@getollie/cli 0.0.1

package/library/web_applications-communication/customer-service-chat-springboot-websocket-offline.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 797,
+  "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. Implement a customer service chat function using Thymeleaf, WebSocket, Spring Boot, MyBatis, and MySQL, with offline support functionality and complete front-end and back-end code. The customer service system should support one-to-many communications.",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the WebSocket implementation complete for real-time chat?",
+      "description": "Review whether the WebSocket communication is properly implemented with Spring's STOMP support, including connection establishment, message routing, and error handling. Check for proper endpoint configuration, message converters, and session management. Score 0 if WebSocket is not implemented, 5 if basic messaging works but lacks proper error handling or reconnection logic, and 10 if fully implemented with heartbeat mechanism and connection state management.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Is the offline support functionality properly implemented?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the system can handle offline scenarios by storing undelivered messages in the database and delivering them when users reconnect. Check if read receipts are implemented, and if the system can track message delivery status. Deduct 5 points if offline messages aren't persisted, 3 points if there's no visual indication of message delivery status, and 2 points if there's no mechanism to handle message order when delivering offline messages. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Is the one-to-many communication model properly designed?",
+      "description": "Check if the system allows customer service representatives to handle multiple customers simultaneously with proper UI for switching between conversations, conversation grouping, and prioritization. Verify if there's a queuing system for unattended customers. Deduct 5 points if there's no way to handle multiple conversations simultaneously, 3 points if there's no conversation prioritization, and 2 points if there's no visual indication of new messages in inactive conversations. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Is the database design complete and properly implemented with MyBatis?",
+      "description": "Evaluate the database schema design for users, conversations, messages, and their relationships. Check if MyBatis mappers, XML configurations, and DTOs are properly implemented. Look for proper transaction management and connection pooling. Deduct 5 points if the schema design doesn't support the requirements, 3 points if there are no indexes on frequently queried columns, and 2 points if there's no pagination for message history. 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 WebSocket disconnections, database connection failures, concurrent access 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 experience (e.g., 1. AI-powered response suggestions 2. Sentiment analysis for customer messages 3. Automatic translation for multi-language support 4. File/image sharing with preview). 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 mechanisms) 2. Function modules unrelated to customer service chat (e.g., unnecessary social features) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., excessive animations). Deduct 3 points for each redundancy found, and directly deduct 10 points if the core functions are interfered with by redundant code.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 7,
+      "title": "Does the code have engineering quality?",
+      "description": "Review modular design (such as separating controller/service/repository layers), unit test coverage, and build process automation. Check if Spring Boot best practices are followed. 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 Thymeleaf templates and CSS follow 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). Review if the chat interface is intuitive with clear visual hierarchy. 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) Message sending/receiving feedback delay ≤ 100ms 2) Transition animation duration controlled between 300-500ms 3) Clear visual focus guidance. Check if new messages are appropriately highlighted and if there are typing indicators. Deduct 5 points for each operation without feedback, 3 points for jerky scrolling when loading message history, 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/dormitory-room-414-official-website.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 1082,
+  "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 display purposes. Help me write a web page in HTML that serves as the official website for Dormitory Room 414, and ensure the encoding format is GB2312.",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the HTML structure semantically correct and follows GB2312 encoding?",
+      "description": "Review whether the HTML uses proper semantic tags (header, nav, main, section, footer) and includes correct GB2312 encoding declaration in meta charset. Check if Chinese characters display correctly without garbled text. Score 0 if encoding is incorrect or semantic structure is missing, 5 if basic structure exists but semantic tags are incomplete, and 10 if fully semantic HTML with proper GB2312 encoding is implemented.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Does the website contain complete dormitory-themed content sections?",
