@getollie/cli 0.0.1

package/library/web_applications-communication/sdu-compuex-network-repair-activity-record.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 1256,
+  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Ensure that the generated code is executable for demonstration purposes. Help me write a \"SDU COMPUEX Shandong University Digital Technology Club Activity Record Sheet\" for a \"Network Repair System Development\" project. The background is Shandong University. The Network Repair System Development is based on Python FastAPI+Vue3, supporting repair requests from multiple campuses, with real-time responses and email notifications.",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the Python FastAPI backend implementation complete?",
+      "description": "Review whether the code properly implements RESTful API endpoints using FastAPI, including authentication, error handling, and middleware for cross-campus repair requests. Check if proper dependency injection, request validation, and response models are implemented. Score 0 if core API endpoints are missing, 5 if basic endpoints are implemented but lack proper validation/error handling, and 10 if the implementation is complete with documentation.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Is the Vue3 frontend implementation complete?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the Vue3 frontend includes all necessary components for the repair system (request form, status tracking, admin dashboard), uses Composition API or Options API consistently, and implements proper state management (Vuex/Pinia). Deduct 3 points if responsive design is missing, 3 points if component reusability is poor, and 4 points if proper form validation is absent. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Is the real-time notification system properly implemented?",
+      "description": "Check if the system implements WebSockets or Server-Sent Events for real-time status updates, and verify if the email notification system uses proper templates and error handling. Deduct 5 points if the notification system doesn't handle connection drops, 3 points if email templates are hardcoded without variables, and 2 points if notification preferences aren't configurable. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Is the multi-campus support architecture properly designed?",
+      "description": "Assess whether the system implements proper data segregation for multiple campuses, includes campus-specific configurations, and handles cross-campus reporting/analytics. Deduct 4 points if campus data isn't properly isolated, 3 points if the system lacks campus-specific customization, and 3 points if cross-campus analytics 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 invalid inputs, network failures, database connection 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 categorization of repair requests 2. Interactive heatmap of repair locations 3. Priority calculation based on historical patterns). Add 3 points for each practical innovative feature implemented (maximum 10 points).",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 6,
+      "title": "Are there any redundant features?",
+      "description": "Strictly check three types of redundancy: 1. Redundant implementation of similar functions (e.g., multiple notification systems doing the same thing) 2. Function modules unrelated to network repair (e.g., a built-in weather widget) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., unnecessary animations). Deduct 3 points for each redundancy found, and directly deduct 10 points if the core functions are interfered with by redundant code.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 7,
+      "title": "Does the code have engineering quality?",
+      "description": "Review modular design (such as separating business logic/view/data layers), unit test coverage, and build process automation. Deduct 5 points if global state pollution is found or design patterns are not used; deduct 5 points if the code duplication rate is too high (over 30%); deduct 5 points if the build process is not automated. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 8,
+      "title": "Does the interface vision meet professional design standards?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the overall design follows modern design principles: 1) Harmonious color matching (no more than 3 primary colors, preferably using Shandong University's brand 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": "hard"
+}

package/library/web_applications-communication/secret-mailbox-webpage.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 1778,
+  "question": "You are a code expert, please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Be sure to provide executable code whenever possible. Help me create a webpage about a secret mailbox.",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the secret mailbox core functionality fully implemented?",
+      "description": "Check if the code implements the fundamental secret mailbox features including message encryption, secure storage, and retrieval mechanisms. Score 0 if encryption is missing, 5 if only basic encryption without proper key management is implemented, and 10 if end-to-end encryption with secure key exchange is fully implemented.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Is the user authentication system secure and robust?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the authentication system uses industry standards (e.g., OAuth, JWT) with proper session management, password hashing (bcrypt/Argon2), and protection against common attacks (CSRF, XSS). Deduct 5 points if password storage is insecure, 3 points if 2FA is missing, and 3 points if there's no account recovery mechanism.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Are privacy and security measures thoroughly implemented?",
+      "description": "Check if the code includes message expiration features, self-destructing messages, encryption at rest, secure transport (HTTPS), and protection against metadata leakage. Deduct 3 points for each missing critical security feature. The implementation should ensure forward secrecy and deniability where appropriate.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Is the message composition and delivery system fully functional?",
