@getollie/cli 0.0.1

package/library/utility_tools-daily_office_tasks/real-time-baseball-score-display-for-streaming.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 400,
+  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate, professional responses. Be sure that any code you generate is executable. Please help me create a small program for real-time baseball game score and situation display that can be used for live streaming on mobile Weibo and Douyin.",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the baseball game scoreboard fully implemented?",
+      "description": "Review whether the code accurately implements essential baseball scoreboard elements including innings (top/bottom), runs, hits, errors, balls, strikes, outs, and current baserunners. Score 0 if core display elements are missing, 5 if basic scoring is implemented but lacking situation details, and 10 if the scoreboard includes all professional baseball statistics with proper layout and updates.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Is the real-time data update mechanism implemented?",
+      "description": "Check whether the code includes proper data fetching mechanism (WebSocket, polling or Server-Sent Events) with error handling and reconnection logic. Verify that updates are reflected immediately on the UI without manual refresh. Deduct 5 points if updates require manual intervention, 3 points if the update frequency is inappropriate (too slow >5s or too resource-intensive <1s), and 3 points if there's no loading state or error handling. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Is the mobile-first design properly implemented for Weibo and Douyin?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the UI is optimized for vertical mobile viewing (16:9 or 9:16 aspect ratios), respects platform-specific UI guidelines, and includes platform branding options. Check if the implementation uses responsive design principles with proper viewport settings. Deduct 5 points if the layout breaks on common mobile resolutions, 3 points if touch targets are smaller than 44x44px, and 5 points if the interface doesn't adapt to different orientations. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Is the baseball field visualization interactive and accurate?",
+      "description": "Assess whether the code provides a clear visual representation of the baseball diamond with accurate baserunner positions, defensive positioning options, and play result animations. Check if the field visualization updates correctly based on game events. Deduct 5 points if the baseball diamond visualization is static or poorly implemented, 3 points if baserunner indicators are unclear, and 5 points if there are no visual cues for recent plays. 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 data feed interruptions, malformed inputs, network latency, etc.) and provide friendly error prompts or recovery mechanisms. Code with strong robustness should gracefully handle edge cases like incomplete game data, mid-game reconnections, and unexpected server responses, 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. Pitch trajectory visualization 2. Player statistics pop-ups 3. Instant replay markers 4. Heat maps for hit distribution 5. Social media integration for user comments). Add 2 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 display the same stat) 2. Function modules unrelated to baseball scoring (e.g., irrelevant animations) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., excessive particle animations that drain battery). 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), component reusability, and code organization. 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 there's no error boundary or fallback UI implemented. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 8,
+      "title": "Does the interface vision meet professional sports broadcasting standards?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the overall design follows professional sports visualization principles: 1) Clear team identification with logos and colors 2) Proper information hierarchy emphasizing current game situation 3) Professional typography (readable at small sizes, consistent labeling). Deduct 3 points for cluttered information display, 5 points for poor color contrast affecting readability, and 5 points for inconsistent visual styling across components. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 9,
+      "title": "Is the live streaming integration well-implemented?",
+      "description": "Judge whether the code properly integrates with streaming platforms: 1) Transparent or chroma-key background options 2) Configurable overlay positioning 3) Optimized rendering performance for streaming <5% CPU overhead. Deduct 5 points for each missing integration feature with Weibo or Douyin APIs, 3 points for streaming-unfriendly rendering methods, and 5 points if the overlay causes significant performance issues during test cases. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    }
+  ],
+  "class": "Utility Tools-Daily Office Tasks",
+  "difficulty": "hard"
+}

package/library/utility_tools-daily_office_tasks/rich-text-editor-spelling-idiom-word-count.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 1527,
+  "question": "You are a code expert, please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Make sure the generated code is executable when possible. Create a rich text editor that implements features such as highlighting spelling mistakes, suggesting corrections for misused idioms (using a pre-loaded database of common errors), and word count statistics.",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the rich text editor core functionality fully implemented?",
+      "description": "Review whether the code accurately implements a rich text editor with contentEditable or a custom text rendering system. Must include text formatting (bold, italic, underline), paragraph management, cursor positioning, and text selection handling. Score 0 if basic text editing is not functional, 5 if only simple formatting is implemented, and 10 if all core rich text features including undo/redo, copy/paste, and format preservation are fully included.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Is the spelling mistake detection and highlighting system properly implemented?",
