@getollie/cli 0.0.1

package/library/svg_generation-svg_images/svg-bar-chart-analytics-trends.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 148,
+  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate, professional responses. Make sure the code you provide is executable for display.\n\nPlease help me implement this SVG image using code. A detailed bar chart displaying analytics data, featuring rising green and orange bars with arrows indicating upward and downward trends.",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Are the core SVG bar chart visual elements correctly implemented?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code properly implements SVG bars with accurate heights proportional to data values. Check if the bars have proper width, positioning, and spacing. Score 0 if bars are missing, 5 if implemented but with positioning issues, and 10 if bars are rendered properly with correct dimensions and placement.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Is the color coding for upward and downward trends correctly implemented?",
+      "description": "Check if green bars represent upward trends and orange bars represent downward trends as specified. Verify that the colors are properly applied based on the data trend direction. Deduct 5 points if colors are reversed or inconsistent, and 3 points if colors are not accessible (contrast ratio below 4.5:1). The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Are the trend arrows correctly implemented and positioned?",
+      "description": "Review if upward and downward arrows are properly implemented and positioned above each bar according to their trend. Check if arrow shapes are clear, properly sized, and consistently applied. Deduct 5 points if arrows are missing for some bars, 3 points if arrows are inconsistently styled, and 5 points if arrows contradict the trend direction. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Is the chart's data visualization accurately representing the analytics data?",
+      "description": "Evaluate if the chart properly scales data values proportionally and if there's appropriate data labeling (values, percentages, etc.). Check if the implementation includes axes with proper scales and gridlines. Deduct 5 points if data scaling is incorrect, 3 points if data labels are missing, and 5 points if axes/gridlines are improperly implemented or missing. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 4,
+      "title": "Is the code robust?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle edge cases like zero values, negative values, or extremely large values without breaking the visualization. Check if the code includes input validation and error handling. 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. Animated transitions when data changes 2. Interactive tooltips showing detailed analytics 3. Responsive design that adapts to container size). 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 visual elements 2. Function modules unrelated to the bar chart visualization 3. Fancy effects that affect performance or readability. Deduct 3 points for each redundancy found, and directly deduct 10 points if the core visualization is interfered with by redundant code.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 7,
+      "title": "Does the code have engineering quality?",
+      "description": "Review modular design (such as separating data processing from visualization), reusability of components, and clean code practices. Deduct 5 points if global namespace pollution is found or if code is not organized into functions; deduct 5 points if the code duplication rate is too high (over 30%); deduct 5 points if there are no 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 overall design follows modern data visualization principles: 1) Harmonious color matching beyond just green and orange 2) Proper layout spacing between chart elements 3) Professional typography for labels and titles. Deduct 3 points for each crowded visual element, 5 points for poor color contrast or accessibility issues, 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 chart includes appropriate interactions: 1) Hover states on bars with visual feedback ≤ 100ms 2) Smooth transitions when displaying data/tooltips 3) Clear visual focus on important data points. Deduct 5 points for each interaction without feedback, 3 points for jerky animations, and 5 points for hard-to-discover interactive elements. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    }
+  ],
+  "class": "SVG Generation-SVG Images",
+  "difficulty": "medium"
+}

package/library/svg_generation-svg_images/svg-binoculars-browsing-searching-magnifying.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 168,
+  "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 when possible. Please help me implement the following requirement using SVG code: create an image of me using binoculars to view and search with lens and zoom functionality.",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the core SVG binocular image properly implemented?",
+      "description": "Check if the SVG code creates a recognizable human figure using binoculars with proper proportions and visual clarity. The figure should be visually identifiable as a person looking through binoculars. Deduct 5 points if the human silhouette lacks definition, 5 points if the binoculars are not anatomically correct in positioning (should be held at eye level), and 5 points if the overall image lacks proper scaling. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Is the lens/zoom functionality interactive and working?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the zoom functionality allows users to simulate looking through binoculars with proper magnification effects. The code should implement at least 2x zoom factor and maintain image clarity during zooming. Deduct 5 points if zooming is static (non-interactive), 3 points if the zoom effect lacks smooth transitions, and 5 points if the lens distortion physics are unrealistic. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Is the binocular lens view implementation technically sound?",
