@getollie/cli 0.0.1

package/library/web_applications-education_learning/typing-training-simulator.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 1637,
+  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Be sure to ensure that the code you generate is executable for demonstration purposes. Create a typing training simulator.",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the typing input system properly implemented?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code correctly captures keystrokes, handles character matching with target text, and validates user input. Check if it accurately measures typing speed (WPM), accuracy percentage, and handles both correct and incorrect keystrokes appropriately. Score 0 if basic keystroke detection is missing, 5 if only basic functionality exists, and 10 if it includes advanced features like key highlighting and real-time feedback.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Does the application include a comprehensive text content system?",
+      "description": "Review the variety and quality of typing content (paragraphs, sentences, words, code snippets). Check whether the system includes different difficulty levels and diverse content categories. Score 3 points for basic random text generation, 7 points for a moderate collection of varied content, and 10 points for an extensive library with customizable content options and progressive difficulty.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Is there a complete statistics and progress tracking system?",
+      "description": "Assess whether the application tracks and displays meaningful typing metrics (WPM, accuracy, error rate, improvement over time). Verify if historical data is persisted and if the system provides visual charts/graphs for progress tracking. Deduct 5 points if only basic current-session stats are shown without persistence, and 3 points if visualization of progress is missing. Give full 10 points for comprehensive analytics with trend analysis.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Are there customization options and training modes?",
+      "description": "Evaluate the range of training modes (timed tests, word practice, code typing, etc.) and customization options (font size, themes, sound effects, keyboard layouts). Check if users can create custom training sessions. Score 3 points for basic functionality, 7 points if multiple modes exist, and 10 points if it includes adaptive training that focuses on user's weak points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 4,
+      "title": "Is the code robust?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle edge cases (rapid typing, simultaneous key presses, focus loss, browser tab switching, etc.) and provides appropriate error handling. Code with strong robustness should prevent text selection/copy-paste and handle international keyboard layouts. Give 10 points if all edge cases are handled, 5 points if basic error handling exists, and 0 points if the application breaks under common scenarios.",
+      "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. Heatmap of problematic keys 2. Customizable virtual keyboard display 3. Gamification elements like achievements, badges or competitive leaderboards 4. Audio rhythm guidance). Add 3 points for each practical innovative feature implemented (maximum 10 points).",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 6,
+      "title": "Are there any redundant features?",
+      "description": "Strictly check three types of redundancy: 1. Redundant event listeners or duplicate input handling 2. Feature modules unrelated to typing practice (e.g., built-in games unrelated to typing skills) 3. Unnecessary animations that distract from typing practice. 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/logic/data layers), code organization, and maintainability. Check for proper event delegation, memory management (especially for long typing sessions), and performance optimization. Deduct 5 points if global state is poorly managed; deduct 5 points if the code has high redundancy; deduct 5 points if there's no clear architecture. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 8,
+      "title": "Does the interface vision meet professional design standards?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the design follows modern principles: 1) Clear visual distinction between typed and target text 2) Proper contrast for text readability (WCAG AA compliance) 3) Consistent spacing and typography (monospace fonts for typing exercises). Deduct 3 points for each readability issue, 5 points for poor text contrast, and 5 points for inconsistent cursor/caret behavior. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 9,
+      "title": "Is the dynamic interaction smooth and seamless?",
+      "description": "Judge whether the application provides immediate feedback for each keystroke (≤ 50ms), smooth cursor movement, and appropriate visual/audio feedback for errors. Assess if the UI updates without noticeable lag even during fast typing. Deduct 5 points for delayed keystroke feedback, 3 points for jarring error indicators, and 5 points for screen flickering during typing sessions. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    }
+  ],
+  "class": "Web Applications-Education/Learning",
+  "difficulty": "medium"
+}

package/library/web_applications-education_learning/uniapp-mini-program-creation.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 868,
+  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate, professional responses. Be careful to ensure that any code you generate is executable for demonstration. Create a mini program using uniapp.",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the uniapp project structure correctly implemented?",
+      "description": "Review whether the code follows the standard uniapp project structure with proper pages.json configuration, manifest.json settings, and component organization. Check if the project includes proper page routing, tabBar configuration, and global style definitions. Score 0 if basic project structure is missing, 5 if only partial structure is implemented, and 10 if complete uniapp architecture with proper configuration files is present.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Are cross-platform compatibility features properly handled?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code implements proper conditional compilation (#ifdef APP-PLUS, #ifdef MP-WEIXIN, etc.) and uses uniapp's unified APIs correctly. Check if platform-specific features are handled appropriately and if the app can run on multiple platforms (H5, WeChat Mini Program, App). Deduct 5 points if conditional compilation is missing, and 3 points if platform-specific APIs are not properly abstracted. Full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Is the component lifecycle and state management implemented correctly?",
