@getollie/cli 0.0.1

package/library/web_applications-communication/animal-translator-html-software.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 1424,
+  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Make sure the generated code is executable and demonstrable. Help me create an animal translator, which is an HTML software that can translate human language into animal language.",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the core translation engine fully implemented?",
+      "description": "Review whether the code accurately implements the translation logic from human language to animal language through JavaScript, including multiple animal language types (cat, dog, bird, etc.) and proper phonetic mapping algorithms. Score 0 if no translation logic is implemented, 5 if only basic single animal translation exists, and 10 if multiple animal languages with comprehensive vocabulary mapping are included.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Is the language input and output system properly designed?",
+      "description": "Check whether the input system supports multiple formats (text input, voice recognition, file upload) and the output system provides various presentation methods (text display, audio playback, visual phonetics). Deduct 5 points if voice input/output is missing, and 3 points if no input validation is implemented. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Is the animal language database comprehensive and accurate?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the animal language system includes scientifically-based or creatively consistent language rules, proper grammar structures, and vocabulary databases for different animals. Two-way translation capability is required. Deduct 5 points if animal languages lack consistency or logical structure. Check whether multiple animal species are supported with distinct linguistic characteristics. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Is the user interaction workflow complete and intuitive?",
+      "description": "Check whether the code includes complete user workflow management, including language selection, translation history, favorites, and sharing functionality. Deduct 5 points if translation history is not implemented, and 3 points if no progress indicators are shown during translation. Give 10 points if the complete user journey is seamlessly integrated.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 4,
+      "title": "Is the code robust?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as empty input, unsupported characters, network issues, browser compatibility problems, etc.) and provide friendly error prompts or recovery mechanisms. Code with strong robustness should be able to effectively handle these edge cases, giving 10 points. If the robustness is average, give 5 points, and if no exceptions are handled, give 0 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 5,
+      "title": "Are there any innovative features that are eye-catching?",
+      "description": "Check whether the code includes surprise features that enhance the experience (e.g., 1. Real-time pronunciation guide with IPA notation 2. Animal avatar animations that speak the translated text 3. Cultural context explanations for animal communication patterns 4. Batch translation for conversations). 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 coexisting unnecessarily) 2. Function modules unrelated to animal translation (e.g., a built-in weather widget) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., excessive particle animations during translation). Deduct 3 points for each redundancy found, and directly deduct 10 points if the core translation 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 components/data layers), code organization, and maintainability. Deduct 5 points if global state pollution is found or proper separation of concerns is not implemented; deduct 5 points if the code duplication rate is too high (over 30%); deduct 5 points if no proper 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 design principles: 1) Harmonious color matching with animal-themed aesthetics (no more than 3 primary colors) 2) Proper layout spacing (element spacing follows the 8px multiple principle) 3) Professional typography system (body font size ≥ 14px, line height over 1.5 times) 4) Intuitive iconography for different animals. Deduct 3 points for each cramped visual element, 5 points for jarring color combinations, and 5 points for chaotic layout hierarchy. 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) Translation trigger response delay ≤ 100ms 2) Transition animations between different animal modes controlled between 300-500ms 3) Clear visual feedback during translation process 4) Smooth animal character animations if present. Deduct 5 points for each operation without feedback, 3 points for laggy animations during mode switching, and 5 points for unclear translation status indicators. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    }
+  ],
+  "class": "Web Applications-Communication",
+  "difficulty": "medium"
+}

package/library/web_applications-communication/anonymous-online-voting-system.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 1181,
+  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Make sure the generated code is executable for demonstration. Design an anonymous online voting system to be published in a fixed group where 17 members have voting rights. The voting requires selecting 3 people from 4 candidates through multiple selection. The system needs to prevent duplicate voting from these 17 people and display voting results after the deadline. Display results in HTML. The candidates are: Zheng Geng, Ge Daoshun, Huang Yiran, and Song Yuting. The voters are: Zheng Geng, Guo Mingkai, Huang Yiran, Song Yuting, Ye Zhen, Wang Yuanxin, Gao Yijun, Wu Fang, Zhang Zhihui, Ling Sicheng, Xu Jinsheng, Chi Zihua, Ge Daoshun, Xu Shiling, Zhang Di, Zhang Fangzhou, and Fan Lingling.",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the anonymous voting system properly implemented?",
