@getollie/cli 0.0.1

package/library/web_applications-education_learning/javascript-dynamic-three-level-train-menu.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 887,
+  "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. Help me write JavaScript code that dynamically generates a three-level menu with the following requirements: The top level is \"Train Selection\", and the second level includes \"My Trains\", \"Morning Trains\", \"Afternoon Trains\", \"Elementary School Evening Tutoring\", and \"Middle School Evening Tutoring\".",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the three-level menu structure correctly implemented?",
+      "description": "Verify if the code properly implements a hierarchical menu with 'Train Selection' as the top level, and the five specified categories ('My Trains', 'Morning Trains', etc.) as second-level items. Check if the structure allows for third-level items to be added under each second-level category. Deduct 5 points if any level is missing, 3 points if the hierarchy is flattened incorrectly.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Is the menu generation truly dynamic?",
+      "description": "Assess whether the menu is generated programmatically through JavaScript rather than hardcoded in HTML. Check if the menu structure is defined as data (array/object) that can be easily modified without changing the core rendering logic. Full points require a clear separation between data structure and rendering logic. Deduct 5 points if menu items are hardcoded, 3 points if the approach doesn't allow easy menu structure modifications.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Is there proper event handling for menu interactions?",
+      "description": "Evaluate the implementation of expand/collapse functionality for menu items. Check for click handlers that toggle visibility of submenu items, proper event bubbling/delegation, and prevention of default actions when needed. Deduct 5 points if expand/collapse functionality is missing, 3 points if event handling has issues, and 2 points if there's no visual feedback on interaction.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Is the menu accessible and keyboard-navigable?",
+      "description": "Check if the menu implementation includes proper ARIA attributes (aria-expanded, aria-haspopup, etc.), keyboard navigation support (tab, arrow keys, escape), and focus management. Full points require complete keyboard accessibility implementation. Deduct 5 points if ARIA attributes are missing, 5 points if keyboard navigation is not implemented.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 4,
+      "title": "Is the code robust?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as empty menu items, deeply nested structures, or long item text) and provide error handling. 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. Smooth animations for expand/collapse 2. Search functionality within the menu 3. Responsive design for different screen sizes). 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 toggle menu visibility) 2. Function modules unrelated to menu navigation (e.g., unnecessary animations) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., excessive DOM manipulations). 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 menu data structure/rendering/event handling), code reusability, and maintainability. Deduct 5 points if global variables are overused; deduct 5 points if the code duplication rate is too high (similar logic repeated for different menu levels); deduct 5 points if there's no clear organization of code functionality. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 8,
+      "title": "Does the interface vision meet professional design standards?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the overall design follows modern design principles: 1) Harmonious color matching (no more than 3 primary colors) 2) Proper layout spacing (element spacing follows the 8px multiple principle) 3) Professional font system (body font size ≥ 14px, line height over 1.5 times). Deduct 3 points for each crowded visual element, 5 points for a glaring color combination, and 5 points for chaotic text-image layout. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 9,
+      "title": "Is the dynamic interaction smooth and seamless?",
+      "description": "Judge whether the dynamic effects conform to human perception characteristics: 1) Click feedback delay ≤ 100ms 2) Transition animation duration controlled between 300-500ms 3) Clear visual focus guidance. Deduct 5 points for each operation without feedback, 3 points for visual after-images during fast sliding, and 5 points for hard-to-find key function buttons. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    }
+  ],
+  "class": "Web Applications-Education/Learning",
+  "difficulty": "easy"
+}

package/library/web_applications-education_learning/javascript-tourism-app-backend-code-explanation.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 1086,
+  "question": "You are a code expert, please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Be sure to make the generated code executable for demonstration purposes. A complete implementation plan for an interactive JavaScript-based tourism app backend code explanation system, with a duration of 8 minutes, operated in VSCode editor, including code demonstrations, real-time interaction, and visual explanation features: requires complete runtime environment configuration or specific functionality extension details.",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the interactive JavaScript-based tourism app backend explanation system fully implemented?",