+      "description": "Check whether the website includes essential sections for a dormitory official website: member introductions, dormitory life showcase, activity records, contact information, and dormitory rules/culture. Each section should have meaningful placeholder content or real content. Deduct 2 points for each missing core section. Score 10 if all sections are comprehensive and well-organized.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Is the navigation system intuitive and functional?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the navigation menu is clearly structured with smooth anchor links or page transitions. Check for breadcrumb navigation, active state indicators, and mobile-responsive navigation collapse. Deduct 3 points if navigation links don't work, 2 points if no active states are shown, and 2 points if mobile navigation is not considered. Full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Are interactive elements and dynamic features properly implemented?",
+      "description": "Check if the website includes interactive features like image galleries, contact forms, comment sections, or interactive dormitory member cards. Evaluate JavaScript functionality for dynamic content loading, form validation, and user interactions. Score 0 if no interactive elements exist, 5 if basic interactions are present but limited, and 10 if comprehensive interactive features enhance user engagement.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 4,
+      "title": "Is the code robust?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as missing images, form validation errors, browser compatibility issues, etc.) and provide friendly error prompts or fallback mechanisms. Code with strong robustness should effectively handle edge cases and provide graceful degradation. Give 10 points if fully robust, 5 points if average robustness, and 0 points if no error handling exists.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 5,
+      "title": "Are there any innovative features that enhance the dormitory website experience?",
+      "description": "Check whether the code includes creative features that make the dormitory website stand out (e.g., 1. Interactive dormitory floor plan 2. Member mood/status indicators 3. Shared calendar for dormitory activities 4. Photo timeline of dormitory memories 5. Virtual guest book). 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 contact forms) 2. Function modules unrelated to dormitory life (e.g., e-commerce functionality) 3. Excessive animations that slow down page loading. Deduct 3 points for each redundancy found, and directly deduct 10 points if core dormitory website functions are interfered with by redundant code.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 7,
+      "title": "Does the code have engineering quality?",
+      "description": "Review code organization (separation of HTML/CSS/JS), proper file structure, and clean coding practices. Check for code reusability, proper commenting, and adherence to web standards. Deduct 5 points if inline styles dominate over external CSS; deduct 5 points if code duplication rate is too high (over 30%); deduct 3 points if no proper file organization exists. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 8,
+      "title": "Does the interface design meet professional dormitory website standards?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the design creates a warm, welcoming dormitory atmosphere: 1) Harmonious color scheme suitable for dormitory theme (warm tones preferred) 2) Proper layout with adequate whitespace (8px grid system) 3) Readable typography (body font ≥ 14px, line height ≥ 1.5) 4) Consistent visual hierarchy. Deduct 3 points for each cluttered section, 5 points for inappropriate color choices, and 5 points for poor readability. Full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 9,
+      "title": "Is the user interaction smooth and responsive?",
+      "description": "Judge whether interactions feel natural and responsive: 1) Hover effects and click feedback ≤ 100ms 2) Smooth transitions between sections (300-500ms duration) 3) Clear visual focus and navigation cues 4) Mobile-friendly touch interactions. Deduct 5 points for each unresponsive interaction, 3 points for jarring transitions, and 5 points if mobile usability is poor. Full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    }
+  ],
+  "class": "Web Applications-Communication",
+  "difficulty": "medium"
+}

package/library/web_applications-communication/draggable-menu-buttons.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 1033,
+  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Make sure the code you generate is executable for demonstration. Modify the menu buttons so they can be dragged, and provide me with all the complete code so I can easily copy it!",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the draggable menu button functionality fully implemented?",
+      "description": "Check if the code implements proper mouse/touch event handling for dragging (mousedown/touchstart, mousemove/touchmove, mouseup/touchend), maintains state during drag operations, and correctly updates the button's position based on cursor/touch movement. Score 0 if dragging is not implemented, 5 if basic dragging works with issues, and 10 if the implementation is complete with smooth drag behavior.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Is cross-browser compatibility addressed?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code handles both mouse and touch events appropriately for different devices, uses vendor prefixes where necessary, and implements feature detection to ensure maximum compatibility across browsers. Deduct 3 points if touch events are missing, 3 points if vendor prefixes are not used where needed, and 4 points if no feature detection is implemented. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Are boundaries and constraints properly implemented?",
