@getollie/cli 0.0.1

package/library/utility_tools-daily_office_tasks/countdown-mini-program-html-output.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 1677,
+  "question": "You are a coding expert, please utilize your professional knowledge to generate accurate, professional responses. Make sure the code you generate is executable when possible. Write a countdown mini program that outputs using HTML.",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the core countdown functionality properly implemented?",
+      "description": "Check whether the code accurately implements a countdown timer using JavaScript with proper time calculations and interval handling. Verify if the timer decreases at the correct rate (1 second intervals) and handles time properly. Score 0 if countdown functionality is missing, 5 if basic implementation with flaws, and 10 if it includes precise time tracking with proper interval management.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Does the countdown have proper start, pause, and reset controls?",
+      "description": "Evaluate if the code includes user controls to start, pause, and reset the countdown. Check if these controls work properly without glitches (e.g., rapid clicking causing timer anomalies). Score 0 if controls are missing, 5 if only partial controls are implemented, and 10 if all controls work flawlessly with proper event handling.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Is the countdown customizable by the user?",
+      "description": "Assess whether users can input or select their desired countdown duration. Check for input validation to prevent invalid time values (negative numbers, non-numeric inputs). Score 0 if customization is not possible, 5 if basic input exists but lacks validation, and 10 if there's comprehensive input handling with validation and user-friendly selection methods.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Does the countdown provide appropriate notifications when finished?",
+      "description": "Verify if the program provides clear visual and/or audible feedback when the countdown reaches zero. Check if the notification is noticeable but not intrusive. Score 0 if no completion notification exists, 5 if there's only basic text indication, and 10 if there are polished notifications (visual effects, sounds, or both) with an option to dismiss or acknowledge.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 4,
+      "title": "Is the code robust?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as rapid control clicking, browser tab switching, device sleep/wake cycles, etc.) and provide graceful degradation. Code with strong robustness should maintain accurate timing and state across these scenarios, giving 10 points. If the robustness is average, give 5 points, and if no error handling exists, 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. Visual progress indicators like circular progress bars 2. Themes or appearance customization 3. Saved presets for common countdown durations). 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 timing functions 2. Function modules unrelated to countdown functionality 3. Fancy effects that affect performance or distract from core functionality. Deduct 3 points for each redundancy found, and directly deduct 10 points if the core functions are interfered with by redundant code.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 7,
+      "title": "Does the code have engineering quality?",
+      "description": "Review code organization (separation of concerns between HTML, CSS, and JavaScript), variable naming conventions, and implementation efficiency. Deduct 5 points if global namespace pollution is found; deduct 5 points if there's significant code duplication; deduct 5 points if the code uses inefficient approaches (like excessive DOM manipulation in timing loops). 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 modern design principles: 1) Clean and consistent color scheme 2) Proper layout with adequate spacing between elements 3) Typography that's easy to read with appropriate sizing hierarchy. Deduct 3 points for each poorly positioned element, 5 points for clashing colors or poor contrast, and 5 points for difficult-to-read text. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 9,
+      "title": "Is the dynamic interaction smooth and responsive?",
+      "description": "Judge whether the interface responds smoothly to user interactions: 1) Button clicks register immediately 2) Timer updates smoothly without visual jitter 3) Transitions between states (running, paused, reset) are clear and intuitive. Deduct 5 points if interactions have noticeable lag, 3 points for jerky animations or updates, and 5 points if the current timer state is not clearly indicated. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    }
+  ],
+  "class": "Utility Tools-Daily Office Tasks",
+  "difficulty": "easy"
+}

package/library/utility_tools-daily_office_tasks/create-selector-for-discipline-json-data.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 1624,