+      "description": "Review whether the code implements proper lens visualization with features like circular/oval viewports, potential light reflection, and edge darkening to simulate real binocular optics. Check for proper use of SVG filters (like feGaussianBlur, feComposite) or clip-paths to create authentic lens effects. Deduct 5 points if the lens edges lack proper rendering, 3 points if no light/reflection effects are present, and 5 points if the twin-lens binocular effect is missing. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Is the search functionality implemented with visual feedback?",
+      "description": "Assess whether the code implements a search mechanism with proper visual indicators (e.g., crosshair, targeting reticle, or focus area) that responds to user interactions. The search area should highlight or otherwise indicate what's being viewed through the binoculars. Deduct 5 points if there's no visual search indicator, 3 points if the search area doesn't provide feedback, and 5 points if the search functionality isn't interactive. 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 resizing, touch vs. mouse input, SVG scaling issues) and provide graceful fallbacks. Code with strong robustness should manage viewport challenges, browser compatibility, and input device variations. Give 10 points for comprehensive error handling, 5 points for basic error handling, and 0 points if no error scenarios are addressed.",
+      "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. Dynamic lighting effects as the binoculars move 2. Motion blur during rapid panning 3. Lens flare effects when pointed at bright areas 4. Simulated focus adjustment). 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 visual effects (e.g., multiple zoom methods coexisting) 2. Feature elements unrelated to binoculars or search functionality 3. Excessive effects that affect performance (e.g., unnecessary filter effects that slow rendering). 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 drawing/interaction/effects code), code readability, and optimization techniques. Deduct 5 points if global variable pollution is found; deduct 5 points if the code has excessive duplication; deduct 5 points if SVG elements lack proper naming conventions or organization. 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 palette (consistent, with proper contrast) 2) Proper visual hierarchy (primary vs. secondary elements) 3) Professional proportions and alignment. Deduct 3 points for each visual inconsistency, 5 points for poor color choices affecting usability, and 5 points for misaligned or improperly scaled elements. 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) Movement response delay ≤ 100ms 2) Smooth binocular panning/zooming animations 3) Clear visual feedback during interactions. Deduct 5 points for laggy zoom transitions, 3 points for jittery movements during panning, and 5 points for confusing interaction patterns. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    }
+  ],
+  "class": "SVG Generation-SVG Images",
+  "difficulty": "hard"
+}

package/library/svg_generation-svg_images/svg-black-white-fish-long-tail.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 128,
+  "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. Please help me implement this SVG image using code: a black and white picture of a fish with a long tail.",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the fish anatomical structure accurately implemented?",
+      "description": "Review whether the SVG code accurately depicts the basic anatomical structure of a fish through path/polygon elements, including head, body, fins, and especially the prominent long tail feature. Check if the proportions are realistic and the body structure is coherent. Score 0 if basic fish shape is not recognizable, 5 if only basic outline is present, and 10 if all anatomical features including detailed fins, scales pattern, and elongated tail are properly rendered.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Is the black and white contrast effectively achieved?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the SVG implementation uses appropriate fill/stroke attributes to create clear black and white contrast without relying on color. Check if visual hierarchy is established through pure monochrome values (#000000, #ffffff, and grayscale variants). Deduct 5 points if any color other than black/white/gray is used, deduct 3 points if contrast ratio is insufficient for accessibility standards. Full score requires crisp black and white definition with proper shading gradients.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Is the long tail feature prominently and elegantly designed?",
+      "description": "Assess whether the fish's long tail is the visual centerpiece with flowing, graceful curves using smooth SVG path commands (cubic bezier curves recommended). The tail should demonstrate dynamic movement and occupy significant visual space. Deduct 5 points if tail appears stiff or geometric, deduct 3 points if tail proportions don't emphasize the 'long' characteristic. Full score requires fluid, organic tail design that enhances the overall composition.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Is the SVG code structure optimized and semantically correct?",