+      "description": "Review whether the code provides a complete backend explanation system including data models, API endpoints, authentication mechanisms, and database connections. Check if the system has proper MVC/MVVM architecture and RESTful API design. Score 0 if core backend functions are missing, 5 if basic CRUD operations are implemented, and 10 if it includes comprehensive tourism-specific backend functionality (user profiles, booking systems, location services, etc.).",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Is the VSCode editor integration properly configured?",
+      "description": "Evaluate if the code includes necessary VSCode extension configurations (.vscode folder, settings.json, launch.json, tasks.json) for seamless integration. Check if custom snippets, keyboard shortcuts, or debugging profiles are provided for tourism app development. Deduct 3 points if VSCode-specific features are not utilized, 3 points if debugging configurations are missing, and 4 points if there's no consideration for team collaboration settings. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Is the 8-minute demonstration flow properly organized?",
+      "description": "Assess whether the code includes a structured demonstration script with clear time allocations for each segment (e.g., 2 min for setup, 3 min for core features, 2 min for advanced capabilities, 1 min for Q&A). Check if demonstration checkpoints or commented code sections are included to guide the presenter. Deduct 5 points if the demonstration structure is missing, 3 points if timing is unrealistic for code complexity. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Are real-time interaction and visual explanation features implemented?",
+      "description": "Evaluate if the code includes interactive visualization components (e.g., dynamic flow charts, real-time data monitoring dashboards, interactive architecture diagrams) that help explain the backend system. Check if the visualization updates in real-time with backend operations. Deduct 5 points if visualizations are static, 3 points if real-time updates are limited to simple metrics. Add 3 points for innovative visual metaphors specific to tourism contexts (e.g., map-based data flow visualization). 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, invalid inputs, database connection issues, etc.) and provide friendly error prompts or recovery mechanisms. Code with strong robustness should include proper error handling, logging, transaction management, and graceful degradation. Give 10 points if comprehensive error handling is implemented, 5 points if basic exception handling exists, and 0 points if no error handling is present.",
+      "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 code explanation generator 2. Tourism data visualization with geographical mapping 3. Interactive code dependency graphs 4. Live performance monitoring dashboard). Add 3 points for each practical innovative feature implemented (maximum 10 points).",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 6,
+      "title": "Are there any redundant features?",
+      "description": "Strictly check three types of redundancy: 1. Redundant implementation of similar functions (e.g., multiple logging systems coexisting) 2. Function modules unrelated to tourism backend explanation (e.g., unrelated frontend components) 3. Resource-intensive visualizations that affect demonstration 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 API/services/data access layers), unit test coverage, documentation quality, 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 visual explanation components 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 (code font is monospace, explanatory text is sans-serif with size ≥ 14px). Deduct 3 points for each cluttered visual element, 5 points for an ineffective color scheme for code highlighting, and 5 points for poor information hierarchy. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 9,
+      "title": "Is the dynamic interaction smooth and seamless?",
+      "description": "Judge whether the dynamic effects conform to human perception characteristics: 1) Code execution feedback delay ≤ 100ms 2) Transition animations controlled between 300-500ms 3) Clear visual focus on relevant code sections during explanation. Deduct 5 points for operations without visual feedback, 3 points for lagging transitions between explanation sections, and 5 points for unintuitive navigation between code examples. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    }
+  ],
+  "class": "Web Applications-Education/Learning",
+  "difficulty": "hard"
+}

package/library/web_applications-education_learning/javascript-website-grade-geography-questions.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 1118,
+  "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. Use JavaScript to build a website for grading students' short-answer geography questions.",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the core grading engine properly implemented?",
+      "description": "Check if the code implements a natural language processing (NLP) algorithm for evaluating short-answer geography questions. The system should include keyword matching, semantic similarity analysis, or machine learning models. Score 0 if no grading logic is implemented, 5 if only basic keyword matching exists, and 10 if sophisticated analysis (context understanding, synonym recognition) is included.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Does the system have a comprehensive geography question database?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code includes or connects to a structured database of geography questions with corresponding answer criteria. The database should cover various geography topics (physical geography, human geography, etc.) with clear grading rubrics. Deduct 5 points if the question set is too limited (less than 20 questions), and 3 points if the answer criteria are ambiguous. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Is there a flexible student answer input system?",