+  "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.\n{\n  \"SubjectCategories\": \"Economics\",\n  \"category\": [\n    {\n      \"type\": \"Economics\",\n      \"subject\":[\n        \"Economics\",\n        \"Economic Statistics\",\n        \"National Economic Management\",\n        \"Resource and Environmental Economics\",\n        \"Business Economics\",\n        \"Energy Economics\"\n      ]\n    },\n    {\n      \"type\": \"Public Finance\",\n      \"subject\":[\n        \"Public Finance\",\n        \"Taxation\"\n      ]\n    },\n    {\n      \"type\": \"Finance\",\n      \"subject\":[\n        \"Finance\",\n        \"Financial Engineering\",\n        \"Insurance\",\n        \"Investment\",\n        \"Financial Mathematics\",\n        \"Credit Management\",\n        \"Economics and Finance\"\n      ]\n    },\n    {\n      \"type\": \"Economics and Trade\",\n      \"subject\":[\n        \"International Economics and Trade\",\n        \"Trade Economics\"\n      ]\n    }\n  ]\n},\nThis is my discipline's JSON data, and I need to create a selector for it",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the hierarchical selector structure correctly implemented?",
+      "description": "Review whether the code accurately implements a multi-level selector based on the JSON data structure (SubjectCategories -> type -> subject), including proper data parsing, category-subject relationship mapping, and cascading selection logic. Score 0 if the hierarchical structure is not implemented, 5 if only basic two-level selection is implemented, and 10 if the complete three-level cascading selector with proper data binding is fully functional.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Is the dynamic data rendering and state management implemented?",
+      "description": "Check whether the selector dynamically renders options based on JSON data with proper state management for selection changes. Evaluate if the component updates child options when parent categories change, maintains selection state consistency, and handles data mutations correctly. Deduct 5 points if state synchronization is missing, and 3 points if data binding is incomplete. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Is comprehensive interaction functionality provided?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the selector includes essential features like search/filter functionality, multi-selection support, clear/reset options, and proper validation. Check if users can easily navigate through categories and find specific subjects. Deduct 5 points if search functionality is not implemented, and 3 points if selection validation is missing. Give 10 points if all interactive features are fully implemented.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Is the component architecture well-structured and reusable?",
+      "description": "Check whether the selector is designed as a reusable component with proper props/configuration options, clean separation of concerns, and ability to handle different JSON data structures. Evaluate if the component can be easily integrated into different contexts and supports customization. Deduct 5 points if the component is not modular, and 3 points if configuration options are limited. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 4,
+      "title": "Is the code robust?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as malformed JSON data, empty categories, network errors, invalid selections, etc.) and provide friendly error prompts or fallback mechanisms. Code with strong robustness should gracefully handle edge cases like missing data properties or unexpected data types, 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 selector includes enhanced user experience features (e.g., 1. Auto-complete with fuzzy matching 2. Recently selected items memory 3. Keyboard navigation support 4. Export selected items functionality 5. Visual grouping with icons). 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 selection logic (e.g., multiple dropdown handlers) 2. Function modules unrelated to data selection (e.g., built-in data analytics) 3. Overly complex animations that affect selector performance. Deduct 3 points for each redundancy found, and directly deduct 10 points if core selection functionality is interfered with by redundant code.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 7,
+      "title": "Does the code have engineering quality?",
+      "description": "Review component modularity (separating data logic/view/event handling), proper naming conventions, and code organization. Deduct 5 points if global state pollution is found or proper component patterns are not used; deduct 5 points if code duplication rate is too high (over 30%); deduct 5 points if the component lacks proper documentation or type definitions. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 8,
+      "title": "Does the interface design meet professional standards?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the selector design follows modern UI principles: 1) Consistent visual hierarchy with proper typography 2) Adequate spacing and alignment (following 8px grid system) 3) Professional color scheme with sufficient contrast ratios 4) Clear visual states (hover, active, disabled, selected). Deduct 3 points for each poorly designed visual element, 5 points for accessibility issues, and 5 points for inconsistent styling patterns. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 9,
+      "title": "Is the interaction smooth and user-friendly?",
+      "description": "Judge whether the selector provides excellent user experience: 1) Immediate response to user actions (≤ 100ms) 2) Smooth dropdown animations (300-500ms duration) 3) Clear visual feedback for selections 4) Intuitive navigation flow 5) Proper focus management for accessibility. Deduct 5 points for each sluggish interaction, 3 points for confusing navigation patterns, and 5 points for poor keyboard accessibility. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    }