+      "description": "Check whether the SVG markup follows best practices with proper viewBox definition, organized grouping elements, and efficient path optimization. Evaluate if the code uses semantic grouping (<g> elements) for logical parts and includes appropriate metadata. Deduct 5 points if paths are not optimized (excessive anchor points), deduct 3 points if no proper viewBox is set, deduct 5 points if code structure is chaotic without logical grouping. Full score requires clean, maintainable SVG architecture.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 4,
+      "title": "Is the code robust?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as browser compatibility issues, scaling problems, rendering errors) and includes fallback mechanisms or error handling. Code with strong robustness should work consistently across different browsers and screen sizes, giving 10 points. If the robustness is average with minor compatibility issues, give 5 points, and if no error handling or compatibility considerations are present, give 0 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 5,
+      "title": "Are there any innovative features that are eye-catching?",
+      "description": "Check whether the code includes creative enhancements that elevate the basic fish illustration (e.g., 1. Subtle animation of tail movement 2. Interactive hover effects 3. Layered depth through multiple SVG groups 4. Artistic texture patterns within the fish body). Add 3 points for each well-implemented innovative feature that enhances visual appeal without compromising the core requirement (maximum 10 points).",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 6,
+      "title": "Are there any redundant features?",
+      "description": "Strictly check three types of redundancy: 1. Unnecessary complex paths that could be simplified 2. Features unrelated to the fish illustration (e.g., background elements, decorative borders) 3. Overly complex effects that don't enhance the black and white fish representation. Deduct 3 points for each redundancy found, and directly deduct 10 points if the core fish illustration is obscured by redundant elements.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 7,
+      "title": "Does the code have engineering quality?",
+      "description": "Review code organization, proper indentation, meaningful comments, and adherence to SVG best practices. Check for clean path definitions, consistent naming conventions, and reusable elements. Deduct 5 points if code is poorly formatted or lacks comments; deduct 5 points if paths are not optimized for file size; deduct 5 points if no consideration for maintainability. The full score requires professional-grade SVG implementation.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 8,
+      "title": "Does the visual composition meet professional design standards?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the fish illustration follows design principles: 1) Balanced composition with proper negative space 2) Clear focal hierarchy with the long tail as emphasis 3) Harmonious proportions following natural fish anatomy 4) Effective use of black and white contrast for visual impact. Deduct 3 points for each compositional weakness, 5 points for poor proportion relationships, and 5 points for ineffective contrast usage. The full score requires gallery-worthy artistic composition.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 9,
+      "title": "Is the visual clarity and detail precision exceptional?",
+      "description": "Judge whether the SVG renders with crisp, clean lines and appropriate level of detail: 1) Sharp edges without aliasing artifacts 2) Smooth curves with optimal anchor point placement 3) Consistent line weights and styling 4) Clear definition at various zoom levels. Deduct 5 points for each rendering quality issue, 3 points for inconsistent line weights, and 5 points for poor scalability. The full score requires pixel-perfect clarity at all viewing sizes.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    }
+  ],
+  "class": "SVG Generation-SVG Images",
+  "difficulty": "easy"
+}

package/library/svg_generation-svg_images/svg-bow-hunting-weapon.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 174,
+  "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 purposes.\n \nPlease help me implement the following request using SVG code. The requirement is to create a bow, which is a hunting weapon used for shooting arrows.",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the basic bow structure correctly implemented in SVG?",
+      "description": "Review whether the SVG code accurately renders the fundamental structure of a bow with proper curvature. The bow should include a curved limb structure (upper and lower limbs), bowstring, grip/handle section, and proper proportions. Score 0 if the basic bow shape is missing, 5 if only a simplistic representation is provided, and 10 if the bow includes detailed anatomical components.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Does the implementation include proper bowstring representation?",
+      "description": "Check whether the bowstring is properly represented with appropriate tension and attachment points to the limb tips. The string should appear taut and positioned correctly in relation to the bow's curve. Deduct 5 points if the string is missing or incorrectly positioned, and 3 points if the string-to-limb connection is unrealistic. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Is the bow's grip/handle area detailed and anatomically correct?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the grip/handle section is properly detailed with ergonomic design elements including a riser, arrow rest, and grip contours. A quality implementation should differentiate the handle material or color from the limbs. Deduct 3 points if the grip lacks detail, 5 points if the grip is anatomically incorrect, and 8 points if the grip is missing entirely. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Are visual enhancements such as textures or decorative elements included?",