+      "description": "Review whether the message system allows rich content (text formatting, attachments), scheduled deliveries, read receipts (with privacy options), and recipient verification. Score 3 points for basic messaging, 7 points for comprehensive features, and 10 points for a complete system with error handling and delivery confirmation.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 4,
+      "title": "Is the code robust?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as network interruption, invalid inputs, authentication failures) 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. Steganography to hide messages within images 2. Decoy messages/mailboxes under duress 3. Location-based or time-based access restrictions). 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 encryption methods without clear purpose) 2. Function modules unrelated to secure messaging (e.g., unnecessary social features) 3. Fancy effects that compromise security or 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 security logic/UI/networking layers), unit test coverage, and build process automation. Deduct 5 points if global state pollution is found or design patterns are not used; deduct 5 points if the code duplication rate is too high (over 30%); deduct 5 points if the build process is not automated. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 8,
+      "title": "Does the interface vision meet professional design standards?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the overall design follows modern design principles: 1) Harmonious color matching (no more than 3 primary colors, preferably with dark mode for privacy) 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 with security-oriented interaction patterns. 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/send-well-wishes-child-birth.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 252,
+  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Be sure to provide executable code for demonstration. Create a front-end program that simulates sending well-wishes to ZKT and ZYX for having a child soon.",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the well-wishes sending simulation core functionality fully implemented?",
+      "description": "Review whether the code accurately implements the well-wishes sending mechanism through HTML/JavaScript, including input validation for blessing messages, character handling for ZKT and ZYX names, and message formatting/display logic. Score 0 if the core blessing interaction is not implemented, 5 if only basic message input is implemented, and 10 if comprehensive blessing categories, personalized messages, and recipient-specific customization are fully included.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Are interactive blessing elements and visual feedback mechanisms implemented?",
+      "description": "Check whether the implementation includes interactive elements such as blessing card selection, animated message sending effects, and visual confirmation feedback. Evaluate if there are multiple blessing templates, customizable message styles, and engaging visual elements like floating hearts, confetti, or blessing animations. Deduct 5 points if visual feedback is missing, and 3 points if interaction responsiveness is poor. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Is a comprehensive blessing message management system designed?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the system includes blessing message categorization (e.g., traditional, modern, humorous), message history tracking, and the ability to generate/display multiple blessing formats. Check if there's a mechanism to store and retrieve sent blessings, preview functionality, and options for different blessing occasions. Deduct 5 points if message persistence is not implemented, and 3 points if categorization system is missing. Give 10 points if fully implemented.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Is the complete blessing experience workflow constructed?",
+      "description": "Check whether the code includes a complete user journey from blessing creation to delivery simulation, including recipient selection (ZKT/ZYX), message customization, sending animation, and confirmation display. Evaluate if there's a blessing gallery, sharing options, and celebration effects. Deduct 5 points if the workflow is incomplete, and 3 points if user guidance is unclear. Give 10 points if the entire experience 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, special characters in messages, browser compatibility issues, etc.) and provide friendly error prompts or recovery mechanisms. Code with strong robustness should be able to effectively handle these edge cases, giving 10 points. If the robustness is average, give 5 points, and if no exceptions are handled, give 0 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 5,
+      "title": "Are there any innovative features that are eye-catching?",
+      "description": "Check whether the code includes surprise features that enhance the blessing experience (e.g., 1. AI-generated personalized blessing poems 2. Interactive blessing card designer 3. Animated blessing delivery simulation with sound effects 4. Social sharing with custom blessing images). 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 blessing functions (e.g., multiple message input methods coexisting unnecessarily) 2. Function modules unrelated to blessing simulation (e.g., built-in games or unrelated utilities) 3. Overly complex animations that detract from the main purpose. Deduct 3 points for each redundancy found, and directly deduct 10 points if the core blessing 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 blessing logic/UI components/data management), code organization, and maintainability. 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 the code lacks proper commenting and documentation. 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 for a blessing/celebration theme: 1) Harmonious and warm color palette suitable for congratulations (no more than 3 primary colors) 2) Proper layout spacing with clear visual hierarchy (element spacing follows the 8px multiple principle) 3) Professional typography system (body font size ≥ 14px, line height over 1.5 times). Deduct 3 points for each crowded visual element, 5 points for inappropriate color combinations for the occasion, and 5 points for chaotic layout. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 9,