+  ],
+  "class": "Utility Tools-Daily Office Tasks",
+  "difficulty": "easy"
+}

package/library/utility_tools-daily_office_tasks/create-tool-collect-consolidate-weekly-reports.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 1167,
+  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and specialized responses. Make sure that the code you generate is executable and ready for demonstration. Help me create a small internal tool that can collect weekly reports submitted by everyone and compile them into a final consolidated document.",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the report collection system's core functionality implemented?",
+      "description": "Review whether the code implements the essential features for report collection: form submission, data validation, and storage mechanism. Check if the system allows users to submit reports with necessary fields (name, date, content, etc.). Score 0 if collection functionality is missing, 5 if basic submission works but lacks validation, 10 if complete with proper validation and error handling.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Is the report consolidation feature properly implemented?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can effectively aggregate individual reports into a consolidated document. Check if it sorts by department/date, removes duplicates, and maintains proper formatting. Deduct 5 points if consolidation is manual rather than automated, 3 points if formatting is inconsistent. Full score requires intelligent merging with categorization capabilities.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Is the data persistence mechanism appropriate?",
+      "description": "Check whether the tool implements suitable data storage for reports (database, file system, etc.). Assess if it includes backup functionality and can handle concurrent access. Deduct 5 points if data is only stored in memory without persistence, 3 points if there's no backup mechanism. Give 10 points for complete implementation with transaction support and data integrity checks.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Is the user authentication and permission system implemented?",
+      "description": "Review whether the tool implements user roles (e.g., submitters, reviewers, administrators) with appropriate access controls. Check if it provides different views/capabilities based on user roles. Score 0 if authentication is missing, 5 if basic login exists but lacks proper role-based permissions, 10 if complete with secure session management and fine-grained access control.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 4,
+      "title": "Is the code robust?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as invalid input data, server errors, concurrent submissions, etc.) and provide friendly error prompts or recovery mechanisms. Code with strong robustness should be able to effectively handle these edge cases, giving 10 points. If the robustness is average, give 5 points, and if no exceptions are handled, give 0 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 5,
+      "title": "Are there any innovative features that are eye-catching?",
+      "description": "Check whether the code includes surprise features that enhance the experience (e.g., 1. Automated report summarization using NLP 2. Interactive charts/visualizations of report metrics 3. Customizable templates for different departments). 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 save mechanisms coexisting) 2. Function modules unrelated to report collection (e.g., a built-in calendar unrelated to deadlines) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., unnecessary animations). Deduct 3 points for each redundancy found, and directly deduct 10 points if the core functions are interfered with by redundant code.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 7,
+      "title": "Does the code have engineering quality?",
+      "description": "Review modular design (such as separating data/business/presentation layers), unit test coverage, and build process automation. Deduct 5 points if global state pollution is found or design patterns are not used; deduct 5 points if the code duplication rate is too high (over 30%); deduct 5 points if the build process is not automated. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 8,
+      "title": "Does the interface vision meet professional design standards?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the overall design follows modern design principles: 1) Harmonious color matching (no more than 3 primary colors) 2) Proper layout spacing (element spacing follows the 8px multiple principle) 3) Professional font system (body font size ≥ 14px, line height over 1.5 times). Deduct 3 points for each crowded visual element, 5 points for a glaring color combination, and 5 points for chaotic text-image layout. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 9,
+      "title": "Is the dynamic interaction smooth and seamless?",