+      "description": "Review the implementation of the answer submission interface, including text formatting, spell-checking, word count indicators, and support for special geography symbols or terminology. The interface should allow for different answer lengths and provide clear submission feedback. Deduct 5 points if the input system doesn't handle basic text formatting or if there's no character limit indicator. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Are the feedback and assessment features comprehensive?",
+      "description": "Check if the system provides detailed feedback on student answers, including strengths, weaknesses, correct concepts identified, and missing key points. Score 0 if no feedback is provided, 5 if only a basic score is given, and 10 if comprehensive, educational feedback with improvement suggestions is implemented.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 4,
+      "title": "Is the code robust?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as empty submissions, extremely long answers, special characters, network interruptions, 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. Interactive maps for geography answers 2. Visualizations of student performance analytics 3. AI-suggested learning resources based on mistakes). 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 grading algorithms coexisting) 2. Function modules unrelated to geography question grading (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 grading logic/UI/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) 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) Grading result feedback delay ≤ 500ms 2) Transition animation duration controlled between 300-500ms 3) Clear visual guidance for question navigation. Deduct 5 points for each operation without feedback, 3 points for sluggish grading responses, and 5 points for hard-to-find key function buttons. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    }
+  ],
+  "class": "Web Applications-Education/Learning",
+  "difficulty": "easy"
+}

package/library/web_applications-education_learning/learning-partner-matching-system.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 667,
+  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Be careful to ensure the generated code is executable for demonstration. Design a learning partner matching system that intelligently pairs users based on their learning goals, interests, and time schedules. Users can browse matching results and send invitations for collaborative learning. The system should record users' pairing history and feedback to optimize the matching algorithm.",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the user profile and preference system fully implemented?",
+      "description": "Review whether the code includes comprehensive user profiles with learning goals, interests, skill levels, time availability, and preferred learning styles. Check if users can update their preferences and if the system stores this information persistently. Score 0 if basic user data collection is missing, 5 if only basic fields are implemented, and 10 if the profile system is comprehensive with validation and privacy controls.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Is the matching algorithm properly designed and implemented?",
+      "description": "Evaluate the matching algorithm's sophistication - check if it considers multiple factors (learning goals, interests, schedule compatibility, skill level) with appropriate weighting. The algorithm should use more than simple filtering and include some form of scoring or ranking. Deduct 5 points if compatibility calculation is too simplistic, and 3 points if there's no consideration for complementary skills. Score 10 if the algorithm includes machine learning components or adaptive weighting based on past matches.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Is the invitation and communication system functional?",
+      "description": "Check whether the system includes ways for users to browse potential matches, send invitations, accept/decline requests, and initiate communication. Verify if invitation status tracking is implemented and whether notifications are provided. Deduct 5 points if the invitation flow is incomplete, and 3 points if there's no way to message or communicate with potential partners. Give 10 points if real-time notifications and multiple communication channels are implemented.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Is the feedback and algorithm optimization system implemented?",
+      "description": "Assess if the code includes mechanisms to collect user feedback after pairing experiences and whether this data is used to refine future matches. Check if there's a system for rating partnerships and providing structured feedback. Deduct 5 points if feedback collection is missing, and 3 points if collected data isn't fed back into the matching algorithm. Award 10 points if the system includes comprehensive analytics and demonstrably improves matches over time.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 4,
+      "title": "Is the code robust?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code handles common edge cases (mismatched preferences, no available matches, users in different time zones, etc.) and provides appropriate error handling. Check for input validation, security measures against data tampering, and graceful failure modes. Give 10 points if the code handles most edge cases elegantly, 5 points for average robustness with some unhandled exceptions, and 0 points if critical paths lack error handling.",