+      "description": "Check whether the spelling checker uses an efficient algorithm (such as Levenshtein distance or BK-tree) with a comprehensive dictionary. Must include real-time highlighting with visual indicators (underlines/highlights) and performance optimization for large texts. Deduct 5 points if detection accuracy is below 90%, deduct 3 points if highlighting performance causes lag on texts over 1000 words. Full score requires sub-200ms response time.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Is the idiom correction suggestion system designed with intelligent matching?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the idiom database includes contextual matching algorithms and provides ranked suggestions based on semantic similarity. Must implement fuzzy matching for partial idioms and context-aware corrections. Deduct 5 points if suggestions are purely string-based without context consideration, deduct 3 points if the database contains fewer than 200 common idiom errors. Full score requires intelligent ranking and contextual relevance.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Is comprehensive word count statistics and text analysis implemented?",
+      "description": "Check whether the system provides real-time statistics including word count, character count, paragraph count, reading time estimation, and readability metrics. Must handle various text formats and unicode characters correctly. Deduct 5 points if statistics are not updated in real-time, deduct 3 points if special characters or formatting affects accuracy. Give 10 points if advanced metrics like sentence complexity are included.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 4,
+      "title": "Is the code robust?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as malformed input, large text files, clipboard data corruption, browser compatibility issues, etc.) and provide friendly error prompts or recovery mechanisms. Code with strong robustness should be able to effectively handle these edge cases, giving 10 points. If the robustness is average, give 5 points, and if no exceptions are handled, give 0 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 5,
+      "title": "Are there any innovative features that are eye-catching?",
+      "description": "Check whether the code includes surprise features that enhance the writing experience (e.g., 1. Grammar checking with AI suggestions 2. Export to multiple formats (PDF, Word, Markdown) 3. Collaborative editing features 4. Voice-to-text integration 5. Writing analytics dashboard). 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 spell-check engines running simultaneously) 2. Function modules unrelated to text editing (e.g., built-in games or media players) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., excessive animations during typing). Deduct 3 points for each redundancy found, and directly deduct 10 points if core editing functions are interfered with by redundant code.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 7,
+      "title": "Does the code have engineering quality?",
+      "description": "Review modular design (such as separating editor core/spell checker/UI layers), unit test coverage, and build process automation. Deduct 5 points if global state pollution is found or design patterns are not used; deduct 5 points if the code duplication rate is too high (over 30%); deduct 5 points if the build process is not automated. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 8,
+      "title": "Does the interface vision meet professional design standards?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the editor design follows modern design principles: 1) Clean, distraction-free writing environment 2) Proper typography with readable fonts (minimum 14px, line height ≥1.5) 3) Intuitive toolbar design with clear iconography 4) Consistent color scheme for different text states (normal, highlighted, error). Deduct 3 points for each cluttered UI element, 5 points for poor contrast ratios, and 5 points for confusing navigation. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 9,
+      "title": "Is the dynamic interaction smooth and seamless?",
+      "description": "Judge whether the editor interactions conform to user expectations: 1) Typing response delay ≤ 50ms 2) Spell-check highlighting appears within 300ms 3) Smooth scrolling and cursor movement 4) Intuitive keyboard shortcuts 5) Responsive suggestion popups. Deduct 5 points for each laggy interaction, 3 points for jarring visual updates during typing, and 5 points for missing standard editor shortcuts (Ctrl+B, Ctrl+I, etc.). The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    }
+  ],
+  "class": "Utility Tools-Daily Office Tasks",
+  "difficulty": "hard"
+}

package/library/utility_tools-daily_office_tasks/shopping-price-comparison-program.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 1107,
+  "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. Write me a small shopping price comparison program.",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the core price comparison functionality implemented?",
+      "description": "Check if the code implements the ability to compare prices of products across different sources/stores. It should include data structures to store product information (name, price, source) and algorithms to sort/filter by price. Score 0 if comparison logic is missing, 5 if basic comparison exists but lacks comprehensive filtering, and 10 if advanced sorting, filtering, and product matching functionality is implemented.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Does the program handle multiple data sources?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the program can retrieve product information from multiple sources (e.g., web scraping, APIs, local database, manual input). Deduct 5 points if only a single data source is supported, 3 points if multiple sources but no error handling for failed sources. The full score is 10 points if it handles multiple sources with proper fallback mechanisms.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Is the data collection/retrieval process well-designed?",
+      "description": "Review how product data is collected and stored. Check for web scraping capability, API integration, or user input mechanisms. Deduct 5 points if the data collection is hardcoded with no extensibility, and 3 points if there's no validation for collected data. Award 10 points for a comprehensive system with configurable data providers and proper caching.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Is the user interface intuitive and functional?",