+      "description": "Judge whether the dynamic effects conform to human perception characteristics: 1) Click feedback delay ≤ 100ms 2) Transition animation duration controlled between 300-500ms 3) Clear visual focus guidance. Deduct 5 points for each operation without feedback, 3 points for visual after-images during fast interactions, and 5 points for hard-to-find key function buttons. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    }
+  ],
+  "class": "Utility Tools-Daily Office Tasks",
+  "difficulty": "easy"
+}

package/library/utility_tools-daily_office_tasks/create-webpage-hyperlinks-to-run-programs.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 1643,
+  "question": "You are a coding expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Make sure that any code you generate is executable and can be demonstrated. I have downloaded some commonly used software for computers and I want to create a webpage that contains hyperlinks to these programs, allowing them to run when clicked. Please help me write the code for this.",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is a proper HTML structure implemented for the hyperlinks webpage?",
+      "description": "Review whether the code includes essential HTML5 document structure (DOCTYPE, html, head, body tags), proper metadata (title, charset), and organized content sections. Check if semantic HTML elements are used appropriately (nav, main, section, footer). Score 0 if missing basic structure, 5 if basic structure exists but lacks semantic elements, and 10 if fully implemented with proper organization.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Are the hyperlinks correctly implemented to launch local applications?",
+      "description": "Verify if the code properly implements protocol handlers (like file:, mailto:) or custom URI schemes for launching local applications. Check for proper usage of href attributes in anchor tags with absolute paths. Deduct 5 points if links use relative paths that would break in production, and 3 points if there's no error handling for unavailable applications. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Is there proper security implementation and user warnings?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code includes security considerations like warning users before launching external applications, explaining potential risks, and implementing confirmation dialogs. Check if the code addresses browser security restrictions for launching local files. Deduct 5 points if there are no user confirmations and 5 points if security risks aren't explained. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Is there a fallback mechanism for browsers with different security policies?",
+      "description": "Check whether the code provides alternative methods for browsers that restrict launching local applications, such as download instructions, detailed manual launch steps, or detection of browser compatibility. Deduct 5 points if no alternatives are provided, and 3 points if the detection logic is incomplete. 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 applications, browser restrictions, user permission denials, etc.) and provide friendly error prompts or recovery mechanisms. Code with strong robustness should be able to effectively handle these edge cases, giving 10 points. If the robustness is average, give 5 points, and if no exceptions are handled, give 0 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 5,
+      "title": "Are there any innovative features that are eye-catching?",
+      "description": "Check whether the code includes surprise features that enhance the experience (e.g., 1. Application icons or thumbnails 2. Search/filter functionality for applications 3. Grouping applications by category or frequency of use). Add 3 points for each practical innovative feature implemented (maximum 10 points).",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 6,
+      "title": "Are there any redundant features?",
+      "description": "Strictly check three types of redundancy: 1. Redundant implementation of similar functions (e.g., multiple ways to launch the same application) 2. Function modules unrelated to application launching (e.g., unnecessary media players) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., heavy animations when hovering over links). Deduct 3 points for each redundancy found, and directly deduct 10 points if the core functions are interfered with by redundant code.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 7,
+      "title": "Does the code have engineering quality?",
+      "description": "Review modular design (such as separating UI/logic/data layers), code organization, and maintainability. Deduct 5 points if global namespace pollution is found or design patterns are not used; deduct 5 points if the code duplication rate is too high (over 30%); deduct 5 points if there's no consideration for maintaining and updating the application list. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 8,
+      "title": "Does the interface vision meet professional design standards?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the overall design follows modern design principles: 1) Harmonious color matching (no more than 3 primary colors) 2) Proper layout spacing (element spacing follows the 8px multiple principle) 3) Professional font system (body font size ≥ 14px, line height over 1.5 times). Deduct 3 points for each crowded visual element, 5 points for a glaring color combination, and 5 points for chaotic text-image layout. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 9,