+      "description": "Check if the code prevents menu buttons from being dragged outside the visible area, implements collision detection with screen edges, and ensures buttons remain accessible to users. Deduct 5 points if buttons can be dragged out of view, 3 points if there's no boundary enforcement, and 2 points if the buttons can overlap in an unusable way. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Does the implementation include a clean reset or save position functionality?",
+      "description": "Assess whether the code includes mechanisms to reset button positions to default, save positions between sessions (using localStorage/sessionStorage), and restore positions on page reload. Score 0 if neither reset nor save functions exist, 5 if only basic position management is implemented, and 10 if complete position management with persistence is included.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 4,
+      "title": "Is the code robust?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as rapid clicks, dragging outside the window, browser resize events, etc.) and provide friendly error handling 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. Animation effects during dragging 2. Snapping to grid or alignment guides 3. Multi-touch support for simultaneous button movements). 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 event listeners that could cause memory leaks 2. Unnecessary wrapper elements that complicate the DOM structure 3. Over-engineered solutions for simple dragging operations. Deduct 3 points for each redundancy found, and directly deduct 10 points if the core functions are interfered with by redundant code.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 7,
+      "title": "Does the code have engineering quality?",
+      "description": "Review code organization (separation of concerns between dragging logic and UI), use of modern JavaScript practices, and performance considerations. Deduct 5 points if global scope is polluted with variables; deduct 3 points if event delegation isn't used for multiple buttons; deduct 2 points if RAF (requestAnimationFrame) isn't used for smooth animations. 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) Visual feedback during drag operations 2) Proper sizing for touch targets (at least 44×44px) 3) Consistent styling that matches the rest of the UI. Deduct 3 points for missing hover/active states, 5 points for inadequately sized touch targets, and 2 points for inconsistent styling. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 9,
+      "title": "Is the dynamic interaction smooth and seamless?",
+      "description": "Judge whether the drag interaction conforms to human perception characteristics: 1) No lag between cursor/touch movement and button position updates 2) Proper acceleration/deceleration if momentum is implemented 3) Clear visual indication of draggable elements. Deduct 5 points for noticeable lag during dragging, 3 points for jumpy movement, and 2 points for lack of visual affordances indicating draggability. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    }
+  ],
+  "class": "Web Applications-Communication",
+  "difficulty": "easy"
+}

package/library/web_applications-communication/dynamic-login-form-validation-captcha.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 1715,
+  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Make sure the code you generate is executable for demonstration purposes. The login interface employs a dynamic form validation mechanism, supporting both username/password login and mobile phone verification code login modes, with built-in CAPTCHA to prevent brute force attacks. Design the HTML.",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Are both login modes fully implemented?",
+      "description": "Review whether the code implements both username/password and mobile verification code login modes with smooth toggle functionality. The toggle should preserve entered data when switching modes. Score 0 if only one mode is implemented, 5 if both modes exist but switching causes data loss, and 10 if both modes function seamlessly with proper state management.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Is the form validation mechanism comprehensive?",
+      "description": "Evaluate the validation logic for all input fields: username format validation, password strength requirements, mobile number formatting, and verification code length checking. Real-time validation with clear visual feedback is required. Deduct 2 points for each field missing validation, 3 points if validation only happens on submission rather than in real-time, and 5 points if error messages are generic rather than specific to the error type.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Is the CAPTCHA mechanism properly implemented?",
+      "description": "Check if the CAPTCHA implementation includes auto-refresh functionality, accessibility considerations (audio alternative), and proper integration with form submission validation. The CAPTCHA should appear after failed attempts and include anti-automation measures. Deduct 5 points if CAPTCHA is purely decorative without validation logic, and 3 points if it lacks refresh capabilities. Give 10 points for a complete implementation with security considerations.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Is the mobile verification code delivery system implemented securely?",