+      "title": "Is the dynamic interaction smooth and celebration-appropriate?",
+      "description": "Judge whether the dynamic effects conform to the celebratory nature and human perception: 1) Click feedback delay ≤ 100ms 2) Blessing animation duration appropriate for the content (300-800ms for celebration effects) 3) Clear visual focus and delightful micro-interactions. Deduct 5 points for each operation without proper feedback, 3 points for jarring or inappropriate animations, and 5 points if the overall interaction doesn't convey the joyful blessing sentiment. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    }
+  ],
+  "class": "Web Applications-Communication",
+  "difficulty": "easy"
+}

package/library/web_applications-communication/simple-forum-website-no-database.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 946,
+  "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. Actually, WebSocket might be a bit challenging, so let's do this instead: Imagine a forum with multiple users where each user can post messages. Please design a simple website without using a database.",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the forum post creation and display system fully implemented?",
+      "description": "Review whether the code accurately implements a basic forum structure with post creation, display, and management through HTML/JavaScript. Check if posts have essential attributes (author, timestamp, content, title). Score 0 if the core functionality is missing, 5 if only basic post display is implemented, and 10 if full post creation, display, and management are included.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Is the multi-user functionality implemented?",
+      "description": "Check whether the implementation includes user registration/login mechanisms, user-specific content displays, and proper session management (using localStorage/sessionStorage in absence of a database). Verify if users can be distinguished and their posts are properly attributed. Score 0 if no user management exists, 5 if basic username identification is implemented, and 10 if complete user profiles and session management are present.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Is the data persistence approach well-designed without using a database?",
+      "description": "Evaluate how the code handles data persistence using client-side storage (localStorage/sessionStorage/IndexedDB). Check for proper data structuring, handling of storage limits, and potential data loss prevention. Deduct 5 points if no data persistence exists, 3 points if data can be lost on browser refresh. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Is the forum interaction model complete?",
+      "description": "Check whether core forum functionalities are implemented: post creation/editing/deletion, sorting/filtering of posts, comment threading (if applicable), and notification of new posts. Deduct 3 points for each missing core functionality, and 5 points if the interaction flow is cumbersome or unintuitive. Give 10 points if fully implemented.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 4,
+      "title": "Is the code robust?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common edge cases (empty posts, very long content, special characters in inputs, concurrent users making changes, storage limit exceeded, etc.) and provide friendly error handling. Code with strong robustness should 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. Rich text editing 2. Post tagging system 3. Real-time content preview 4. Responsive design for mobile). 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 post creation methods) 2. Function modules unrelated to forum functionality (e.g., a built-in calculator) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., excessive animations). Deduct 3 points for each redundancy found, and directly deduct 10 points if the core functions are interfered with by redundant code.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 7,
+      "title": "Does the code have engineering quality?",
+      "description": "Review modular design (separation of UI/data/event handling layers), code reusability, 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 error handling or logging mechanism. 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) Form submission feedback delay ≤ 100ms 2) Transition animation duration controlled between 300-500ms 3) Clear visual indication for post creation success/failure. Deduct 5 points for each operation without feedback, 3 points for jarring transitions between forum sections, and 5 points for hard-to-find key function buttons. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    }
+  ],
+  "class": "Web Applications-Communication",
+  "difficulty": "easy"
+}

package/library/web_applications-communication/social-media-feed-with-posts-likes-comments.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 507,
+  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Make sure any code you generate is executable for demonstration purposes.\n\n======== ROLE ========\nYou are an experienced code expert. I'm providing you with a software development requirement description and asking you to generate project code based on these requirements. Strictly follow the rules to help users generate complete project code with simple and easy-to-understand comments. Don't output anything else.\n\n======== OUTPUT RULES ========\n1. Always generate complete, runnable project code. Ensure the project is fully executable\n2. Make sure all code files you output are complete, don't omit any code\n3. Carefully review and check all code before final output, evaluating its executability. If the code cannot run or contains errors, regenerate it\n4. If the requirements include external API access or use of user data (images, videos, audio, etc.), please provide mock data\n\n======== PROJECT REQUIREMENTS ========\nImplement a social media feed page where users can publish new posts and view friends' posts. Posts can contain text, images, and videos, with support for likes and comments. New posts should automatically load at the top of the feed.",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the social media feed UI implementation complete?",