+      "description": "Review whether the code implements a secure anonymous voting system where voters cannot be identified from their votes. Check if a voter authentication mechanism exists without revealing identity in the results. Score 0 if anonymity is not implemented, 5 if basic anonymity is implemented but with flaws, and 10 if complete anonymity with cryptographic protection is implemented.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Is the multiple selection voting mechanism correctly implemented?",
+      "description": "Verify if the system properly constrains voters to select exactly 3 candidates from the 4 options. Check if the UI clearly indicates the selection requirement and prevents submission with invalid selections (less than 3 or more than 3). Deduct 5 points if validation is missing, 3 points if validation exists but has bugs. Full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Is the duplicate voting prevention mechanism effective?",
+      "description": "Evaluate how the system prevents the 17 specified voters from voting multiple times. Check for session management, cookies, authentication tokens, or other methods to track who has voted. Assess if the implementation securely stores this information. Score 0 if duplicate voting is possible, 5 if prevention exists but can be bypassed, and 10 if the prevention mechanism is robust.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Is the deadline and result display functionality implemented correctly?",
+      "description": "Check if the system has a configurable deadline after which voting closes and results are automatically displayed. Verify if the transition from voting to results display is seamless. Deduct 5 points if deadline implementation is missing, 3 points if result display doesn't show automatically. Award full 10 points if both are implemented correctly with appropriate time handling.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 4,
+      "title": "Is the code robust?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as browser crashes, network interruptions, page refreshes, or concurrent voting) and provide friendly error prompts or recovery mechanisms. Code with strong robustness should be able to effectively handle these edge cases, giving 10 points. If the robustness is average, give 5 points, and if no exceptions are handled, give 0 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 5,
+      "title": "Are there any innovative features that are eye-catching?",
+      "description": "Check whether the code includes surprise features that enhance the experience (e.g., 1. Real-time voting statistics (visible only after deadline) 2. Secure voting verification receipts 3. Interactive result 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 voter verification methods) 2. Function modules unrelated to voting (e.g., unnecessary animations) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance. 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 voting logic/UI/authentication layers), clean code practices, and security considerations. 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 security vulnerabilities like XSS or CSRF. 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 status for voting selection and submission. Deduct 5 points for operations without feedback, 3 points for confusing selection states, and 5 points for unclear submission confirmation. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    }
+  ],
+  "class": "Web Applications-Communication",
+  "difficulty": "easy"
+}

package/library/web_applications-communication/blazor-server-auth-microservice-timestamp.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 311,
+  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Try to ensure the generated code is executable.\n\nMicroservice 1: Authentication Microservice\nAPI Controller Code:\n```csharp\nnamespace AuthService.Controllers\n{\n    [ApiController]\n    [Route(\"api/[controller]\")]\n    public class AuthController : ControllerBase\n    {\n        private readonly UserManager<IdentityUser> _userManager;\n        private readonly SignInManager<IdentityUser> _signInManager;\n        private readonly IConfiguration _configuration;\n\n        public AuthController(UserManager<IdentityUser> userManager, SignInManager<IdentityUser> signInManager, IConfiguration configuration)\n        {\n            _userManager = userManager;\n            _signInManager = signInManager;\n            _configuration = configuration;\n        }\n\n        [HttpPost(\"register\")]\n        public async Task<IActionResult> Register(RegisterModel model)\n        {\n            var user = new IdentityUser { UserName = model.Username, Email = model.Email };\n            var result = await _userManager.CreateAsync(user, model.Password);\n\n            if (result.Succeeded)\n            {\n                return Ok();\n            }\n\n            return BadRequest(result.Errors);\n        }\n\n        [HttpPost(\"login\")]\n        public async Task<IActionResult> Login(LoginModel model)\n        {\n            var result = await _signInManager.PasswordSignInAsync(model.Username, model.Password, false, false);\n\n            if (result.Succeeded)\n            {\n                var user = await _userManager.FindByNameAsync(model.Username);\n                try\n                {\n                    var token = GenerateJwtToken(user!);\n\n\n                    return Ok(new { token });\n                }\n                catch(Exception e)\n                {\n                    throw e;\n                }\n            }\n\n            return Unauthorized();\n        }\n\n        private string GenerateJwtToken(IdentityUser user)\n        {\n            var claims = new[]\n            {\n                new Claim(JwtRegisteredClaimNames.Sub, user.UserName!),\n                new Claim(JwtRegisteredClaimNames.Jti, Guid.NewGuid().ToString())\n            };\n\n            var key = new SymmetricSecurityKey(Encoding.UTF8.GetBytes(_configuration[\"Jwt:Key\"]!));\n            var creds = new SigningCredentials(key, SecurityAlgorithms.HmacSha256);\n\n            var token = new JwtSecurityToken(\n                issuer: _configuration[\"Jwt:Issuer\"],\n                audience: _configuration[\"Jwt:Audience\"],\n                claims: claims,\n                expires: DateTime.Now.AddMinutes(30),\n                signingCredentials: creds);\n\n            return new JwtSecurityTokenHandler().WriteToken(token);\n        }\n    }\n}\n```\n\nMicroservice 2: Timestamp Microservice:\nController Code:\n```csharp\nnamespace TimestampService.Controllers\n{\n    [ApiController]\n    [Route(\"api/[controller]\")]\n    [Authorize] // Add this attribute to require authentication\n    public class TimestampController : ControllerBase\n    {\n        private readonly TimestampDbContext _context;\n\n        public TimestampController(TimestampDbContext context)\n        {\n            _context = context;\n        }\n\n        [HttpGet]\n        public IActionResult GetTimestamp()\n        {\n            var timestamp = new TimestampRecord\n            {\n                Timestamp = DateTime.UtcNow\n            };\n\n            _context.Timestamps.Add(timestamp);\n            _context.SaveChanges();\n\n            return Ok(timestamp);\n        }\n    }\n}\n```\n\nNow please help me create a Blazor Server project: Blazor has two interfaces: a login interface that authenticates through the API, and a work page that requires login to access. If not logged in, it redirects to the login page (implemented using @Attribute Authorize). The work page has a button and a textbox. When the button is clicked, it retrieves values from microservice 2, where the authentication token is the same as the Blazor verification token, and displays the returned values in the textbox.",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the Blazor authentication implementation complete?",
+      "description": "Check if the Blazor project correctly implements authentication using JWT tokens from the Auth microservice. The code should include proper token storage (localStorage/sessionStorage), token validation, handling token expiration, and redirect logic. Verify that authentication state is preserved across page refreshes.Score 0 if authentication is not implemented, 5 if basic token storage exists but without proper validation/expiration handling, 10 if complete with refresh token mechanism and secure storage.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Is the login interface properly implemented?",
+      "description": "Evaluate if the login interface includes username/password fields with proper validation (required fields, minimum length, etc.), appropriate error handling (displaying API error messages), loading states during authentication, and proper handling of API responses. Check for CSRF protection if using cookie-based auth.Score 0 if basic login form is missing, 5 if form exists but lacks validation or error handling, 10 if the form has complete validation, error handling, and security measures.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Is the work page and authorization correctly implemented?",
+      "description": "Check if the work page is properly protected with [Authorize] attribute, has proper UI components (button and textbox as required), and correctly redirects unauthorized users to the login page. Examine if the authorization is validated both on the client and server sides to prevent unauthorized access.Score 0 if authorization is missing, 5 if authorization exists but redirect logic is flawed or inconsistent, 10 if authorization is complete with proper redirect logic and security checks.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Is the API integration with microservice 2 properly implemented?",
+      "description": "Verify if the Blazor application correctly passes JWT tokens to the Timestamp microservice, handles API responses appropriately, and updates UI based on responses. Check for proper error handling for API failures, network issues, and token validation problems.Score 0 if API integration is missing, 5 if basic integration exists but lacks error handling, 10 if integration includes proper error handling, loading states, and retry mechanisms.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 4,
+      "title": "Is the code robust?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as API failures, token expiration during session, network interruption, validation errors, etc.) and provide friendly error prompts or recovery mechanisms. Check for proper exception handling and fallback 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. Persistent login with refresh token 2. Multi-factor authentication 3. User session management with logout functionality 4. Dark mode for the application 5. Responsive design for mobile compatibility).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 authentication methods or token validations 2. Unnecessary API calls or state management 3. Excessive UI elements that complicate the user experience.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 authentication logic/UI components/API services), component reusability, code organization, and proper dependency injection. Check for code duplication, global state management, and adherence to Blazor best practices.Deduct 5 points if global state pollution is found or proper component structure is not used; deduct 5 points if the code duplication rate is too high (over 30%); deduct 5 points if dependency injection is not properly utilized.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 8,