+      "description": "Verify that the code includes rate limiting for SMS requests, countdown timer between requests (typically 60 seconds), proper mobile number validation before sending, and visual feedback during the waiting period. Deduct 5 points if rate limiting is absent, 3 points if there's no countdown timer, and 3 points if the mobile validation occurs only after sending rather than before.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 4,
+      "title": "Is the code robust?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as network delays, invalid inputs, session timeouts, 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. Password strength visual indicator 2. Social login integration 3. Dark/light mode toggle 4. Persistent login option with security warning). 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 validation logic (e.g., multiple password validation functions) 2. Function modules unrelated to login (e.g., newsletter signup within login form) 3. Excessive animations or effects that affect loading 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 (separation of validation logic, UI components, and event handling), code reusability, and maintainability. Deduct 5 points if global variables are excessively used; deduct 5 points if the code contains hardcoded values instead of constants; deduct 5 points if there's significant code duplication. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 8,
+      "title": "Does the interface vision meet professional design standards?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the login form follows modern design principles: 1) Consistent input field styling with clear focus states 2) Proper spacing between form elements (8px grid system) 3) Professional typography with adequate contrast for accessibility. Deduct 3 points for inconsistent styling between input fields, 5 points for poor visual hierarchy (unclear what action to take), and 5 points for inadequate responsive design considerations. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 9,
+      "title": "Is the dynamic interaction smooth and seamless?",
+      "description": "Judge whether the form interactions feel natural: 1) Immediate visual feedback on input validation (≤100ms) 2) Smooth transitions between login modes (300-500ms) 3) Appropriate loading indicators during submission. Deduct 5 points for lack of submission state indication, 3 points for jarring mode transitions, and 5 points for delayed validation feedback causing user confusion. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    }
+  ],
+  "class": "Web Applications-Communication",
+  "difficulty": "medium"
+}

package/library/web_applications-communication/gradio-dynamic-dark-mode-themes.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 415,
+  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Be sure to ensure that the code you generate can be executed and displayed. How can I add two menu items in Gradio, one for dynamically switching dark mode, and another for dynamically switching themes?",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Are the menu items correctly implemented in Gradio?",
+      "description": "Review whether the code properly implements menu items using Gradio's API components. Check for correct use of gr.Dropdown, gr.Radio, or custom components for theme selection. Score 0 if no menu implementation, 5 if basic implementation without proper styling, 10 if fully implemented with proper Gradio component integration.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Is the dark mode switching functionality working correctly?",
+      "description": "Verify the dark mode toggle functionality works dynamically without page refresh. Check for proper event handling that applies CSS changes or theme classes. Examine if the implementation uses Gradio's built-in theme methods or custom JavaScript. Score 0 if not implemented, 5 if implemented but requires page refresh, 10 if fully dynamic with smooth transition effects.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Is the theme switching functionality implemented properly?",
+      "description": "Evaluate if multiple themes can be selected and applied dynamically. Check if the code includes proper theme definitions or uses Gradio's built-in themes. Verify the theme switcher updates all UI elements consistently. Score 0 if theme switching is missing, 5 if only basic theme changes work, 10 if comprehensive theme switching with consistent application across the interface.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Is there proper state management for persistent theme preferences?",
+      "description": "Check if the code maintains user theme preferences across sessions using local storage, cookies, or server-side storage. Verify if theme state is properly synchronized between client and server components. Score 0 if no state persistence, 5 if basic persistence without synchronization, 10 if complete persistence mechanism with proper synchronization.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 4,
+      "title": "Is the code robust?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as browser incompatibilities, CSS conflicts, theme application failures) and provide friendly error handling or 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. Theme preview thumbnails 2. Automatic time-based theme switching 3. Custom theme creation interface). 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 theme switching methods) 2. Function modules unrelated to theming (e.g., unnecessary UI components) 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 from theme logic), code reusability, and maintainability. Deduct 5 points if global variable pollution is found or proper encapsulation is not used; deduct 5 points if the code duplication rate is too high (over 30%); deduct 5 points if the code is not structured logically for easy maintenance. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 8,