+      "title": "Is the dynamic interaction smooth and seamless?",
+      "description": "Judge whether the dynamic effects conform to human perception characteristics: 1) Click feedback delay ≤ 100ms 2) Transition animation duration controlled between 300-500ms 3) Clear visual focus guidance. Deduct 5 points for each operation without feedback, 3 points for visual after-images during fast interaction, and 5 points for hard-to-find key function buttons. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    }
+  ],
+  "class": "Utility Tools-Daily Office Tasks",
+  "difficulty": "easy"
+}

package/library/utility_tools-daily_office_tasks/date-range-selection-processing.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 1772,
+  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Make sure that the code you generate is executable for demonstration. I need to process date range selection. Please generate complete code that I can directly copy and paste. Thank you!",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the date range selection UI properly implemented?",
+      "description": "Review whether the code implements a complete date range selection interface with start and end date inputs, a calendar picker, and clear visual indicators of the selected range. Score 0 if there's no visual representation, 5 points if basic input fields are provided without a calendar, and 10 points if a full interactive calendar with range highlighting is implemented.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Is the date validation logic comprehensive?",
+      "description": "Check if the code includes validation for: invalid dates (e.g., February 30), ensuring end date is after start date, handling different date formats, timezone considerations, and preventing selection of invalid ranges (e.g., weekends/holidays if specified). Deduct 2 points for each missing validation aspect. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Does the implementation handle date manipulation properly?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code correctly handles date operations like calculating days between dates, adding/subtracting days, formatting dates in different locales, and handling edge cases (leap years, month transitions, etc.). Deduct 3 points if date arithmetic is incorrect, 3 points if formatting is inconsistent, and 4 points if timezone issues are ignored. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Are convenient selection shortcuts implemented?",
+      "description": "Assess whether the code includes practical shortcuts like 'Today', 'Last 7 days', 'Last month', 'Year to date', etc. Also check for intuitive navigation between months/years and range preview functionality. Award 3 points for basic navigation, 3 points for predefined ranges, and 4 points for intelligent defaults and range preview. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 4,
+      "title": "Is the code robust?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as invalid user inputs, browser compatibility issues, edge date cases like leap years) and provide friendly error prompts or recovery mechanisms. Code with strong robustness should be able to effectively handle these edge cases, giving 10 points. If the robustness is average, give 5 points, and if no exceptions are handled, give 0 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 5,
+      "title": "Are there any innovative features that are eye-catching?",
+      "description": "Check whether the code includes surprise features that enhance the experience (e.g., 1. Visual heatmap of date selection frequency 2. Intelligent range suggestions based on context 3. Keyboard navigation support). 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 date handling logic (e.g., multiple date parsing mechanisms) 2. Functionality unrelated to date selection (e.g., unnecessary animations) 3. Overcomplicated UI that affects usability. 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 date logic/UI components/event handling), appropriate use of libraries vs. custom code, and adherence to best practices. Deduct 5 points if global state pollution is found or design patterns are not used; deduct 5 points if the code duplication rate is too high (over 30%); deduct 5 points if browser compatibility is not considered. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 8,
+      "title": "Does the interface vision meet professional design standards?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the date selection UI follows modern design principles: 1) Clear visual hierarchy between inputs and calendar 2) Proper layout spacing (element spacing follows the 8px multiple principle) 3) Appropriate color contrast for selected dates and ranges. Deduct 3 points for cluttered calendar layout, 5 points for poor contrast that affects readability, and 5 points for inconsistent styling between date components. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 9,
+      "title": "Is the dynamic interaction smooth and seamless?",
+      "description": "Judge whether the date selection interactions conform to human perception characteristics: 1) Immediate feedback when dates are selected 2) Smooth transitions when navigating between months/years 3) Clear visual cues for valid/invalid selections. Deduct 5 points for laggy calendar rendering, 3 points for jumpy month transitions, and 5 points for unclear selected state indicators. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    }