+      "title": "Does the interface vision meet professional design standards?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the overall design follows modern design principles: 1) Harmonious color matching (no more than 3 primary colors) 2) Proper layout spacing (element spacing follows the 8px multiple principle) 3) Professional font system (body font size ≥ 14px, line height over 1.5 times). Check for consistent styling between login and work pages.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 feedback during API calls and authentication. Check loading indicators during API operations and transitions between pages.Deduct 5 points for each operation without feedback, 3 points for visual lag during operations, and 5 points for hard-to-find key function buttons. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    }
+  ],
+  "class": "Web Applications-Communication",
+  "difficulty": "hard"
+}

package/library/web_applications-communication/campus-lost-found-wechat-mini-program.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 1497,
+  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Be sure to make the code you generate executable for demonstration purposes. Development of a modular-designed WeChat mini program for campus lost and found.",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the basic architecture of the WeChat mini program properly implemented?",
+      "description": "Review whether the code accurately implements the WeChat mini program structure with appropriate app.js, app.json, and page directories. Check if the project uses the correct folder structure (pages, components, utils, etc.) and follows WeChat mini program development conventions. Score 0 if the basic structure is missing, 5 if only basic structure exists without proper organization, and 10 if the architecture follows best practices for WeChat mini programs.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Are the core lost and found features fully implemented?",
+      "description": "Evaluate the completeness of lost and found functionalities: item posting (with images, descriptions, location tags), item searching/filtering, user notifications, and contact mechanisms. Deduct 3 points if image upload is missing, 3 points if location tagging isn't implemented, 2 points if search/filter functionality is limited, and 2 points if notification system is incomplete. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Is the campus-specific functionality properly designed and implemented?",
+      "description": "Check if the mini program has campus-specific features like campus map integration, building/location selection, student verification system, and campus-based filtering. Deduct 3 points if campus map integration is missing, 2 points if location selection is generic rather than campus-specific, 3 points if student verification is absent, and 2 points if campus-based filtering isn't implemented. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Is the modular design approach effectively applied?",
+      "description": "Assess whether the code implements proper component-based architecture with reusable UI components, service layers, and state management. Check for separation of concerns between data models, business logic, and UI. Deduct 3 points if components aren't reusable, 3 points if business logic is mixed with UI code, and 4 points if there's no clear state management approach. 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 network errors, image loading failures, 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. AI-powered image recognition for item categorization 2. Lost item location heat map visualization 3. Seamless integration with campus ID systems). 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 notification systems coexisting) 2. Function modules unrelated to campus lost and found (e.g., a built-in game feature) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., unnecessary animations on every screen). 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 business logic/UI/network layers), code organization, naming conventions, and build process automation. Deduct 5 points if global state pollution is found or design patterns are not used; deduct 3 points if the code duplication rate is too high (over 30%); deduct 2 points if the naming conventions are inconsistent. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 8,
+      "title": "Does the interface design meet WeChat mini program standards?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the overall design follows WeChat mini program design principles: 1) Consistent with WeChat visual language (proper use of navigation bar, tab bar, etc.) 2) Proper layout spacing (element spacing follows the 8px multiple principle) 3) Professional typography system (body font size ≥ 14px, appropriate contrast). Deduct 3 points for each inconsistency with WeChat design standards, 3 points for poor information hierarchy, and 4 points for chaotic layout. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 9,
+      "title": "Is the user experience optimized for the campus context?",