+      "title": "Does the interface vision meet professional design standards?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the menu items follow modern design principles: 1) Visually distinguishable from other UI elements 2) Proper spacing and positioning in the interface 3) Professional typography and iconography. Deduct 3 points for poor visual hierarchy, 5 points for inconsistent styling with the rest of the interface, and 5 points for poor accessibility (e.g., low contrast). The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 9,
+      "title": "Is the dynamic interaction smooth and seamless?",
+      "description": "Judge whether the theme switching conforms to human perception characteristics: 1) Theme changes apply without visible flickering 2) Transition effects between themes are smooth (200-400ms) 3) Clear visual feedback when selecting themes. Deduct 5 points for jarring theme transitions, 3 points for delayed application of theme changes, and 5 points for lack of visual feedback during selection. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    }
+  ],
+  "class": "Web Applications-Communication",
+  "difficulty": "medium"
+}

package/library/web_applications-communication/h5-java-user-login-interface.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 899,
+  "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. I need a user login interface based on H5 and Java interaction.",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the front-end login interface fully implemented with HTML5?",
+      "description": "Review whether the code properly implements a responsive login form with HTML5 features (such as form validation, placeholder attributes, and semantic elements). Check if it includes essential login fields (username/email, password) and appropriate input types with attributes for validation. Score 0 if there's no HTML5 implementation, 5 if basic login fields exist but lack proper validation, and 10 if the implementation is complete with modern HTML5 features.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Is the CSS styling professional and responsive?",
+      "description": "Evaluate if the CSS implementation follows responsive design principles with media queries for different devices. Check if it includes modern styling techniques (flexbox/grid, transitions, etc.) and handles different screen sizes properly. Deduct 5 points if the interface doesn't adapt to mobile screens, 3 points if there are clear styling inconsistencies, and 2 points if accessibility features (focus states, contrast ratios) are missing. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Is the client-side validation logic properly implemented?",
+      "description": "Check whether JavaScript validation is implemented for all form inputs before submission. Verify that it includes real-time validation feedback, password strength indicators, and proper error handling. Deduct 5 points if validation only happens on submission without real-time feedback, 3 points if error messages are not specific or helpful, and 2 points if password strength requirements aren't enforced. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Is the Java backend authentication system properly designed and secured?",
+      "description": "Evaluate the Java backend code for secure authentication practices including password hashing (using algorithms like bcrypt/PBKDF2), protection against SQL injection, and proper session management. Check if it implements token-based authentication (JWT/OAuth). Deduct 5 points if passwords are stored in plaintext/weak hashing, 5 points if there's no protection against brute force attacks, and 3 points if secure session handling is 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 network failures during login, invalid inputs, system unavailability, etc.) and provide friendly error prompts or recovery mechanisms. Code with strong robustness should handle connection timeouts, server errors, and input validation gracefully. Give 10 points if all edge cases are handled, 5 points if only basic error handling exists, and 0 points if errors cause the system to crash.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 5,
+      "title": "Are there any innovative features that are eye-catching?",
+      "description": "Check whether the login system includes surprise features that enhance the experience (e.g., 1. Biometric authentication options 2. Social login integration 3. Two-factor authentication 4. Remember me functionality with secure cookie handling 5. Passwordless login options). 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 validation logic (e.g., duplicate validation in both HTML5 attributes and JavaScript) 2. Unnecessary API calls or data processing unrelated to authentication 3. Excessive animations or effects that slow down the login process. Deduct 3 points for each redundancy found, and directly deduct 10 points if the core authentication function is compromised by redundant code.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 7,
+      "title": "Does the code have engineering quality?",