+      "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-suggested learning activities, 2. Gamification elements for consistent participation, 3. Integration with calendar systems for scheduling). 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 user matching approaches 2. Function modules unrelated to learning partnerships (e.g., extensive social media features) 3. Resource-intensive features that affect core functionality (e.g., unnecessary animations or media). 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 separation of concerns (user management, matching algorithm, communication system), code reusability, and testing provisions. Check for proper database design with normalization, API documentation, and security best practices. Deduct 5 points for global variable abuse, 5 points for repeated code blocks that could be functions, and 5 points for unsecured user data. 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 design principles: 1) Clean user profiles with appropriate information hierarchy 2) Intuitive matching results display with clear call-to-actions 3) Consistent visual language across the platform. Deduct 3 points for cluttered match displays, 5 points for poor information architecture that makes navigation difficult, and 5 points for inconsistent UI elements. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 9,
+      "title": "Is the dynamic interaction smooth and seamless?",
+      "description": "Judge whether the user flows are intuitive: 1) Setting up profiles and preferences feels streamlined 2) Discovering and connecting with potential partners requires minimal steps 3) Navigation between different system sections is coherent. Deduct 5 points for confusing user journeys, 3 points for slow or unresponsive interfaces during matching processes, and 5 points for inadequate feedback when actions are completed. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    }
+  ],
+  "class": "Web Applications-Education/Learning",
+  "difficulty": "medium"
+}

package/library/web_applications-education_learning/lisao-webpage-dynamic-video-audio-narration.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 1542,
+  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Ensure that any code you provide is executable for demonstration. This is an illustration from the Chinese literature lesson on \"Lisao\" (The Lament). I need you to create a webpage based on this image with the following requirements:\n- Transform the image into a dynamic video, adding details from the text\n- Generate a synchronized audio narration file that plays with the video, with the narration content providing supplementary knowledge about \"Lisao\" not covered in the lesson",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the webpage structure properly implemented with HTML5 standards?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the HTML structure follows semantic markup principles with proper use of <header>, <main>, <section>, <footer> tags. Check for responsive design implementation with appropriate meta viewport tags and CSS media queries. Score 0 if basic HTML structure is missing, 5 if basic structure exists but lacks semantic elements, 10 if fully compliant with HTML5 standards including accessible attributes.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Is the dynamic video transformation successfully implemented?",
+      "description": "Review whether the code effectively transforms the static image into a dynamic video with animated elements. Check if it uses canvas manipulation, SVG animations, or HTML5 video elements with proper layering. Score 0 if no animation exists, 5 if basic animation is implemented but lacks smoothness or detail, 10 if the animation is fluid with multiple animated elements that accurately represent scenes from 'Lisao'.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Are the details from the text appropriately incorporated into the visual elements?",
+      "description": "Examine whether specific textual details from 'Lisao' are visually represented in the animations. Check for symbolic elements (like herbs, mythical creatures, or celestial journeys mentioned in the poem), accurate historical context visualization, and visual storytelling elements. Deduct 3 points for each major textual element missing, and 5 points if the visuals contradict the poem's content. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Is the audio narration properly synchronized with the visual content?",
+      "description": "Evaluate the implementation of audio-visual synchronization. Check if the code includes timestamp markers for synchronization points, event listeners for coordinating audio with visual elements, and proper preloading of audio resources. Score 0 if no synchronization exists, 5 if basic synchronization is implemented but with noticeable lag, 10 if perfect synchronization with visual cues matching narration content.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 4,
+      "title": "Is the code robust?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as browser compatibility issues, network interruption during audio/video loading, user interaction errors, etc.) and provide friendly error prompts or recovery mechanisms. Code with strong robustness should be able to effectively handle these edge cases, giving 10 points. If the robustness is average, give 5 points, and if no exceptions are handled, give 0 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 5,
+      "title": "Are there any innovative features that are eye-catching?",