+      "description": "Examine if the bow includes visual enhancements such as wood grain textures, decorative patterns, binding wraps, or other aesthetic elements that add realism without compromising the SVG performance. Score 0 if no visual enhancements are present, 5 for basic textures, and 10 for detailed and performance-optimized enhancements.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 4,
+      "title": "Is the code robust?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle display across different viewports, includes proper SVG namespace declarations, and uses appropriate SVG element attributes. Code with strong robustness should be able to effectively scale without distortion and render consistently across browsers. Give 10 points for highly robust code with viewBox, preserveAspectRatio and fallbacks. If the robustness is average, give 5 points, and if critical SVG attributes are missing, 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. Animation showing bow flexing 2. Interactive elements allowing users to draw the bow 3. Visual effects like shadows or highlights that add dimensionality). 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. Duplicate SVG elements that serve the same purpose 2. Excessive nested groups (<g>) without clear organization 3. Over-complicated path definitions that could be simplified. Deduct 3 points for each redundancy found, and directly deduct 10 points if the core rendering is affected by redundant code.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 7,
+      "title": "Does the code have engineering quality?",
+      "description": "Review the SVG structure (such as proper grouping of elements), use of reusable components (like symbols or gradients), and code readability. Deduct 5 points if elements are not logically grouped; deduct 5 points if there's excessive coordinate hardcoding without variables or calculation; deduct 5 points if comments or meaningful IDs are missing. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 8,
+      "title": "Does the visual design meet professional standards?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the overall design follows modern design principles: 1) Balanced proportions between bow parts 2) Appropriate use of color and contrast 3) Clean lines and smooth curves without jagged edges. Deduct 3 points for each disproportion in visual elements, 5 points for poor color choices that affect visibility, and 5 points for jagged or visually disrupting path definitions. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 9,
+      "title": "Is the SVG optimized for performance?",
+      "description": "Judge whether the SVG implementation is efficiently coded: 1) Appropriate use of path commands with minimal points 2) Proper use of transform attributes instead of duplicate elements 3) Efficient use of gradients and filters without unnecessary complexity. Deduct 3 points for each unnecessarily complex path, 5 points for excessive DOM elements that could be combined, and 5 points for unoptimized filter effects that impact rendering. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    }
+  ],
+  "class": "SVG Generation-SVG Images",
+  "difficulty": "easy"
+}

package/library/svg_generation-svg_images/svg-boxer-fighting-stance.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 59,
+  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Be sure to ensure that the code you generate is executable for demonstration purposes. Please help me implement this SVG image using code. The boxer wore boxing gloves to fight and punch.",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the boxer character accurately implemented in SVG?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the boxer's body proportions are anatomically correct, with proper stance and posture for a fighting position. Check if the head, torso, arms, and legs are clearly defined using SVG shapes. Score 0 if the boxer is not recognizable, 5 if basic representation is present but proportions are off, and 10 if the boxer looks professionally designed with correct anatomical details.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Are the boxing gloves properly rendered?",
+      "description": "Examine if the boxing gloves are visually distinct elements with appropriate size, shape, and positioning on the boxer's hands. They should have the characteristic boxing glove shape with proper padding representation. Deduct 5 points if the gloves look unrealistic or poorly attached to the hands, and 3 points if the gloves lack defining details like wrist straps or shape contours. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Is the fighting/punching motion implemented?",
+      "description": "Check whether the SVG includes animation of punching motions using SVG animation elements (SMIL) or JavaScript. Evaluate the realism of the punch trajectory, timing, and the coordination between arm movement and body weight shift. Give 0 points if no animation is present, 5 points if basic animation exists but looks mechanical, and 10 points if the punching animation is fluid and realistic.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Is the SVG code structured efficiently?",
+      "description": "Analyze whether the SVG code uses appropriate grouping (<g> elements), reusable components (symbols or defs), and proper element hierarchy. Check if IDs and classes are used meaningfully. Give 10 points for optimized SVG structure with logical grouping and minimal redundancy, 5 points for basic structure with some organization, and 0 points for unstructured code with no logical grouping.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 4,