+      "description": "Assess whether the program provides a clear interface (CLI, GUI, web) for users to search products, view comparisons, and sort results. Deduct 5 points for a difficult-to-navigate interface, 3 points if search/filter functionality is limited. Award 10 points for an intuitive interface with clear product displays, sorting options, and filter capabilities.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 4,
+      "title": "Is the code robust?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as network errors, malformed input data, unavailable sources, 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. Price history tracking and alerts 2. AI-powered deal recommendations 3. Coupon integration 4. Browser extension for real-time comparisons). 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 filtering mechanisms that do the same thing) 2. Function modules unrelated to price comparison (e.g., a built-in calculator when simple math would suffice) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., excessive animations in a utility app). 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 collection/processing/display layers), unit test coverage, and build process automation. Deduct 5 points if global state pollution is found or design patterns are not used; deduct 5 points if the code duplication rate is too high (over 30%); deduct 5 points if the build process is not automated. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 8,
+      "title": "Does the interface vision meet professional design standards?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the overall design follows modern design principles: 1) Harmonious color matching (no more than 3 primary colors) 2) Proper layout spacing (element spacing follows the 8px multiple principle) 3) Professional font system (body font size ≥ 14px, line height over 1.5 times). Deduct 3 points for each crowded visual element, 5 points for a glaring color combination, and 5 points for chaotic text-image layout. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 9,
+      "title": "Is the dynamic interaction smooth and seamless?",
+      "description": "Judge whether the dynamic effects conform to human perception characteristics: 1) Click feedback delay ≤ 100ms 2) Transition animation duration controlled between 300-500ms 3) Clear visual focus guidance. Deduct 5 points for each operation without feedback, 3 points for visual after-images during fast sliding, and 5 points for hard-to-find key function buttons. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    }
+  ],
+  "class": "Utility Tools-Daily Office Tasks",
+  "difficulty": "easy"
+}

package/library/utility_tools-daily_office_tasks/small-japanese-translation-program.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 1359,
+  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Be sure to provide executable code for demonstration when possible. Help me write a small Japanese translation program.",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the core translation functionality implemented correctly?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code implements the essential Japanese-English translation capability through proper API integration or local dictionary lookup. Score 0 if no translation functionality exists, 5 if basic word translation is implemented, and 10 if the solution handles phrases, sentences, and different forms of Japanese characters (hiragana, katakana, kanji).",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Is the input processing for Japanese text properly implemented?",
+      "description": "Check whether the code correctly handles various Japanese character inputs (hiragana, katakana, kanji, romaji conversion) and implements proper text segmentation for accurate translation. Deduct 3 points if romaji-to-kana conversion is missing, 3 points if text normalization is absent, and 4 points if there's no handling for mixed character types. Full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Is there a flexible user interface for text input and display?",
+      "description": "Assess whether the program provides a clean interface for entering Japanese text and viewing translations, including proper text direction support and appropriate fonts. Score 0 for command-line only, 5 for basic UI without proper Japanese text rendering, and 10 for a complete UI with proper Japanese font rendering and text direction support.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Does the program handle language-specific features?",
+      "description": "Evaluate support for Japanese-specific linguistic features such as particles, honorifics, context-dependent meanings, and furigana display. Deduct 2 points for each missing key feature. Check if the solution provides explanations for grammar points or cultural context when relevant. 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 input, network interruption when using translation APIs, unsupported characters, 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. Audio pronunciation 2. Handwriting recognition for kanji 3. Character stroke order animations 4. Context-aware translations). 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 translation engines doing the same thing without clear benefit) 2. Function modules unrelated to translation (e.g., a built-in game) 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 translation logic/UI/API layers), error handling, and documentation. 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 there are no comments or documentation. 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 standards: 1) Clear visual distinction between Japanese and English text 2) Proper font selection for both languages (proper rendering of Japanese characters) 3) Consistent spacing and alignment for bidirectional text. Deduct 3 points for each readability issue, 5 points for inappropriate font usage, and 5 points for poor layout that affects text legibility. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 9,
+      "title": "Is the dynamic interaction smooth and seamless?",