+  ],
+  "class": "Utility Tools-Daily Office Tasks",
+  "difficulty": "easy"
+}

package/library/utility_tools-daily_office_tasks/deepseek-write-daily-sunlight-record.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 1150,
+  "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. For a computer novice, how to use Deepseek to write a daily sunlight record",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the daily sunlight record application concept clearly explained for a novice?",
+      "description": "Check if the response includes a beginner-friendly introduction to what a daily sunlight record is, its purpose, and how it can be useful. Score 0 if no explanation is provided, 5 if basic explanation is given, and 10 if comprehensive explanation with practical examples is included.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Is there a step-by-step guide for using Deepseek to create the application?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether clear instructions are provided specifically for using Deepseek to generate the code for the sunlight recorder. The guide should include how to formulate the prompt, what information to provide, and how to iterate on responses. Deduct 5 points if Deepseek-specific guidance is missing, and 3 points if the instructions are too technical for a novice. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Is the sunlight recording functionality properly implemented?",
+      "description": "Examine whether the code allows users to record date, time, duration, and intensity of sunlight exposure in an intuitive way. Check if data validation is implemented (preventing invalid dates, negative durations, etc.). Score 0 if core functionality is missing, 5 if basic recording is implemented, and 10 if comprehensive recording with validation is included.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Does the application include data visualization for the recorded sunlight data?",
+      "description": "Assess whether the code implements visual representations (charts, graphs, calendars) to help users understand patterns in their sunlight exposure. Charts should show trends over time with proper labeling. Deduct 5 points if visualizations are missing, 3 points if they lack interactivity, and 2 points if they're not intuitive. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 4,
+      "title": "Is the code robust?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as invalid inputs, browser compatibility issues, data loss prevention) and provide friendly error prompts or recovery mechanisms. Code with strong robustness should be able to effectively handle these edge cases, giving 10 points. If the robustness is average, give 5 points, and if no exceptions are handled, give 0 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 5,
+      "title": "Are there any innovative features that are eye-catching?",
+      "description": "Check whether the code includes surprise features that enhance the experience (e.g., 1. Weather API integration for automatic light condition verification 2. Reminder notifications based on sunlight exposure goals 3. Seasonal analysis of sunlight patterns). 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 date pickers or duplicate data storage mechanisms) 2. Function modules unrelated to sunlight recording (e.g., unnecessary social sharing features) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., excessive animations). Deduct 3 points for each redundancy found, and directly deduct 10 points if the core functions are interfered with by redundant code.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 7,
+      "title": "Does the code have engineering quality?",
+      "description": "Review modular design (such as separating data/view/controller layers), code readability for novices, and build process simplicity. Deduct 5 points if global state pollution is found or if the code is overly complex for a novice to understand; deduct 5 points if the code duplication rate is too high (over 30%); deduct 5 points if the build/deployment process requires advanced technical knowledge. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 8,
+      "title": "Does the interface vision meet professional design standards?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the overall design follows modern design principles: 1) Harmonious color matching (no more than 3 primary colors) 2) Proper layout spacing (element spacing follows the 8px multiple principle) 3) Professional font system (body font size ≥ 14px, line height over 1.5 times). Deduct 3 points for each crowded visual element, 5 points for a glaring color combination, and 5 points for chaotic text-image layout. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 9,
+      "title": "Is the dynamic interaction smooth and novice-friendly?",
+      "description": "Judge whether the dynamic effects and interactions are appropriate for computer novices: 1) Clear, labeled interactive elements 2) Tooltips or help text for unfamiliar functions 3) Undo/redo capability for mistakes. Deduct 5 points for unintuitive interactions that would confuse novices, 3 points for missing guidance on complex features, and 5 points for technical terminology that isn't explained. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    }
+  ],
+  "class": "Utility Tools-Daily Office Tasks",