+      "description": "Judge whether the app is optimized for campus users: 1) Fast loading time (initial render ≤ 2s) 2) Minimal steps to report lost/found items (≤ 3 screens) 3) Clear visual guidance for first-time users 4) Campus-specific terminology and workflows. Deduct 3 points for poor performance, 3 points for complex user flows, 2 points for lack of onboarding guidance, and 2 points for generic UX not tailored to campus context. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    }
+  ],
+  "class": "Web Applications-Communication",
+  "difficulty": "medium"
+}

package/library/web_applications-communication/chaoshan-culture-calendar-forum-app.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 1539,
+  "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 and ready for demonstration. I want to create a software about Chaoshan, including calendars with important dates for different regions, customs and traditions, and forum-like features (similar to WeChat Moments).",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the calendar system with regional important dates fully implemented?",
+      "description": "Evaluate the calendar implementation to see if it properly displays important Chaoshan regional dates and events. Check whether it supports customization for different regions within Chaoshan (Chaozhou, Shantou, Jieyang), includes lunar calendar conversion for traditional festivals, and offers filtering/categorization of events. Score 0 if the calendar system is not implemented, 5 if basic calendar functionality exists but lacks regional specificity, and 10 if the implementation is comprehensive with region-specific important dates and proper cultural annotation.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "How well are the Chaoshan customs and traditions documented and presented?",
+      "description": "Assess the quality and comprehensiveness of the cultural content. Check if the code implements interactive displays of Chaoshan traditions (such as Kungfu Tea ceremony, Chaoshan cuisine, opera), includes multimedia elements (images, audio, video), and provides historical context. Evaluate whether the information architecture allows for easy navigation between related customs. Deduct 5 points if cultural documentation is sparse or inaccurate, 3 points if multimedia elements are missing. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Is the forum/WeChat Moments-like feature functional and culturally appropriate?",
+      "description": "Examine the social platform functionality, including post creation, commenting, image sharing, and user profiles. Check whether the UI adheres to familiar WeChat Moments patterns while incorporating Chaoshan cultural elements. Verify the implementation of privacy controls and content filtering. Score 0 if the forum feature is not implemented, 5 if basic posting functionality exists but lacks social interaction features, and 10 if the implementation includes robust interaction capabilities with cultural contextualization.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Is there proper integration between the calendar, cultural content, and social features?",
+      "description": "Evaluate how well the three main components are integrated. Check if calendar events can be shared to the forum, if cultural content can be referenced in posts, and if user-generated content can enhance cultural documentation. Assess if the navigation between sections is intuitive. Deduct 5 points if components operate in isolation with minimal cross-functionality, 3 points if the integration exists but is cumbersome to use. 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 network disconnections, invalid user inputs, missing cultural data, calendar date conversion errors) 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. AR visualization of Chaoshan customs 2. Dialect translation/pronunciation guide 3. Interactive cultural heritage map 4. AI-powered Chaoshan cultural assistant). 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 news feeds with overlapping content) 2. Function modules unrelated to Chaoshan culture (e.g., general social media features that don't connect to the cultural focus) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., excessive animations when displaying calendar events). 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 cultural data/UI/network 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 while incorporating Chaoshan aesthetic elements: 1) Harmonious color matching (traditional Chaoshan colors used appropriately) 2) Proper layout spacing (element spacing follows the 8px multiple principle) 3) Professional font system that supports both standard and any special Chaoshan characters. 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 when switching between calendar, cultural content, and forum sections. 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": "Web Applications-Communication",
+  "difficulty": "hard"
+}

package/library/web_applications-communication/collaborative-whiteboard-tool.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 680,
+  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Make sure the code you generate is executable when possible. Implement a simple collaborative whiteboard tool where users can draw, add shapes and text on a canvas, and share content in real-time with other users for collaboration.",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the canvas drawing functionality fully implemented?",