+      "description": "Judge whether the translation experience is responsive and intuitive: 1) Translation response time ≤ 1 second 2) Smooth transitions between input and output 3) Clear visual feedback during processing. Deduct 5 points for each operation without feedback, 3 points for noticeable lag in translation responses, and 5 points for confusing interaction flow. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    }
+  ],
+  "class": "Utility Tools-Daily Office Tasks",
+  "difficulty": "easy"
+}

package/library/utility_tools-daily_office_tasks/smart-spreadsheet-tool.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 551,
+  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Be sure to provide executable code in your demonstrations. Implement a smart spreadsheet tool that supports CRUD operations on data, cell merging, formula calculations (basic mathematical functions, statistical functions, etc.), data sorting and filtering, and the ability to generate simple charts (bar charts, line charts, pie charts), with support for importing and exporting table data in Excel format.",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the CRUD functionality for the spreadsheet fully implemented?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code implements complete Create, Read, Update, and Delete operations for cells and rows/columns. Check if cell selection (single, range, multi-selection), editing (inline and formula bar), and data validation are properly implemented. Score 0 if core CRUD operations are missing, 5 if basic operations are present but lack advanced features, and 10 if all operations including keyboard navigation and shortcuts are fully implemented.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Are cell merging and formatting capabilities properly implemented?",
+      "description": "Check if the code supports merging/unmerging cells with proper content handling, and if basic formatting options (font styles, colors, borders, alignment, etc.) are available. Verify that merged cells maintain their integrity when sorting or when rows/columns are inserted/deleted. Deduct 5 points if merged cells show rendering issues, 3 points if formatting options are limited, and 2 points if undo/redo for these operations is not supported. Full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Does the formula calculation system work correctly?",
+      "description": "Verify the implementation of formula evaluation engine that should support basic math operations (+, -, *, /), statistical functions (SUM, AVERAGE, COUNT, MIN, MAX), logical functions (IF), and cell references. Test for circular reference detection and error handling. Deduct 3 points if advanced functions are missing, 5 points if cell references don't update properly when rows/columns change, and 5 points if formula recalculation is not automatic. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Are data sorting and filtering functionalities effective?",
+      "description": "Evaluate the implementation of multi-column sorting (ascending/descending) and filtering capabilities based on various criteria (text, numbers, dates). Check if sorting/filtering maintains the integrity of formulas and merged cells. Deduct 5 points if only basic single-column sorting is available, 3 points if custom filtering options are missing, and 3 points if the UI doesn't provide visual feedback for active filters. 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 formulas, out-of-bounds references, data type mismatches, large datasets) 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. Auto-formatting of recognized data types 2. Smart column width adjustment 3. Template gallery for common spreadsheet layouts 4. Conditional formatting with data visualization). Add 3 points for each practical innovative feature implemented (maximum 10 points).",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 6,
+      "title": "Are there any redundant features?",
+      "description": "Strictly check three types of redundancy: 1. Redundant implementation of similar functions (e.g., multiple sorting mechanisms coexisting) 2. Function modules unrelated to spreadsheet functionality (e.g., unnecessary animations) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., excessive rendering of inactive cells). 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 model/view/controller layers), unit test coverage, and performance optimization for large datasets. Deduct 5 points if global state pollution is found or design patterns are not used; deduct 5 points if the code duplication rate is too high (over 30%); deduct 5 points if no optimizations for handling large spreadsheets (virtual scrolling, lazy loading). The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 8,
+      "title": "Does the interface vision meet professional spreadsheet design standards?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the UI follows industry-standard spreadsheet interfaces: 1) Clear grid lines and cell indicators 2) Intuitive formula bar and cell reference visualization 3) Professional toolbar layout with logical grouping of functions. Deduct 3 points for non-standard cell navigation, 5 points for confusing formula editing interface, and 5 points for poorly organized toolbars/menus. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 9,
+      "title": "Are the charting features and import/export capabilities comprehensive?",
+      "description": "Judge whether the implementation includes: 1) Multiple chart types (bar, line, pie) with proper data mapping 2) Chart customization options (titles, legends, colors) 3) Excel-compatible import/export functionality. Deduct 5 points if charts don't update dynamically with data changes, 3 points for limited chart customization, and 5 points if import/export fails to preserve formulas or formatting. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    }
+  ],
+  "class": "Utility Tools-Daily Office Tasks",
+  "difficulty": "hard"
+}

package/library/utility_tools-daily_office_tasks/tauri-clock-application-development.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 312,
+  "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. Develop a clock application using Tauri.",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the core clock functionality completely implemented?",
