiple camera angles or perspectives 2. Realistic sound effect integration 3. Photo preview/gallery feature 4. Different camera models/styles 5. Zoom functionality). 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 triggers for same effect) 2. Function modules unrelated to camera operation (e.g., built-in games or irrelevant widgets) 3. Overly complex effects that affect performance (e.g., excessive particle systems or heavy filters). Deduct 3 points for each redundancy found, and directly deduct 10 points if core camera functions are interfered with by redundant code.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 7,
+      "title": "Does the code have engineering quality?",
+      "description": "Review code organization, SVG structure cleanliness, CSS/JavaScript separation, and reusability. Check for proper use of SVG groups, clean DOM structure, and maintainable code patterns. Deduct 5 points if SVG structure is chaotic or lacks proper grouping; deduct 5 points if inline styles are overused instead of CSS classes; deduct 5 points if code lacks modularity and reusability. 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 realistic camera colors (blacks, silvers, grays) 2) Proper proportions and realistic scaling 3) Professional visual hierarchy and clean composition. Deduct 3 points for each unrealistic color choice, 5 points for poor proportional relationships, and 5 points for cluttered or unprofessional visual presentation. 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) Button press feedback delay ≤ 100ms 2) Shutter animation duration feels natural (typically 200-400ms) 3) Clear visual focus and interaction states 4) Smooth transitions without jarring movements. Deduct 5 points for each sluggish interaction, 3 points for unnatural animation timing, and 5 points for unclear interaction feedback. Full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    }
+  ],
+  "class": "SVG Generation-SVG Images",
+  "difficulty": "hard"
+}

package/library/svg_generation-svg_images/carboy-airlock-carbonation-homebrewing.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 43,
+  "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. Please help me implement this SVG image using code. The carboy has an airlock for carbonation during homebrewing.",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the carboy shape accurately represented in SVG?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the SVG code properly implements the characteristic flask-like shape of a carboy with appropriate proportions (wider bottom, narrowed neck). Check if the path/polygon elements use correct coordinates to create a visually accurate representation. Score 0 if the carboy shape is incorrect, 5 if basic shape is present but proportions are off, and 10 for accurate representation with proper curvature and dimensions.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Is the airlock mechanism correctly depicted with functional accuracy?",
+      "description": "Review whether the airlock is implemented with proper structural details showing the S-shaped or three-piece design that allows gas to escape but prevents air from entering. Verify if the implementation shows the water/liquid barrier inside the airlock. Deduct 5 points if the airlock is visually present but lacks functional detail, and deduct another 3 points if the connection to the carboy is incorrect or missing. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Does the SVG implement appropriate transparency and liquid level visualization?",
+      "description": "Check whether the code uses transparency effects to show the glass nature of the carboy and visibility of liquid contents. Evaluate if the liquid level is clearly depicted with proper opacity/fill attributes. Deduct 3 points if transparency is missing, 5 points if the liquid level is not visible or poorly implemented, and 3 points if the refractive properties of glass are not suggested visually. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Is the SVG code structured to demonstrate the carbonation process visually?",
+      "description": "Analyze whether the code includes visual elements representing the carbonation process, such as bubbles rising through the liquid and/or gas movement through the airlock. Check if animations are implemented to show the dynamic nature of fermentation. Score 0 if no carbonation visualization exists, 5 if static bubbles are present, and 10 if animations showing the active fermentation process are implemented.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 4,
+      "title": "Is the code robust?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the SVG code handles viewBox properly to ensure consistent display across different screen sizes. Check if there are fallback options for browsers with limited SVG support and whether clip-paths or masks are implemented correctly. Code with strong robustness should work consistently across browsers, giving 10 points. If the robustness is average with some browser compatibility issues, give 5 points, and if it fails in multiple environments, 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 visualization (e.g., 1. Interactive elements that respond to user hovering/clicking 2. Color changes indicating fermentation stages 3. Realistic liquid physics simulation). 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 SVG elements that contribute nothing visually 2. Excessive detail that increases file size without improving visual quality 3. Complex animations or effects that obscure the main subject rather than enhance it. Deduct 3 points for each redundancy found, and directly deduct 10 points if these redundancies significantly impact loading performance.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 7,
+      "title": "Does the code have engineering quality?",
+      "description": "Review SVG structure including proper grouping (<g> elements), meaningful IDs/classes, and code reusability. Check if the code uses variables for repeating values and implements efficient path commands rather than excessive points. Deduct 5 points if elements are not logically grouped; deduct 5 points if there's excessive repetition instead of reusing elements; deduct 5 points if the code lacks comments explaining complex parts. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 8,
+      "title": "Does the interface vision meet professional design standards?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the visual design follows modern SVG best practices: 1) Harmonious color scheme appropriate for glass and liquid representation 2) Proper balance of detail vs. minimalism 3) Professional use of gradients and lighting effects to suggest dimensional glass properties. Deduct 3 points for unrealistic coloring, 5 points for flat/unconvincing glass representation, and 5 points for poor lighting or shadow implementation. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 9,
+      "title": "Is the dynamic interaction smooth and seamless?",
+      "description": "Judge whether any included animations conform to natural physics: 1) Bubbles rise at realistic speeds 2) Liquid movement appears natural with appropriate easing 3) Any transitions are smooth with appropriate timing functions. Deduct 5 points for jerky animations, 3 points for unrealistic motion physics, and 5 points for animations that run too quickly or slowly to be convincing. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    }
+  ],
+  "class": "SVG Generation-SVG Images",
+  "difficulty": "hard"
+}