+      "description": "Review whether the code accurately implements the basic drawing functions (line, freehand, shapes, text) using HTML5 Canvas or SVG. Check if the tool includes brush size/color selection, eraser tool, and shape manipulation (resize, rotate, move). Score 0 if core drawing functionality is missing, 5 if only basic drawing is implemented, and 10 if it includes comprehensive drawing tools with customization options.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Is the real-time collaboration mechanism properly implemented?",
+      "description": "Evaluate the implementation of WebSocket or similar technology for real-time data synchronization between users. Check if the system broadcasts drawing events to all connected clients and manages concurrent edits appropriately. Deduct 5 points if there's no conflict resolution strategy, and 3 points if synchronization has noticeable lag (>200ms). The full score requires bidirectional communication with proper event serialization.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Is there a proper user session and presence management system?",
+      "description": "Check if the code includes user identification, cursor/pointer tracking for different users, and visual indicators showing who is currently active/drawing. Evaluate whether the system handles user joins/leaves gracefully and maintains session state. Deduct 5 points if there's no visual differentiation between users' actions, and 3 points if the presence system lacks reconnection handling.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Does the whiteboard implement content persistence and history?",
+      "description": "Assess whether the whiteboard state can be saved (locally or server-side) and loaded later. Check if there's an undo/redo functionality with reasonable history depth. Verify if users can export their work as images or in a shareable format. Deduct 5 points if persistence is missing entirely and 3 points if history management is limited or buggy.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 4,
+      "title": "Is the code robust?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as network disconnections, browser compatibility issues, concurrent edits, large canvas operations, etc.) and provide friendly error prompts or recovery mechanisms. Code with strong robustness should be able to effectively handle these edge cases, giving 10 points. If the robustness is average, give 5 points, and if no exceptions are handled, give 0 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 5,
+      "title": "Are there any innovative features that are eye-catching?",
+      "description": "Check whether the code includes surprise features that enhance the experience (e.g., 1. AI-assisted shape recognition 2. Collaborative presentation mode 3. Real-time audio/video chat integration 4. Smart object alignment). 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 drawing engines coexisting) 2. Function modules unrelated to whiteboard collaboration (e.g., a built-in file manager) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., excessive animations or transitions). Deduct 3 points for each redundancy found, and directly deduct 10 points if the core functions are interfered with by redundant code.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 7,
+      "title": "Does the code have engineering quality?",
+      "description": "Review modular design (such as separating drawing logic/UI/networking 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 clear separation between front-end and back-end concerns. 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) Clean toolbar organization with clear iconography. Deduct 3 points for each crowded visual element, 5 points for a glaring color combination, and 5 points for chaotic tool placement that hinders usability. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 9,
+      "title": "Is the dynamic interaction smooth and seamless?",
+      "description": "Judge whether the drawing experience feels natural and responsive: 1) Drawing latency ≤ 50ms 2) Smooth rendering without jitter during continuous drawing 3) Intuitive selection and manipulation of objects. Deduct 5 points for noticeable lag when drawing, 3 points for jerky animations during object manipulation, and 5 points for unintuitive tool switching that disrupts workflow. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    }
+  ],
+  "class": "Web Applications-Communication",
+  "difficulty": "hard"
+}

package/library/web_applications-communication/collapsible-sidebar-streaming-content-input-bar.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 1526,
+  "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. Implement the frontend for the page described above, including the collapsible sidebar on the left, the streaming response content frame on the right, and the input bar at the bottom right (supporting file and image imports).",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the collapsible sidebar implementation complete?",
+      "description": "Check whether the sidebar can be collapsed/expanded with smooth animation (duration between 200-300ms). Verify that the sidebar maintains its state across screen size changes and includes proper icon transitions. Score 0 if the sidebar isn't collapsible, 5 if basic toggle functionality exists but lacks animation/transitions, and 10 if fully implemented with responsive behavior and proper state management.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Is the streaming response content frame properly implemented?",
+      "description": "Evaluate the streaming content implementation for proper text animation (character-by-character or word-by-word appearance), scroll management (auto-scroll with user override detection), and proper formatting of code blocks and other content types. Deduct 5 points if streaming animation is missing, 3 points if code syntax highlighting is absent, and 5 points if the scroll behavior is problematic. Full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Is the input bar functionality complete?",