+      "description": "Check if the code implements all essential clock features: current time display with hours, minutes, seconds, and possibly milliseconds; proper time zone handling; and accurate time updates (ideally using requestAnimationFrame for smooth UI updates rather than setInterval). Score 0 if core time display is missing, 5 if basic functionality exists but has accuracy issues, and 10 if all core clock features are fully implemented with high precision.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Is the Tauri integration properly implemented?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code correctly leverages Tauri APIs for native functionality including window management, OS integration, and possibly system tray features. Check for proper initialization of Tauri in the project structure (correct tauri.conf.json configuration, appropriate cargo dependencies). Deduct 5 points if essential Tauri features aren't used, 3 points if permissions aren't properly configured. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Are additional clock features implemented?",
+      "description": "Assess if the implementation includes extended functionality like multiple time zones, alarms/timers, stopwatch, world clock, or countdown features. Each well-implemented additional feature is worth 2-3 points. Deduct points if these features are poorly implemented or contain bugs. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Is there cross-platform compatibility?",
+      "description": "Check if the code properly handles platform-specific considerations for Windows, macOS, and Linux through Tauri's APIs. Review whether the configuration accounts for different operating system behaviors, such as app lifecycle, notifications, and system tray integration. Deduct 5 points if the app works on only one platform, and 3 points if minor platform-specific issues exist. 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 system time changes, daylight saving transitions, permission denials, or resource constraints) and provide friendly error prompts or recovery mechanisms. Code with strong robustness should be able to effectively handle these edge cases, giving 10 points. If the robustness is average, give 5 points, and if no exceptions are handled, give 0 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 5,
+      "title": "Are there any innovative features that are eye-catching?",
+      "description": "Check whether the code includes surprise features that enhance the experience (e.g., 1. Customizable clock faces/themes 2. Desktop widget mode with transparency 3. Time synchronization with atomic clock servers). 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 timer implementations) 2. Function modules unrelated to clock functionality (e.g., a built-in game) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., excessive animations that consume battery). 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 time logic/view/platform-specific code), 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 properly configured for Tauri. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 8,
+      "title": "Does the interface vision meet professional design standards?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the overall design follows modern design principles: 1) Harmonious color matching (no more than 3 primary colors) 2) Proper layout spacing (element spacing follows the 8px multiple principle) 3) Professional font system (body font size ≥ 14px, line height over 1.5 times). Deduct 3 points for each crowded visual element, 5 points for a glaring color combination, and 5 points for chaotic text-image layout. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 9,
+      "title": "Is the dynamic interaction smooth and seamless?",
+      "description": "Judge whether the dynamic effects conform to human perception characteristics: 1) Click feedback delay ≤ 100ms 2) Transition animation duration controlled between 300-500ms 3) Clear visual focus guidance. Deduct 5 points for each operation without feedback, 3 points for visual after-images during fast sliding, and 5 points for hard-to-find key function buttons. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    }
+  ],
+  "class": "Utility Tools-Daily Office Tasks",
+  "difficulty": "medium"
+}

package/library/utility_tools-daily_office_tasks/to-do-item-recorder-with-categories-dates-reminders.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 1267,
+  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Take care to ensure that any code you generate is executable. Write a computer program that records to-do items, with requirements including category management, date setting, and automatic reminders.",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the core to-do item management system fully implemented?",
+      "description": "Review whether the code accurately implements CRUD operations for to-do items (create, read, update, delete). Check if each to-do item contains essential properties like title, description, status, and if the system supports filtering and sorting. Score 0 if core operations are missing, 5 if basic operations are implemented, and 10 if advanced features like bulk operations and undo functionality are included.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Is the category management system properly designed?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code implements a robust category system that allows users to create, edit, delete categories and assign to-do items to multiple categories. Check for category hierarchy support and category-based filtering/sorting. Deduct 3 points if categories are hardcoded, 5 points if items can only belong to one category, and 5 points if category operations aren't persistent. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Is the date setting and deadline functionality properly implemented?",
+      "description": "Check if the program allows setting dates for to-do items with proper date validation, timezone handling, and recurring tasks support. Verify if the interface includes a date picker or similar intuitive input method. Deduct 3 points if date validation is missing, 3 points if timezone issues exist, and 5 points if recurring tasks aren't supported. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Is the automatic reminder system effectively implemented?",