+      "description": "Check whether the code includes surprise features that enhance the experience (e.g., 1. Interactive elements allowing users to trigger specific poem scenes 2. Parallax scrolling effects tied to poem progression 3. Cultural context tooltips appearing alongside narration). 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 animation systems overlapping) 2. Function modules unrelated to the poem presentation (e.g., unrelated social media widgets) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., excessive particle effects causing lag). Deduct 3 points for each redundancy found, and directly deduct 10 points if the core presentation is interfered with by redundant code.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 7,
+      "title": "Does the code have engineering quality?",
+      "description": "Review modular design (such as separating animation/audio/UI layers), file organization, and performance optimization. Deduct 5 points if global variable pollution is found or design patterns are not used; deduct 5 points if the code duplication rate is too high (over 30%); deduct 5 points if no performance considerations (like image optimization or lazy loading) are implemented. 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 classical Chinese aesthetic principles while maintaining modern usability: 1) Harmonious color palette reflecting the poem's tone 2) Proper layout balancing text and visuals with adequate negative space 3) Typography that honors traditional Chinese calligraphy while remaining readable. Deduct 3 points for each visually jarring element, 5 points for inappropriate modern elements that clash with the classical theme, and 5 points for poor readability. 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) Transitions between poem sections feel natural and contemplative 2) Animation timing reflects the emotional pacing of the poem 3) Clear visual guidance for user navigation and interaction. Deduct 5 points for jarring transitions, 3 points for animations that run too quickly to appreciate, and 5 points for confusing navigation or lack of user control options (pause/play/rewind). The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    }
+  ],
+  "class": "Web Applications-Education/Learning",
+  "difficulty": "medium"
+}

package/library/web_applications-education_learning/literature-retrieval-frontend-design.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 1220,
+  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Take care to ensure that any code you generate is executable for demonstration purposes. Design a frontend page similar to literature retrieval systems, referencing third-party open source projects.",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the literature retrieval search functionality fully implemented?",
+      "description": "Check if the code includes a comprehensive search system with advanced filters (author, title, date range, keywords), fuzzy matching, and result sorting capabilities. Review whether proper query string handling and search parameter validation are implemented. Score 0 if there's no search functionality, 5 if only basic keyword search exists, and 10 if advanced search with filters and sorting is fully implemented.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Is the search results display system properly designed?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the results are displayed in a clean, organized format with proper pagination (10-20 items per page), sorting controls, and citation details. Check if each result includes essential bibliographic information (title, authors, publication, year, DOI/URL). Deduct 3 points if pagination is missing, 3 points if sorting options are absent, and 4 points if the results lack proper formatting for academic citations. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Is there a detailed view for individual literature entries?",
+      "description": "Check if users can view detailed information about a specific publication, including abstract, full citation, author details, and related papers. Assess whether the code provides options to export citations in multiple formats (BibTeX, RIS, EndNote). Deduct 5 points if detailed view is missing, 3 points if citation export functionality is absent. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Is there a user account system with save/bookmark functionality?",
+      "description": "Review whether the implementation includes user profiles with the ability to save searches, create bibliographies, and bookmark papers. Check for reading history tracking and organization of saved papers into collections/folders. Score 0 if no user system exists, 5 if basic bookmarking is available, and 10 if comprehensive user profiles with organized collections are implemented.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 4,
+      "title": "Is the code robust?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as empty search results, server errors, malformed queries) and provide friendly error prompts or recovery mechanisms. Check for input validation, error boundary components, and graceful fallbacks. Code with strong robustness should be able to effectively handle these edge cases, giving 10 points. If the robustness is average, give 5 points, and if no exceptions are handled, give 0 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 5,
+      "title": "Are there any innovative features that are eye-catching?",