+      "description": "Assess whether the input bar properly handles multiline input, expands vertically with content (with reasonable max-height), and includes a clear send button. Check for keyboard shortcuts (Enter to send, Shift+Enter for new line). Deduct 5 points if file/image import functionality is missing, 3 points if the input doesn't auto-resize, and 5 points if keyboard shortcuts are not implemented. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Is the file and image import functionality properly implemented?",
+      "description": "Verify that the code handles file/image uploads with proper preview, progress indication, size validation (reject files >10MB), and format validation. Check for drag-and-drop support and clipboard paste functionality. Deduct 5 points if only button upload is supported (no drag-and-drop), 5 points if there's no upload validation, and 7 points if image previews are missing. 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 out-of-bounds input, network interruption, user operation errors, etc.) and provide friendly error prompts or recovery mechanisms. Code with strong robustness should be able to effectively handle these edge cases, giving 10 points. If the robustness is average, give 5 points, and if no exceptions are handled, give 0 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 5,
+      "title": "Are there any innovative features that are eye-catching?",
+      "description": "Check whether the code includes surprise features that enhance the experience (e.g., 1. Dark/light mode toggle 2. Keyboard shortcut guide 3. Message search functionality 4. Markdown preview while typing). 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 collapse the sidebar) 2. Function modules unrelated to a chat interface (e.g., built-in games) 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 components/state management/API services), 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 configured properly. 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": "Web Applications-Communication",
+  "difficulty": "medium"
+}

package/library/web_applications-communication/customer-service-chat-button-with-backend.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 1266,
+  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Make sure the generated code is executable and ready for display. Help me write JavaScript code: Create a live customer service chat button in the bottom left corner of my website, with a backend interface where I can view incoming messages.",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the chat button UI implementation complete?",
+      "description": "Check if the code properly implements a visually appealing button fixed in the bottom left corner that expands into a chat window. Verify CSS positioning (fixed position, z-index handling), responsive design across different screen sizes, and proper state handling (minimized/expanded). Deduct 3 points if the button isn't properly positioned, 5 points if it's not responsive, and 3 points if state transitions aren't smooth. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Is the chat interface functionality fully developed?",
+      "description": "Evaluate if the chat component includes essential features: message input box, send button, message history display, timestamps, user identification, and message status indicators (sent/delivered/read). Messages should properly scroll and stack, with clear visual distinction between sent and received messages. Score 0 if core chat functionality is missing, 5 if basic messaging works but lacks visual polish, and 10 if all expected chat UI components are implemented professionally. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Is the real-time messaging functionality implemented?",
+      "description": "Review the implementation of real-time message handling using technologies like WebSockets, Server-Sent Events, or polling. Check for message queue management, reconnection logic, and offline message handling. Deduct 5 points if messages aren't delivered in real-time, 3 points if there's no reconnection handling, and 5 points if there's no offline message support. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Is the admin backend interface properly implemented?",
+      "description": "Assess the admin interface for viewing and responding to customer messages. Check for features like multiple conversation management, search functionality, customer information display, and notification systems for new messages. Deduct 5 points if there's no way to respond to messages, 3 points if multiple conversations aren't supported, and 5 points if there are no notifications for new messages. 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 network interruption, server errors, user input validation, 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. Typing indicators 2. Read receipts 3. File/image sharing capabilities 4. Auto-response templates 5. Customer satisfaction ratings). 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 message sending methods) 2. Function modules unrelated to customer service chat (e.g., unnecessary analytics) 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), error handling, and maintainability. 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 proper error handling or logging. 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 message scrolling, and 5 points for hard-to-find key function buttons. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    }
+  ],
+  "class": "Web Applications-Communication",
+  "difficulty": "medium"
+}