+      "description": "Assess whether the code includes a functioning reminder system that can trigger notifications based on due dates. Check for customizable reminder settings (e.g., time before deadline), notification methods (e.g., pop-up, email), and background process handling. Deduct 5 points if reminders don't work when the app is closed, 3 points if customization options are limited, and 5 points if notifications aren't properly implemented. 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 issues for cloud sync, database corruption, 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. Natural language processing for quick entry 2. Smart prioritization based on user patterns 3. Integration with calendar systems or third-party apps). 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 handling methods) 2. Function modules unrelated to to-do management (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 data model/view/controller layers), unit test coverage, and code organization. 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 there's no error handling or logging system. 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) Smooth transitions when adding/completing tasks 3) Clear visual focus guidance for priority items. Deduct 5 points for each operation without feedback, 3 points for laggy animations during list scrolling, and 5 points for unintuitive navigation between different views (categories, calendar, etc.). The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    }
+  ],
+  "class": "Utility Tools-Daily Office Tasks",
+  "difficulty": "hard"
+}

package/library/utility_tools-daily_office_tasks/to-do-list-mini-program-for-boyfriend.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 1042,
+  "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. To-do list mini-program for boyfriend",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the core to-do list functionality fully implemented?",
+      "description": "Review whether the code implements complete CRUD operations (Create, Read, Update, Delete) for to-do items through HTML/JavaScript, including task categorization, priority settings, due date management, and completion status tracking. Score 0 if basic add/delete functions are missing, 5 if only simple task management is implemented, and 10 if comprehensive task management with filtering, sorting, and search capabilities are fully included.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Is the data persistence and synchronization mechanism properly implemented?",
+      "description": "Check whether the implementation includes reliable data storage (localStorage/IndexedDB or cloud sync), automatic save functionality, and data backup mechanisms. Evaluate if there's real-time synchronization across devices and offline capability. Deduct 5 points if data loss occurs on page refresh, and 3 points if no offline storage is handled. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Are personalized features and relationship-focused elements designed?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the mini-program includes boyfriend-specific customization features such as shared task lists, couple reminders, anniversary tracking, or romantic task categories. Check if there are personalized themes, custom notification sounds, or partner interaction features. Deduct 5 points if generic templates are used without personalization. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Is the notification and reminder system comprehensive?",
+      "description": "Check whether the code includes a complete notification system with multiple reminder types (browser notifications, visual alerts, sound alerts), customizable reminder intervals, and smart scheduling. Evaluate if there are different notification strategies for different task priorities. Deduct 5 points if no notification system exists, and 3 points if notifications don't work across different browsers. Give 10 points if fully implemented with cross-platform compatibility.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 4,
+      "title": "Is the code robust?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as invalid input, storage quota exceeded, network failures, browser compatibility issues, etc.) and provide friendly error prompts or recovery mechanisms. Code with strong robustness should be able to effectively handle these edge cases, giving 10 points. If the robustness is average, give 5 points, and if no exceptions are handled, give 0 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 5,
+      "title": "Are there any innovative features that are eye-catching?",
+      "description": "Check whether the code includes surprise features that enhance the romantic experience (e.g., 1. Mood-based task suggestions 2. Achievement badges for completed tasks 3. Love note attachments to tasks 4. Progress sharing with partner 5. Gamification elements). 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 task creation interfaces) 2. Function modules unrelated to to-do management (e.g., built-in games or unrelated widgets) 3. Overly complex animations that affect usability. Deduct 3 points for each redundancy found, and directly deduct 10 points if the core to-do 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 layer/business logic/presentation layer), code organization, and maintainability. Deduct 5 points if global state pollution is found or no design patterns are used; deduct 5 points if the code duplication rate is too high (over 30%); deduct 5 points if no error handling or logging mechanisms exist. 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 UI principles: 1) Harmonious color matching suitable for daily use (no more than 3 primary colors) 2) Proper layout spacing (element spacing follows the 8px multiple principle) 3) Professional typography (body font size ≥ 14px, line height over 1.5 times) 4) Consistent iconography and visual hierarchy. Deduct 3 points for each crowded visual element, 5 points for poor color contrast or readability issues, and 5 points for inconsistent design patterns. 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/tap feedback delay ≤ 100ms 2) Transition animations duration controlled between 200-400ms 3) Clear visual focus guidance and intuitive gesture support 4) Smooth task completion animations. Deduct 5 points for each operation without feedback, 3 points for laggy interactions during rapid task management, and 5 points for unclear navigation or hard-to-find essential functions. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    }
+  ],
+  "class": "Utility Tools-Daily Office Tasks",
+  "difficulty": "medium"
+}