+  "difficulty": "hard"
+}

package/library/utility_tools-daily_office_tasks/detailed-daily-schedule-planner.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 787,
+  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Make sure the code you generate is executable whenever possible. Help me write a detailed daily schedule planner.",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the core scheduling functionality fully implemented?",
+      "description": "Evaluate if the code properly implements calendar representation, event creation, modification, and deletion. Check for proper date handling, time slot management, and conflict detection. Score 0 if basic scheduling is missing, 5 if only simple event adding is implemented, and 10 if the planner includes comprehensive event management with validation.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Does the planner include task categorization and priority management?",
+      "description": "Verify if the code allows users to categorize tasks (work, personal, etc.), set priorities (high, medium, low), and filter/sort based on these attributes. Check for visual indicators of priority levels. Deduct 3 points if categorization is missing, 3 points if priority setting is absent, and 4 points if no filtering/sorting mechanisms exist. Full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Is there persistent data storage and retrieval functionality?",
+      "description": "Check if the planner implements data persistence using localStorage, IndexedDB, or server-side storage. Assess if data is properly loaded on application start and saved on changes. Verify existence of backup/export functionality. Deduct 5 points if data isn't persisted between sessions, 3 points if there's no export option, and 2 points if data validation is missing before storage. Full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Are notifications and reminders implemented effectively?",
+      "description": "Evaluate if the planner includes notifications for upcoming events, deadline reminders, and customizable alert timing. Check if the implementation uses browser notifications, sound alerts, or visual cues. Score 0 if reminders are completely missing, 5 if only basic visual reminders exist, and 10 if comprehensive notification options with timing preferences are available.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 4,
+      "title": "Is the code robust?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code handles common edge cases (invalid date inputs, concurrent edits, browser refresh, etc.) and provides friendly error messages or recovery mechanisms. Check for form validation, proper error handling, and data integrity protection. Give 10 points if all common edge cases are handled gracefully, 5 points if basic validation exists but some scenarios are unhandled, and 0 points if critical errors can easily occur.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 5,
+      "title": "Are there any innovative features that are eye-catching?",
+      "description": "Check for standout features that enhance usability (e.g., 1. Natural language processing for quick event creation 2. AI-suggested optimal scheduling 3. Integration with external calendars 4. Weather information relevant to planning). Add 2.5 points for each practical innovative feature implemented (maximum 10 points).",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 6,
+      "title": "Are there any redundant features?",
+      "description": "Strictly check for three types of redundancy: 1. Duplicate scheduling mechanisms that perform similar functions differently 2. Overly complex features irrelevant to daily planning 3. Unnecessary animations or visual effects that hinder performance. Deduct 3 points for each redundancy found, and directly deduct 10 points if core planning functionality is obscured by redundant code.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 7,
+      "title": "Does the code have engineering quality?",
+      "description": "Review code organization (separation of UI/logic/storage layers), implementation of design patterns, naming conventions, and comments. Check for modular structure and reusable components. Deduct 5 points for global variable abuse, 3 points for inconsistent naming or poor readability, and 2 points for inadequate comments. Full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 8,
+      "title": "Does the interface vision meet professional design standards?",
+      "description": "Evaluate if the design follows modern UI principles: 1) Clean and consistent color scheme (max 3-4 colors) 2) Proper whitespace and layout hierarchy 3) Responsive design for different screen sizes 4) Readable typography (proper contrast, size ≥14px). Deduct 3 points for each cluttered view, 2 points for inconsistent styling, and 5 points for poor mobile adaptation. Full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 9,
+      "title": "Is the dynamic interaction smooth and intuitive?",
+      "description": "Judge whether interactions feel natural and efficient: 1) Quick response to user inputs (<100ms) 2) Logical tab order and keyboard navigation 3) Clear visual feedback for actions 4) Intuitive drag-and-drop for event management if implemented. Deduct 3 points for each laggy interaction, 2 points for confusing navigation patterns, and 5 points if key planning operations require excessive clicks. Full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    }