+      "description": "Check whether the code includes surprise features that enhance the experience (e.g., 1. Visual citation network graphs 2. AI-powered paper recommendations 3. Browser extensions for one-click citation 4. Annotation tools for PDFs). 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 search forms with overlapping functionality) 2. Function modules unrelated to literature retrieval (e.g., a built-in chat system) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., excessive animations or 3D visualizations). 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, API services, and state management), component reusability, and build process automation. Examine code organization, naming conventions, and documentation quality. 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 academic interface principles: 1) Clean, distraction-free reading experience 2) Proper typography for academic content (serif fonts for body text, adequate line spacing) 3) Consistent visual hierarchy with clear content separation. Deduct 3 points for cluttered layouts, 5 points for poor readability (small font sizes, insufficient contrast), and 5 points for inconsistent design patterns across pages. 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) Search response time appears immediate (loading indicators for searches >300ms) 2) Smooth transitions between search results and detailed views 3) Intuitive interactions for filtering and refining searches. Deduct 5 points for laggy search experiences, 3 points for jarring page transitions, and 5 points for confusing navigation patterns. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    }
+  ],
+  "class": "Web Applications-Education/Learning",
+  "difficulty": "medium"
+}

package/library/web_applications-education_learning/lunar-calendar-moon-phase-webpage.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 234,
+  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Be sure to ensure that the generated code is executable for display. Create a webpage showing the moon's phase changes from the first to the thirtieth day of the lunar calendar.",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the lunar phase simulation scientifically accurate?",
+      "description": "Check whether the code correctly represents the lunar phases according to astronomical principles (waxing crescent, first quarter, waxing gibbous, full moon, waning gibbous, third quarter, waning crescent, new moon). Review whether the calculation takes into account the 29.53-day lunar cycle rather than simply using a 30-day calendar. Score 0 if phases are incorrect, 5 if basic phases are present but with inaccuracies, and 10 if astronomically accurate with proper illumination angles.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Is the day-by-day phase transition visualization implemented?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code provides a clear visual representation for all 30 days of the lunar calendar, with proper transitions between phases. Check if the illumination percentage matches the day number in the lunar cycle. Deduct 5 points if transitions are abrupt, 3 points if illumination angles are inconsistent, and 2 points if the shape of the moon is distorted. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Is there an interactive component allowing users to navigate between different days?",
+      "description": "Check whether users can interact with the visualization to select specific lunar days or navigate through the cycle (such as sliders, clickable days, or animation controls). Score 0 if no interaction exists, 5 if basic navigation is implemented but clunky, and 10 if smooth, intuitive navigation with immediate visual feedback is provided.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Is additional contextual information about lunar phases provided?",
+      "description": "Assess whether the code includes educational elements about each lunar phase (names, characteristics, cultural significance, or astronomical explanations). Score 0 if no information is provided, 5 if basic labels are present, and 10 if comprehensive information that enhances user understanding is integrated seamlessly with the visualization.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 4,
+      "title": "Is the code robust?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as out-of-bounds input, browser compatibility issues, user operation errors, etc.) and provide friendly error prompts or recovery mechanisms. Code with strong robustness should be able to effectively handle these edge cases, giving 10 points. If the robustness is average, give 5 points, and if no exceptions are handled, give 0 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 5,
+      "title": "Are there any innovative features that are eye-catching?",
+      "description": "Check whether the code includes surprise features that enhance the experience (e.g., 1. Real-time comparisons with current lunar phase 2. Realistic lunar surface textures with shadows 3. Regional visibility indicators based on geography). 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 calculations or rendering logic that could be optimized 2. Function modules unrelated to lunar phases (e.g., unnecessary weather information) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., excessive animations that distract from the lunar phase visualization). Deduct 3 points for each redundancy found, and directly deduct 10 points if the core visualization is obscured by redundant elements.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 7,
+      "title": "Does the code have engineering quality?",