+      "description": "Review the HTML/CSS structure for the feed page to ensure it properly displays posts with text, images, and videos in a responsive layout. Check for proper UI components including post creation form, post display cards, like buttons, comment sections, and scrollable feed container. Score 0 if missing core UI elements, 5 if basic layout exists but lacks refinement, 10 if fully implemented with proper spacing, responsiveness, and visual hierarchy.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Is the post creation functionality properly implemented?",
+      "description": "Verify that users can create new posts with text, images, and videos. Check for form validation, proper handling of media uploads (or mock functionality), preview capabilities, and submission handling. The implementation should include error states, loading indicators, and success feedback. Deduct 5 points if media upload handling is missing, 3 points if validation is incomplete. Full score if the creation flow is intuitive and handles all required content types.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Is the feed data management and display logic implemented correctly?",
+      "description": "Evaluate how posts are fetched, stored, and displayed in the feed. Check for proper data structures, state management approaches, and rendering optimization. New posts should appear at the top of the feed automatically. Review pagination or infinite scroll implementation if included. Deduct 5 points if new posts don't automatically appear at the top, 3 points if post ordering is incorrect, and 3 points if there's no loading state for initial feed load. Full score requires efficient rendering and proper data flow.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Are social interactions (likes and comments) fully functional?",
+      "description": "Check if like functionality updates count and visual state immediately (optimistic UI), with proper error handling if the action fails. Comment system should allow adding new comments, display existing ones with proper timestamps and user info, and potentially support nested replies. Deduct 5 points if like counts don't update immediately, 3 points if comment submission has no visual feedback, and 5 points if comment display is missing essential information. Full score requires complete implementation of both features with proper UX considerations.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 4,
+      "title": "Is the code robust?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as network failures during post creation, invalid input data, failed media loading, 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. Post content sentiment analysis 2. Smart content recommendations 3. Interactive post reactions beyond simple likes 4. Accessibility features). Add 3 points for each practical innovative feature implemented (maximum 10 points).",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 6,
+      "title": "Are there any redundant features?",
+      "description": "Strictly check three types of redundancy: 1. Redundant implementation of similar functions (e.g., multiple ways to create posts) 2. Function modules unrelated to social media feed (e.g., a built-in calculator) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., excessive animations on scroll). 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, and API services), component reusability, and build process/folder structure. 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 or folder structure is chaotic. 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) Like/comment feedback delay ≤ 100ms 2) Transition animation duration controlled between 300-500ms 3) Clear visual focus guidance when creating posts. Deduct 5 points for each operation without feedback, 3 points for jerky scroll performance, and 5 points for laggy media loading without placeholders. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    }
+  ],
+  "class": "Web Applications-Communication",
+  "difficulty": "medium"
+}

package/library/web_applications-communication/song-request-app-with-social-features.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 1195,
+  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Be sure to ensure the generated code is executable for demonstration. Write a piece of code for a song request app. The main interface has the title \"Home\" at the top, and is divided into four areas below: the first area is for requesting songs, the second area is for singing, the third area is similar to a social feed where you can post songs you've sung, and the fourth area is a personal profile page.",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the song request functionality fully implemented?",
+      "description": "Review whether the code implements a complete song request system including search functionality, song selection, and queue management. Check if the interface allows filtering songs by genre, artist, or popularity. The implementation should handle API calls to music databases and include loading states. Score 0 if song request is missing, 5 if basic functionality exists but lacks search filters or queue management, 10 if the system is comprehensive with all expected features.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Is the singing area properly developed?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the singing interface includes essential features like lyrics display with timing synchronization, audio playback controls, recording capability, and post-recording options (save, share, discard). Check if the interface handles different screen sizes appropriately and maintains proper audio synchronization. Deduct 5 points if recording functionality is missing, 3 points if there's no lyrics synchronization. Award full 10 points only if all components work together seamlessly.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Is the social feed implementation complete?",