+  ],
+  "class": "Utility Tools-Daily Office Tasks",
+  "difficulty": "easy"
+}

package/library/utility_tools-daily_office_tasks/deveco-studio-jd-login-navigation-interface.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 1207,
+  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Make sure the code you generate is executable for demonstration. Using DevEco Studio, design a JD.com login interface with only navigation functionality. Provide detailed steps and code using the entry framework.",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the core JD.com login interface UI implemented correctly?",
+      "description": "Verify if the code implements the essential elements of a JD.com login interface: logo placement at the top, input fields for username/phone and password, login button, and additional options (register, forgot password). Score 0 if missing core elements, 5 if basic elements exist but with incorrect styling, 10 if fully implemented with proper JD.com branding and layout.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Are the necessary navigation components implemented?",
+      "description": "Check if the navigation functionality includes a top navigation bar, category navigation menu, and appropriate navigation destinations. Evaluate if the code handles navigation events properly and maintains state between screens. Score 0 if navigation is not implemented, 5 if basic navigation exists but with limited functionality, 10 if complete navigation with proper transitions is implemented.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Is the DevEco Studio entry framework utilized properly?",
+      "description": "Examine whether the code correctly uses ArkTS/JS, component lifecycle methods, and HarmonyOS APIs according to the DevEco Studio specifications. Verify proper project structure with pages, components, and resources organized according to recommended practices. Deduct 5 points if framework features are underutilized, and 7 points if the wrong framework is used entirely. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Are form validation and input handling implemented correctly?",
+      "description": "Assess whether the login form includes proper validation for username/phone and password fields with appropriate error messages. Check if the code handles input focus, keyboard events, and auto-fill functionality. Deduct 3 points for missing validation, 3 points for no error handling, and 4 points for lack of keyboard interaction support. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 4,
+      "title": "Is the code robust?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as invalid inputs, network errors during login attempts, device rotation, etc.) and provide friendly error prompts or recovery mechanisms. Code with strong robustness should be able to effectively handle these edge cases, giving 10 points. If the robustness is average, give 5 points, and if no exceptions are handled, give 0 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 5,
+      "title": "Are there any innovative features that are eye-catching?",
+      "description": "Check whether the code includes surprise features that enhance the experience (e.g., 1. Biometric authentication option 2. Remember me functionality 3. Dark mode support 4. Accessibility features). Add 3 points for each practical innovative feature implemented (maximum 10 points).",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 6,
+      "title": "Are there any redundant features?",
+      "description": "Strictly check three types of redundancy: 1. Redundant implementation of similar functions (e.g., multiple validation methods for the same field) 2. Function modules unrelated to login or navigation (e.g., a built-in calculator) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., excessive animations). Deduct 3 points for each redundancy found, and directly deduct 10 points if the core functions are interfered with by redundant code.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 7,
+      "title": "Does the code have engineering quality?",
+      "description": "Review modular design (such as separating UI/logic/network layers), component reusability, and build process configuration. Deduct 5 points if global state pollution is found or design patterns are not used; deduct 5 points if the code duplication rate is too high (over 30%); deduct 5 points if the build process is not properly configured. 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 JD.com's brand guidelines: 1) Correct use of JD.com's red color (#E2231A) and secondary colors 2) Proper layout spacing and element alignment 3) Professional typography (consistent with JD.com's font style). Deduct 3 points for each visual inconsistency with JD branding, 5 points for poor color usage, and 5 points for inconsistent spacing and alignment. 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 HarmonyOS design principles: 1) Responsive button feedback ≤ 100ms 2) Smooth transitions between login screen and navigation destinations 3) Clear visual focus guidance on interactive elements. Deduct 5 points for each operation without feedback, 3 points for jerky animations, and 5 points for navigation transitions that feel disconnected or abrupt. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    }
+  ],
+  "class": "Utility Tools-Daily Office Tasks",
+  "difficulty": "easy"
+}