+      "title": "Is the code robust?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code handles browser compatibility issues, includes proper viewBox settings for responsiveness, and provides fallbacks for unsupported features. Code with strong robustness should be able to render consistently across major browsers, giving 10 points. If the robustness is average, give 5 points, and if critical compatibility issues 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 user clicks 2. Sound effects for punches 3. Opponent reaction to punches 4. Particle effects for impact). 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 could be simplified or grouped 2. Unnecessary attributes that don't contribute to the visual output 3. Excessive detail that impacts performance without visual benefit. Deduct 3 points for each redundancy found, and directly deduct 10 points if the core visualization is compromised by redundant code.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 7,
+      "title": "Does the code have engineering quality?",
+      "description": "Review modular design (such as separating drawing logic/animation/interaction), code reusability, and maintainability. Deduct 5 points if global variables pollute the namespace; deduct 5 points if the code has high duplication (repeated similar shapes or animations); deduct 5 points if the code lacks comments or clear structure. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 8,
+      "title": "Does the visual design meet professional standards?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the overall design follows modern design principles: 1) Consistent color palette appropriate for the subject matter 2) Proper proportion and balance in the overall composition 3) Appropriate level of detail for the intended use. Deduct 3 points for each visually jarring element, 5 points for poor color choices, and 5 points for unbalanced composition. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 9,
+      "title": "Is the animation smooth and realistic?",
+      "description": "Judge whether the boxing animations conform to physics and human movement: 1) Natural easing for acceleration/deceleration 2) Appropriate timing for punch speed (typically 300-500ms) 3) Secondary motion in the body when throwing punches. Deduct 5 points for each unnatural movement, 3 points for jerky transitions, and 5 points for static elements that should move in response to the action. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    }
+  ],
+  "class": "SVG Generation-SVG Images",
+  "difficulty": "hard"
+}

package/library/svg_generation-svg_images/svg-butterflyfish-with-swimming-animation.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 104,
+  "question": "You are a code expert, please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Ensure that the code you generate is executable for demonstration purposes.\nPlease help me implement the following requirements using code, specifically using SVG. The requirement is to create: Draw a simple butterflyfish, using <path> elements to create the shape, and add a swimming animation to it.",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the butterflyfish shape properly implemented using SVG <path> elements?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code uses SVG <path> elements to create an recognizable butterflyfish shape with proper anatomical features (distinctive body shape, fins, tail, eye, and characteristic butterfly pattern). Award 10 points for a complete, anatomically correct representation; 5 points if the fish is recognizable but missing some key features; 0 points if the shape is too abstract to identify as a butterflyfish.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Is the fish anatomy accurately represented in the SVG paths?",
+      "description": "Check if the SVG implementation includes all primary anatomical elements: pointed snout, triangular dorsal fin, pectoral fins, distinctive tail, and the characteristic eyespot pattern. For each anatomical element properly implemented, award 2 points (maximum 10 points). Deduct points for any missing or poorly executed elements.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Is the swimming animation properly implemented?",
+      "description": "Assess the swimming animation quality. A complete implementation should include: 1) Smooth side-to-side body movement (3 points), 2) Proper tail fin movement (3 points), 3) Continuous animation loop without jarring transitions (2 points), and 4) Natural speed and rhythm mimicking actual fish movement (2 points). Deduct points for stiff, unrealistic, or missing animation elements.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Is the SVG code optimized and well-structured?",
+      "description": "Evaluate code quality focusing on: 1) Efficient path definitions using appropriate SVG commands rather than excessive points (3 points), 2) Use of groups (<g>) to organize related elements (2 points), 3) Reuse of path definitions where appropriate (2 points), and 4) Clear structure separating shape definitions from animation definitions (3 points). Deduct points for inefficient or disorganized code.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 4,
+      "title": "Is the code robust?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common issues (such as browser resizing, viewport changes, or animation performance optimization). Code with strong robustness should scale properly, work across modern browsers, and not cause performance issues. Give 10 points for excellent robustness, 5 points for average implementation, and 0 points if serious issues are 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. Interactive elements that respond to user input, 2. Additional environmental elements like bubbles or coral, 3. Color changes or special 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. Redundant path definitions or duplicate elements, 2. Unnecessarily complex animation definitions, 3. Features unrelated to the butterflyfish or its animation. Deduct 3 points for each redundancy found, and directly deduct 10 points if the core implementation is obscured by redundant code.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 7,