+      "description": "Review modular design (such as separating astronomical calculations/visualization/user interface layers), code reusability, and implementation efficiency. 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 animation performance is poor (below 30 fps). 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 (appropriate night sky or space theme without being garish) 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 distracting color scheme that diminishes the moon visualization, 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/selection feedback delay ≤ 100ms 2) Phase transition animations controlled between 300-500ms for smooth blending 3) Clear visual cues for current day selection. Deduct 5 points for each operation without feedback, 3 points for jerky animations during phase transitions, and 5 points for confusing navigation between lunar days. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    }
+  ],
+  "class": "Web Applications-Education/Learning",
+  "difficulty": "hard"
+}

package/library/web_applications-education_learning/major-historical-disasters-on-this-day.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 1108,
+  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Make sure that the code you generate is executable for demonstration. Write a tool that can view \"major disasters that happened on this day in history\", in HTML format, for mobile devices.",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the core functionality of displaying 'major disasters on this day in history' implemented?",
+      "description": "Check whether the code properly fetches and displays historical disaster data for the current date. It should include the date handling logic, data retrieval mechanism, and proper rendering. Score 0 if the core functionality is missing, 5 if basic implementation exists but with limitations, and 10 if it comprehensively shows disasters with proper date formatting and details.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Is there an appropriate data source or API integration?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the implementation uses a reliable data source or API to fetch historical disaster information. Check if the API calls are properly structured with error handling, rate limiting consideration, and fallback mechanisms. Deduct 5 points if no proper data source is used (e.g., hardcoded sample data), and 3 points if the API integration lacks error handling. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Is the mobile-specific design properly implemented?",
+      "description": "Assess whether the implementation follows mobile-first design principles, including responsive layouts, appropriate touch targets (minimum 44x44px), mobile-friendly navigation, and proper viewport settings. Check for media queries handling different screen sizes. Deduct 5 points if the interface is not optimized for mobile viewing, and 3 points if touch interactions are not properly implemented. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Does the implementation include date navigation or filtering capabilities?",
+      "description": "Check if users can navigate through different dates or filter disasters by type/severity/location. Evaluate if the date selection is intuitive (calendar picker, swipe gestures, etc.) and whether filter options are properly implemented. Deduct 5 points if date navigation is absent, and 3 points if the filtering system is limited or unintuitive. 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, API errors, invalid dates, empty result sets, 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. Interactive timeline visualization 2. Disaster location mapping 3. Related historical context information 4. Categorization by disaster type with visual indicators). Add 2.5 points for each practical innovative feature implemented (maximum 10 points).",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 6,
+      "title": "Are there any redundant features?",
+      "description": "Strictly check three types of redundancy: 1. Redundant implementation of similar functions (e.g., multiple date pickers) 2. Function modules unrelated to historical disasters (e.g., weather forecasts) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., unnecessary animations or high-resolution images). Deduct 3 points for each redundancy found, and directly deduct 10 points if the core functions are interfered with by redundant code.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 7,
+      "title": "Does the code have engineering quality?",
+      "description": "Review modular design (such as separating data fetching/processing/rendering), code maintainability, and performance optimization. Deduct 5 points if global variables are overused; deduct 5 points if the code has high complexity or poor organization; deduct 5 points if performance optimizations are missing (e.g., no caching of previously viewed dates). 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 mobile design principles: 1) Harmonious color matching (appropriate for the serious subject matter) 2) Proper layout spacing (element spacing follows the 8px multiple principle) 3) Professional typography (readable font sizes ≥ 16px, sufficient contrast). Deduct 3 points for each cluttered section, 5 points for inappropriate color schemes (e.g., festive colors for disaster content), and 5 points for poor information hierarchy. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 9,
+      "title": "Is the dynamic interaction smooth and seamless?",
+      "description": "Judge whether the dynamic effects conform to mobile interaction patterns: 1) Touch feedback delay ≤ 100ms 2) Smooth scrolling through disaster entries 3) Intuitive gestures for date navigation if implemented. Deduct 5 points for laggy scrolling, 3 points for delayed touch responses, and 5 points for unintuitive interaction patterns. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    }
+  ],
+  "class": "Web Applications-Education/Learning",
+  "difficulty": "easy"
+}