+      "description": "Check whether Vue.js lifecycle hooks are properly used within uniapp context, including onLoad, onShow, onHide, and onUnload. Evaluate if state management follows Vue.js patterns with proper data binding and reactive updates. Deduct 5 points if lifecycle methods are incorrectly implemented, and 3 points if state management lacks reactivity. Full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Are uniapp-specific APIs and features utilized effectively?",
+      "description": "Assess whether the code leverages uniapp's built-in APIs such as uni.request for network calls, uni.showToast for user feedback, uni.navigateTo for navigation, and other platform APIs. Check if storage, device capabilities, and native features are properly integrated. Deduct 5 points if basic uniapp APIs are not used, and 3 points if native feature integration is incomplete. 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, user input validation, page navigation 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 mobile app experience (e.g., 1. Gesture interactions and touch feedback 2. Local storage with offline capabilities 3. Native device integration like camera/GPS 4. Custom components with advanced animations). 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 navigation methods coexisting) 2. Function modules unrelated to the mini program's core purpose 3. Heavy animations or effects that affect performance on mobile devices. 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 pages/components/utils/api layers), proper use of uniapp plugins, and build configuration. Deduct 5 points if global state pollution is found or Vue.js best practices are not followed; deduct 5 points if the code duplication rate is too high (over 30%); deduct 5 points if manifest.json and pages.json are not properly configured. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 8,
+      "title": "Does the interface design meet mobile-first professional standards?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the design follows mobile UI principles: 1) Touch-friendly button sizes (minimum 44px touch targets) 2) Proper mobile spacing and typography (rpx units used correctly) 3) Responsive layout that works across different screen sizes 4) Consistent with platform design guidelines (iOS/Android/WeChat). Deduct 3 points for each non-mobile-optimized element, 5 points for poor touch interaction design, and 5 points for inconsistent visual hierarchy. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 9,
+      "title": "Is the mobile interaction smooth and intuitive?",
+      "description": "Judge whether the interactions are optimized for mobile devices: 1) Touch feedback with appropriate haptic responses 2) Smooth page transitions using uniapp's navigation APIs 3) Proper loading states and skeleton screens 4) Intuitive gesture support where applicable. Deduct 5 points for each missing touch feedback, 3 points for laggy transitions or animations, and 5 points for non-intuitive navigation patterns. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    }
+  ],
+  "class": "Web Applications-Education/Learning",
+  "difficulty": "easy"
+}

package/library/web_applications-education_learning/university-homepage-vue.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 353,
+  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Make sure the code you generate is executable for demonstration purposes. Create a university homepage using Vue.",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the basic Vue project structure properly implemented?",
+      "description": "Check if the project includes essential Vue components (main.js, App.vue), proper directory structure (components/, views/, assets/, etc.), and Vue Router configuration. Deduct 5 points if component organization is chaotic, 5 points if Vue lifecycle hooks are misused, and 5 points if proper Vue binding syntax is missing. Full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Is the university homepage navigation system complete?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the navigation includes essential university sections (Home, About, Academics, Admissions, Research, Campus Life, etc.) with proper routing implementation. Check for mobile-responsive dropdown menus, active link highlighting, and accessibility features. Score 10 points for comprehensive implementation, 5 points if only basic navigation exists, 0 if navigation is broken or missing key sections.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Are the homepage content sections properly structured and implemented?",
+      "description": "Review implementation of university homepage essential components: hero section with carousel/slider, news/events section with dynamic content, featured programs/departments, testimonials, and call-to-action areas. Deduct 3 points for each missing critical section. Check if Vue components are reusable and properly styled. Full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Is the Vue data management appropriate for a university homepage?",
+      "description": "Check if proper reactive data management is implemented (Vuex store for complex state or composition API for simpler projects). Verify data fetching mechanisms for dynamic content (news, events, courses). Assess if props and emits are used correctly between components. Score 10 points for well-structured data flow, 5 points for basic implementation, 0 for incorrect/missing data management.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 4,
+      "title": "Is the code robust?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as API failures, image loading errors, form validation, etc.) and provide friendly error prompts or recovery mechanisms. Code with strong robustness should be able to effectively handle these edge cases, giving 10 points. If the robustness is average, give 5 points, and if no exceptions are handled, give 0 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 5,