+      "title": "Does the code have engineering quality?",
+      "description": "Review code organization (such as clear comments, meaningful variable names, proper element IDs), animation implementation efficiency, and compatibility across browsers. Deduct 5 points if global styles may interfere with external elements; deduct 5 points if animations are implemented inefficiently (e.g., using CSS when SMIL would be more appropriate or vice versa); deduct 5 points if browser prefixes are missing where needed. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 8,
+      "title": "Does the visual design meet professional artistic standards?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the overall design follows professional artistic principles: 1) Harmonious color scheme for the butterflyfish (3 points), 2) Proper proportions and balanced design (4 points), 3) Attention to detail in patterns and textures (3 points). Deduct points for garish colors, anatomically incorrect proportions, or overly simplistic representation lacking detail. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 9,
+      "title": "Is the animation smooth and natural?",
+      "description": "Judge whether the animation conforms to natural fish movement: 1) Smooth transitions between keyframes with proper easing (4 points), 2) Appropriate animation speed simulating natural swimming (3 points), 3) Coordinated movement between different body parts (3 points). Deduct points for jerky movements, unnatural speed, or disconnected animation between body parts. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    }
+  ],
+  "class": "SVG Generation-SVG Images",
+  "difficulty": "medium"
+}

package/library/svg_generation-svg_images/svg-chart-audio-supplier-device-count.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 112,
+  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate, professional responses. Make sure that the generated code is executable for demonstration.\nPlease help me implement the following requirement using code, creating it with SVG code. The requirement is to create a chart showing the number of devices used by audio suppliers.",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the SVG chart implementation correct and complete?",
+      "description": "Check if the SVG chart correctly implements all required elements (viewBox, dimensions, coordinate system). Verify that the chart includes proper axis lines, labels, and a title. Score 0 if basic SVG structure is missing, 5 if elements are present but incomplete, 10 if fully implemented with proper namespaces and scalability.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Is the data visualization for audio suppliers appropriate?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the chart type (bar chart, pie chart, etc.) is appropriate for comparing device numbers across audio suppliers. Check if the data representation is clear and allows for easy comparison. Deduct 5 points if the chart type is inappropriate for the data, 3 points if data labels are missing, and 2 points if the scale is misleading. Full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Are the visual elements properly implemented?",
+      "description": "Review whether the chart includes necessary visual elements like legends, tooltips, or data labels to clearly identify each audio supplier and their device count. Check if colors are used effectively to differentiate between suppliers. Deduct 5 points if legends are missing, 3 points if supplier labels are unclear, and 2 points if color differentiation is poor. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Is interactivity or responsiveness included in the SVG implementation?",
+      "description": "Assess whether the chart includes interactive features such as hover effects, click events for additional information, or responsive design that adapts to different screen sizes. Deduct 5 points if no interactivity is implemented, 3 points if hover states are missing, and 2 points if the chart doesn't scale properly on different devices. 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 missing data, zero values, extremely large values, etc.) and provide appropriate fallbacks or error handling. 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. Animated transitions between data updates 2. Filter functionality to focus on specific suppliers 3. Exportable chart as image). 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 visualization functions 2. Function modules unrelated to the required chart (e.g., unrelated animations) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., excessive gradients or filters). Deduct 3 points for each redundancy found, and directly deduct 10 points if the core functions are interfered with by redundant code.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 7,
+      "title": "Does the code have engineering quality?",
+      "description": "Review modular design (such as separating data logic from visualization), reusability of components, and code organization. Deduct 5 points if global variables are overused; deduct 5 points if the code duplication rate is too high (over 30%); deduct 5 points if there's no separation between data and presentation. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 8,