+      "description": "Review modular design (such as separating UI/business logic/API layers), appropriate design patterns, consistent error handling, and proper documentation. On the Java side, check for proper dependency injection, service-repository pattern, and exception handling. Deduct 5 points if global variables are overused; deduct 5 points if there's significant code duplication; deduct 5 points if logging is insufficient for debugging. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 8,
+      "title": "Does the interface vision meet professional design standards?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the login UI follows modern design principles: 1) Cohesive color scheme (no more than 3 primary colors) 2) Proper layout with adequate white space (following the 8px grid system) 3) Professional typography (readable font sizes ≥ 14px, line height over 1.5 times) 4) Clear visual hierarchy guiding users through the login flow. Deduct 3 points for cluttered design, 5 points for jarring color combinations, and 5 points for poor form layout. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 9,
+      "title": "Is the dynamic interaction smooth and seamless?",
+      "description": "Judge whether the login interaction conforms to user expectations: 1) Login button shows loading state within 100ms of click 2) Form validation feedback appears immediately after input 3) Error messages are clearly displayed near the relevant fields 4) Successful login provides visual confirmation before redirect. Deduct 5 points for each interaction without feedback, 3 points for delayed responses over 300ms, and 5 points for confusing navigation after failed login attempts. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    }
+  ],
+  "class": "Web Applications-Communication",
+  "difficulty": "medium"
+}

package/library/web_applications-communication/h5-qr-code-chat-room.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 238,
+  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate, professional responses. Be sure to make the generated code executable for demonstration. Help me create an H5 open chat room where anyone can scan a QR code to enter and chat by sending text messages and images.",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the HTML5 chat room interface fully implemented?",
+      "description": "Review whether the code implements a complete chat interface with message display area, input field, send button, and image upload functionality. Check if messages are properly formatted and displayed with timestamps and user identifiers. Score 0 if the core interface elements are missing, 5 if basic messaging UI is implemented, and 10 if all chat features including text, images, timestamps, and user identification are fully included.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Is the QR code entry mechanism properly implemented?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code generates a proper QR code that contains the room URL, can be displayed clearly on various devices, and handles scanning properly. Check if the QR code generation uses a reliable library and if the generated code scales without degradation. Deduct 5 points if the QR code doesn't work across different devices, and 3 points if there's no validation mechanism to ensure the QR code contains proper data. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Is real-time communication properly implemented?",
+      "description": "Check whether the implementation uses WebSockets or a similar technology for real-time messaging. Verify that messages appear instantly for all users without manual refresh and that the connection handles disconnections gracefully. Deduct 5 points if there's noticeable delay (>500ms), 3 points if reconnection logic is missing, and 5 points if the system doesn't handle multiple concurrent users properly. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Is the image sharing functionality complete and secure?",
+      "description": "Evaluate the image upload and display features, including preview before sending, proper sizing/compression of images, supported formats, and security measures. Check if the code includes validation for file types and sizes, and if images are displayed properly in the chat. Deduct 5 points if there's no file type validation, 3 points if images aren't properly resized for mobile, and 5 points if there's no progress indicator for uploads. 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, invalid file uploads, XSS attacks, 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. Message reactions/emojis 2. Read receipts 3. Typing indicators 4. Voice messages 5. Custom themes). 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 mechanisms) 2. Function modules unrelated to chat (e.g., a built-in game) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., excessive animations that slow down messaging). 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/messaging logic/networking layers), code organization, and proper error handling. 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 security considerations (like sanitizing inputs) are missing. 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) 4) Mobile-responsive design that works on various screen sizes. 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) Message sending feedback delay ≤ 100ms 2) Smooth scrolling when new messages appear 3) Clear visual focus guidance 4) Intuitive image upload process. Deduct 5 points for each operation without feedback, 3 points for jerky animations when messages arrive, 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/hikvision-vue-realtime-monitoring-video-page.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 763,