+      "description": "Check whether the social feed includes core functionality for displaying user-posted songs with appropriate metadata (user, song title, timestamp), interaction features (like, comment, share), infinite scrolling or pagination, and content filtering options. Ensure data loading is optimized and includes skeleton states. Deduct 3 points for missing interaction features, 3 points for poor feed performance, and 4 points if content filtering is absent. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Is the profile page properly implemented?",
+      "description": "Assess whether the profile page displays user information (avatar, username, bio), statistics (songs sung, followers/following counts), activity history, and settings/customization options. Check if the implementation includes responsive design for different device sizes and proper state management for authenticated/unauthenticated views. Deduct 3 points for missing user statistics, 3 points for absent activity history, and 4 points if profile customization options are not available. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 4,
+      "title": "Is the code robust?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code includes error handling for API failures, input validation, empty states (no search results, empty feed), and offline functionality. Code should gracefully handle edge cases such as long song titles, missing profile images, or failed uploads. Award 10 points for comprehensive error handling with user-friendly messages, 5 points for basic error checks without recovery mechanisms, and 0 points if exceptions are unhandled.",
+      "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. Voice-activated song search 2. Live collaborative singing rooms 3. AI-generated song recommendations based on singing style 4. Vocal range analysis and matching). 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. Duplicated navigation components or overlapping gestures 2. Unnecessary animations that slow down the app experience 3. Feature bloat unrelated to the core music/social experience (e.g., embedded games, weather widgets). 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 component architecture (separation of UI/logic), state management approach, code reusability across the four main sections, and performance optimizations. Deduct 5 points for global state pollution or prop drilling issues; deduct 3 points if the rendering optimization is poor (unnecessary re-renders); deduct 2 points if there's no code splitting for the four main sections. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 8,
+      "title": "Does the interface vision meet professional design standards?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the UI follows modern app design principles: 1) Consistent color scheme across all four areas 2) Typography hierarchy that prioritizes readability 3) Proper use of whitespace and content density 4) Clear visual distinction between the four main areas. Deduct 3 points for inconsistent styling between sections, 4 points for cluttered layouts, and 3 points for poor information hierarchy. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 9,
+      "title": "Is the navigation and transition between areas smooth and intuitive?",
+      "description": "Judge the app's navigation system: 1) Clear, persistent access to all four main areas 2) Smooth transitions between sections (≤ 300ms) 3) Proper loading states during content fetching 4) Navigation state preservation when switching between areas. Deduct 3 points for jarring transitions, 3 points for confusing navigation patterns, and 4 points if the current section isn't clearly indicated. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    }
+  ],
+  "class": "Web Applications-Communication",
+  "difficulty": "medium"
+}

package/library/web_applications-communication/tencent-yuanbao-ai-response-interface-bootstrap-v5.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 1308,
+  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Make sure the generated code is executable when possible. Create an HTML page using Bootstrap V5 that resembles the Tencent Yuanbao client's AI response interface (with functionality for uploading files and images).",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the basic Tencent Yuanbao AI interface structure implemented correctly?",
+      "description": "Verify if the code includes the essential UI components of Yuanbao client: header with branding, sidebar for navigation/chat history, main conversation area, input field with send button, and file/image upload controls. Score 0 if the interface is completely different, 5 if it has basic resemblance but missing key elements, 10 if all major components match the Yuanbao interface layout.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Is the file and image upload functionality properly implemented?",
+      "description": "Check if the upload functionality includes: file input controls, preview capability for images before upload, file type validation, progress indicators, and proper error handling for rejected files. Deduct 3 points if preview functionality is missing, 3 points if there's no validation for file types/sizes, and 4 points if error handling is absent. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Is Bootstrap V5 used correctly and efficiently?",
+      "description": "Evaluate proper usage of Bootstrap V5 components and utilities: grid system for responsive layout, appropriate use of cards/modals/dropdowns, proper spacing utilities, and responsive breakpoints. Deduct 3 points for using deprecated Bootstrap 4 features, 2 points for excessive custom CSS that could be handled by Bootstrap utilities, and 5 points if responsive design is not implemented. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Is the chat/response interface functional and interactive?",