+      "title": "Does the interface vision meet professional design standards?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the chart design follows modern data visualization principles: 1) Harmonious color palette appropriate for data visualization 2) Proper spacing and margins around chart elements 3) Professional typography with readable font sizes and weights. Deduct 3 points for cluttered visual elements, 5 points for poor color choices that hinder data interpretation, and 5 points for illegible text. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 9,
+      "title": "Is the dynamic interaction smooth and seamless?",
+      "description": "Judge whether any dynamic effects (like transitions, tooltips, or hover states) conform to human perception characteristics: 1) Immediate visual feedback on interaction 2) Smooth animations with appropriate timing 3) Clear affordances for interactive elements. Deduct 5 points for each operation without feedback, 3 points for jerky animations, and 5 points for unclear interactive elements. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    }
+  ],
+  "class": "SVG Generation-SVG Images",
+  "difficulty": "medium"
+}

package/library/svg_generation-svg_images/svg-compass-wayfinding-directions.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 71,
+  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Take care to ensure the code you generate is executable for demonstration. Please help me implement this SVG image using code. A compass helps with wayfinding by giving directions to the location.",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the basic SVG compass structure correctly implemented?",
+      "description": "Check whether the SVG markup includes all essential components of a compass: circular base, cardinal direction indicators (N, S, E, W), and a direction needle. Score 0 if the basic structure is missing, 5 if basic elements are present but incomplete, and 10 if all compass elements are properly structured with appropriate SVG elements (circle, path, text, etc.).",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Is the compass visually accurate and properly positioned?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the compass elements maintain proper proportions and positioning (cardinal directions at correct angles, needle properly centered, etc.). Check that the viewBox is properly set. Deduct 5 points if elements are misaligned, 3 points if the proportions are inconsistent, and 5 points if the compass is not properly centered in the viewBox. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Is the compass needle interactive or animated?",
+      "description": "Assess whether the compass includes interactive features such as rotation on click/drag or automatic animation. Check if the needle movement is smooth and realistic (proper transform origin, transition effects). Deduct 5 points if animation is jerky, 5 points if interaction is unintuitive, and 8 points if the needle doesn't move at all. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Are cardinal and intercardinal directions properly labeled?",
+      "description": "Check whether the compass includes properly positioned text elements for direction labels (N, S, E, W, NE, NW, SE, SW). Evaluate text positioning, font size, and readability. Deduct 3 points for each missing cardinal direction, 2 points for each missing intercardinal direction, and 5 points if text positioning interferes with readability. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 4,
+      "title": "Is the code robust?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common edge cases (such as browser resizing, different screen sizes, SVG support checks, etc.) and provide fallbacks or responsive design. 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 edge cases 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. Geolocation integration to point to actual north, 2. Tilting/3D perspective effects, 3. Realistic materials or 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. Redundant SVG elements or unnecessary groupings, 2. Features unrelated to a compass functionality, 3. Excessive visual effects that impact performance (e.g., unnecessary gradients or filters). 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 structure (separation of SVG markup, CSS styling, and JavaScript functionality), code reusability, and maintainability. Deduct 5 points if inline styles are overused without CSS classes; deduct 5 points if JavaScript is not properly separated or organized; deduct 5 points if there's significant code duplication. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 8,
+      "title": "Does the interface vision meet professional design standards?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the compass design follows modern design principles: 1) Harmonious color scheme with appropriate contrast, 2) Clean visual hierarchy with proper emphasis on important elements, 3) Professional typography for direction labels. Deduct 3 points for poor contrast making elements hard to distinguish, 5 points for clashing colors, and 5 points for cluttered visual design. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 9,
+      "title": "Is the dynamic interaction smooth and seamless?",
+      "description": "Judge whether any animations or interactions conform to human perception characteristics: 1) Smooth transitions for needle movement (≤ 100ms response time), 2) Appropriate easing functions for realistic motion, 3) Clear visual feedback for user interactions. Deduct 5 points for jerky animations, 3 points for unrealistic motion physics, and 5 points for lack of visual feedback. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    }
+  ],
+  "class": "SVG Generation-SVG Images",
+  "difficulty": "easy"
+}