+      "title": "Are there any innovative features that are eye-catching?",
+      "description": "Check whether the code includes surprise features that enhance the experience (e.g., 1. Interactive campus map with 3D buildings 2. Virtual tour integration 3. Real-time class availability checker 4. Personalized content based on user role/interests). 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 carousel implementations) 2. Function modules unrelated to university website needs 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., excessive animations or transitions). Deduct 3 points for each redundancy found, and directly deduct 10 points if the core functions are interfered with by redundant code.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 7,
+      "title": "Does the code have engineering quality?",
+      "description": "Review component modularity, code reusability, proper Vue best practices (single-file components, computed properties, watchers), and build process setup. Deduct 5 points if global state is overused; deduct 5 points if components exceed 300 lines; deduct 5 points if there's no separation of concerns (mixing business logic with UI). The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 8,
+      "title": "Does the interface vision meet professional university design standards?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the design follows institutional branding principles: 1) Appropriate color scheme reflecting university identity 2) Proper hierarchy highlighting important information 3) Professional typography suitable for educational context 4) Balanced content-to-whitespace ratio. Deduct 3 points for each inappropriate visual element, 5 points for unprofessional color combinations, and 5 points for poor information architecture. 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 modern web experience standards: 1) Transition animations between routes 2) Lazy-loading for performance optimization 3) Interactive elements respond within 100ms 4) Mobile-responsive design with touch-friendly interactions. Deduct 5 points for jarring page transitions, 3 points for sluggish interactions, and 5 points for non-responsive layouts. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    }
+  ],
+  "class": "Web Applications-Education/Learning",
+  "difficulty": "medium"
+}

package/library/web_applications-education_learning/university-homework-assignment-mini-program.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 1236,
+  "question": "You are a code expert, please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Be sure to ensure the code you generate is executable. I need you to write a mini-program about university teachers assigning homework to students. It should enable real-time interaction and have a user interface. Teachers should be able to specify chapters in a dialog box, and the AI will automatically generate questions. Meanwhile, students should be able to receive these questions. Please help me optimize the logic and overall framework to help the AI better understand my requirements.",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the teacher's homework assignment functionality fully implemented?",
+      "description": "Review whether the code implements a complete dialog interface for teachers to specify chapters and subject areas for homework assignment. Check if the UI includes proper form elements with validation (required fields, format checking) and clear submission controls. Score 0 if the teacher interface is not implemented, 5 if only basic input fields exist without validation, and 10 if the interface is complete with proper validation, error handling and confirmation mechanisms.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Is the AI-powered question generation system properly implemented?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code implements an AI question generation system that can produce appropriate questions based on teacher inputs. Check if it handles different subject matters, difficulty levels, and question types. Verify the integration method (API calls, local models, etc.) and error handling for generation failures. Deduct 5 points if question variety is limited to one type, 3 points if difficulty levels cannot be specified. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Is the student's homework receiving functionality implemented?",
+      "description": "Check whether the code implements a student interface that can receive, display, and interact with assigned homework. Verify if notifications for new assignments are implemented, whether assignments are properly organized by subject/date, and if submission mechanisms exist. Deduct 5 points if there's no notification system, 3 points if assignments aren't organized logically. Give 10 points if fully implemented with clean UI and proper interaction patterns.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Is the real-time interaction between teacher and student interfaces implemented?",
+      "description": "Assess whether the code implements real-time data synchronization between teacher and student interfaces. Check if WebSocket or similar technology is used for instant updates, whether state management handles concurrent users properly, and if offline state is managed. Deduct 5 points if synchronization is only one-way, 3 points if there's significant delay (>1s) in updates. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 4,
+      "title": "Is the code robust?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as network interruption, invalid inputs, server timeouts, etc.) and provide friendly error prompts or recovery mechanisms. Code with strong robustness should be able to effectively handle these edge cases, giving 10 points. If the robustness is average, give 5 points, and if no exceptions are handled, give 0 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 5,
+      "title": "Are there any innovative features that are eye-catching?",
+      "description": "Check whether the code includes surprise features that enhance the experience (e.g., 1. Analytics dashboard for homework completion statistics 2. AI-assisted grading suggestions 3. Interactive feedback channels between teachers and students). Add 3 points for each practical innovative feature implemented (maximum 10 points).",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 6,
+      "title": "Are there any redundant features?",