+      "description": "Assess if the interface allows for displaying AI responses with proper formatting, shows user/AI distinction visually, handles different message types (text, code, images), and provides interaction feedback. Deduct 3 points if message formatting is not implemented, 4 points if there's no visual distinction between user and AI messages, and 3 points if there's no interaction feedback. 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 large file uploads, server errors, unsupported file types, 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. Voice input capability 2. Message reactions/emojis 3. Theme switching between light/dark modes). 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 upload files) 2. Function modules unrelated to an AI chat interface (e.g., a built-in game) 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/API calls), clean HTML structure, appropriate use of JavaScript best practices, and code organization. Deduct 5 points if global namespace pollution is found; deduct 3 points if there's inline styling instead of proper CSS classes; deduct 2 points if the HTML structure is overly nested or doesn't follow semantic principles. 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 that matches Tencent's brand 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 inconsistent color scheme with Tencent Yuanbao, 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 for upload actions. Deduct 5 points for each operation without feedback, 3 points for jarring transitions when uploading files or receiving responses, and 5 points if important controls like the upload button aren't prominently visible. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    }
+  ],
+  "class": "Web Applications-Communication",
+  "difficulty": "easy"
+}

package/library/web_applications-communication/tencent-yuanbao-ant-design-pro-chat-window.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 875,
+  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Be sure to provide executable code in your demonstrations. Please develop a chat window similar to Tencent Yuanbao using AntDesignPro, and provide the TypeScript code.",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the basic chat window UI structure correctly implemented?",
+      "description": "Review whether the code implements the key UI components of a chat window similar to Tencent Yuanbao: conversation list sidebar, chat message area, input area, and header bar using Ant Design Pro components. Check if the layout properly handles responsive design. Score 0 if the basic structure is missing, 5 if only part of the structure is implemented, and 10 if the full Yuanbao-like structure is present with proper styling.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Is the message display functionality properly implemented?",
+      "description": "Evaluate if the code implements message bubbles that correctly distinguish between sent and received messages with different styling and positioning. Check if timestamps are displayed, avatars are included, and if the message area auto-scrolls to the latest message. Deduct 3 points if message grouping by time is missing, 3 points if read receipts aren't implemented, and 2 points if media content (images, files) display is not supported. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Is the message input and sending functionality complete?",
+      "description": "Check if the input area includes text input, emoji picker, file attachment options, and send button. Verify if the code handles message composition, validation, and sending with proper TypeScript typing. Deduct 3 points if emoji support is missing, 3 points if file attachment isn't implemented, and 2 points if there's no input validation. Deduct 5 points if the TypeScript interfaces for message objects are incomplete or incorrect. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Is the chat history and conversation management implemented?",
+      "description": "Assess whether the code includes conversation list management, history loading with pagination, conversation search functionality, and unread message indicators. Check for proper state management using React hooks or Redux. Deduct 3 points if conversation search is missing, 3 points if message history pagination isn't implemented, and 4 points if there's no state persistence between sessions. 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, long messages, empty states, and message send failures) 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 2. Voice/video messaging 3. Read receipts with animations 4. Message translation). 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 logics coexisting) 2. Function modules unrelated to chat (e.g., unrelated dashboard 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 components/services/state management), TypeScript typing quality, component reusability, and code organization. Deduct 3 points if global state pollution is found; deduct 3 points if TypeScript interfaces/types are poorly defined or any 'any' type is used; deduct 2 points if the code duplication rate is too high (over 30%); deduct 2 points if the component architecture doesn't follow Ant Design Pro conventions. 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 Ant Design principles: 1) Consistent use of Ant Design components without custom overrides 2) Proper layout spacing using Ant Design's grid system 3) Professional typography following Ant Design's text hierarchy. Deduct 3 points for each inconsistent visual element, 3 points for breaking Ant Design's color palette, and 4 points for chaotic layout not following Ant Design Pro patterns. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 9,
+      "title": "Is the dynamic interaction smooth and seamless?",
+      "description": "Judge whether the dynamic effects conform to human perception characteristics: 1) Message sending feedback delay ≤ 100ms 2) Transition animations for new messages and conversation switching 3) Clear loading states and progress indicators. Deduct 3 points for each operation without feedback, 3 points for jerky scrolling or transitions, and 4 points for missing loading states during data fetching operations. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    }
+  ],
+  "class": "Web Applications-Communication",
+  "difficulty": "medium"
+}