+  "question": "You are a code expert, please utilize your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Make sure the code you generate is executable for demonstration purposes. Develop a real-time monitoring video page with Hikvision based on the PDF development documentation in conjunction with Vue.",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the Hikvision SDK integration correctly implemented?",
+      "description": "Review whether the code correctly integrates Hikvision Web SDK according to the official PDF documentation, including proper initialization of video plugins, camera connection establishment, and stream decoding capabilities. Check if the implementation handles different video formats (H.264/H.265) and supports multiple resolution options. Score 0 if SDK is not properly integrated, 5 if basic video display works but lacks format support, and 10 if all streaming protocols and formats are fully supported with proper error handling.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Is the real-time video streaming functionality fully operational?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the real-time video streaming maintains stable connection with minimal latency (<500ms), includes proper buffer management to prevent video freezing, and implements automatic stream quality adjustment based on network conditions. Check if the system supports multiple concurrent video streams and handles stream switching seamlessly. Deduct 5 points if latency exceeds 1 second, deduct 3 points if buffer overflow occurs during network fluctuations. Full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Is the Vue.js architecture properly designed with component modularity?",
+      "description": "Check whether the Vue.js implementation follows best practices with proper component separation (video player, control panel, device management), state management using Vuex/Pinia, and reactive data binding for real-time status updates. Evaluate if the component lifecycle methods properly handle video resource allocation and cleanup. Deduct 5 points if components are tightly coupled, deduct 3 points if memory leaks occur during component destruction. Award 10 points for clean modular architecture.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Are the monitoring control features comprehensively implemented?",
+      "description": "Assess whether essential monitoring controls are implemented including PTZ (Pan-Tilt-Zoom) operations, video recording start/stop, snapshot capture, playback functionality, and device status monitoring. Check if the interface provides intuitive controls for brightness/contrast adjustment and supports preset position management. Deduct 3 points for each missing core control feature, deduct 5 points if PTZ operations have noticeable delays. 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 disconnection, device offline, authentication failures, browser compatibility issues, etc.) and provide friendly error prompts or recovery mechanisms. Code with strong robustness should implement automatic reconnection, graceful degradation, and clear error messaging, 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 monitoring experience (e.g., 1. AI-powered motion detection alerts 2. Multi-screen video wall layout 3. Real-time video analytics overlay 4. Mobile-responsive touch controls 5. Video export with timestamp watermarks). 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 video player instances for same stream) 2. Function modules unrelated to video monitoring (e.g., built-in chat system) 3. Heavy visual effects that impact video performance (e.g., complex CSS animations during streaming). Deduct 3 points for each redundancy found, and directly deduct 10 points if the core video functionality is interfered with by redundant code.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 7,
+      "title": "Does the code have engineering quality?",
+      "description": "Review modular design (separating video streaming/UI components/API layers), TypeScript usage for type safety, proper error boundaries, and build optimization for video streaming performance. Deduct 5 points if global state pollution is found or Vue composition API is not properly utilized; deduct 5 points if bundle size is not optimized for video streaming; deduct 5 points if no proper testing setup for video components. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 8,
+      "title": "Does the interface vision meet professional monitoring system standards?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the design follows professional monitoring interface principles: 1) Dark theme optimized for long-term viewing 2) High contrast elements for critical controls 3) Proper video aspect ratio maintenance 4) Professional control panel layout with logical grouping. Deduct 3 points for each poorly positioned control element, 5 points for eye-straining color schemes inappropriate for monitoring, and 5 points for video distortion or improper scaling. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 9,
+      "title": "Is the dynamic interaction smooth and seamless?",
+      "description": "Judge whether the video controls and interactions meet professional monitoring standards: 1) PTZ control response time ≤ 200ms 2) Video switching without black screen flicker 3) Control panel overlay without interfering video viewing 4) Smooth zoom and pan operations without stuttering. Deduct 5 points for each laggy control response, 3 points for video artifacts during operation transitions, and 5 points for unresponsive touch/click areas in video player. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    }
+  ],
+  "class": "Web Applications-Communication",
+  "difficulty": "hard"
+}