+      "description": "Strictly check three types of redundancy: 1. Redundant implementation of similar functions (e.g., multiple notification systems coexisting) 2. Function modules unrelated to homework assignment (e.g., a built-in game) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., unnecessary animations that slow down the interface). 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 models/views/controllers), unit test coverage, and use of appropriate design patterns. Deduct 5 points if global state pollution is found; 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 intuitive?",
+      "description": "Judge whether the interface interactions are intuitive and responsive: 1) Clear visual distinction between teacher and student views 2) Logical workflow from assignment creation to student submission 3) Appropriate loading states and transitions. Deduct 5 points for confusing navigation, 3 points for missing loading indicators during AI question generation, and 5 points for unintuitive action buttons. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    }
+  ],
+  "class": "Web Applications-Education/Learning",
+  "difficulty": "medium"
+}

package/library/web_applications-education_learning/valorant-tutorial-page-html-multimedia.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 1474,
+  "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 demonstration purposes. Create a VALORANT tutorial page using HTML, embedding multimedia (video and audio).",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the VALORANT tutorial content structure comprehensively implemented?",
+      "description": "Review whether the HTML structure includes complete tutorial sections covering core VALORANT gameplay elements: agent abilities, weapon mechanics, map knowledge, and tactical strategies. Check if content is organized with proper semantic HTML5 tags (section, article, nav, aside). Score 0 if basic tutorial structure is missing, 5 if only partial content sections are implemented, and 10 if all major tutorial categories are comprehensively covered with logical content hierarchy.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Is the multimedia integration (video/audio) properly implemented and optimized?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether video and audio elements are correctly embedded with appropriate formats (MP4/WebM for video, MP3/OGG for audio), include fallback options, and have proper controls. Check for autoplay policies compliance, loading optimization (lazy loading, preload attributes), and accessibility features (captions, audio descriptions). Deduct 5 points if no fallback formats provided, 3 points if accessibility features missing, and 5 points if loading performance is poor. Full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Is the interactive tutorial navigation and progress tracking system implemented?",
+      "description": "Check whether the tutorial includes interactive navigation elements, progress indicators, and user progress tracking mechanisms. Evaluate if users can jump between tutorial sections, bookmark progress, and receive completion feedback. Assess if the navigation is intuitive with breadcrumbs, chapter selection, and smooth scrolling. Deduct 5 points if progress tracking is missing, 3 points if navigation is confusing, and 5 points if no interactive elements are present. Full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Is the VALORANT-specific visual theming and branding authentically implemented?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the page design authentically reflects VALORANT's visual identity including color schemes (teal/red accent colors), typography matching game aesthetics, and UI elements consistent with game interface. Check for proper use of game assets, iconography, and layout patterns that mirror the game's design language. Give 10 points if fully authentic to VALORANT branding, 5 points if partially consistent, and 0 points if generic gaming design without VALORANT-specific elements.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 4,
+      "title": "Is the code robust?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as media loading failures, browser compatibility issues, network interruptions, and user interaction errors) and provide friendly error prompts or recovery mechanisms. Code with strong robustness should include error handling for media elements, graceful degradation for unsupported features, and proper validation. Give 10 points if fully robust, 5 points if average robustness, and 0 points if no exception 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 tutorial experience (e.g., 1. Interactive agent ability demonstrations 2. Mini-games for aim training 3. Real-time strategy quiz elements 4. 3D weapon inspection viewer 5. Voice-over narration with professional casting). Add 3 points for each practical innovative feature implemented (maximum 10 points).",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 6,
+      "title": "Are there any redundant features?",
+      "description": "Strictly check three types of redundancy: 1. Redundant implementation of similar functions (e.g., multiple video players for same content) 2. Function modules unrelated to VALORANT tutorials (e.g., unrelated game content or social media feeds) 3. Excessive animations that distract from learning content. Deduct 3 points for each redundancy found, and directly deduct 10 points if core tutorial functions are interfered with by redundant code.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 7,
+      "title": "Does the code have engineering quality?",
+      "description": "Review modular design (separating content/styling/interaction layers), semantic HTML structure, CSS organization, and JavaScript modularity. Check for proper file organization, comment documentation, and maintainable code structure. Deduct 5 points if poor separation of concerns or inline styles dominate; deduct 5 points if code duplication rate is high (over 30%); deduct 5 points if no documentation or comments provided. 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 web design principles: 1) Harmonious color matching consistent with VALORANT branding (no more than 4 primary colors) 2) Proper layout spacing (element spacing follows 8px grid system) 3) Professional typography (body font ≥ 16px, line height ≥ 1.5, proper contrast ratios) 4) Responsive design for different screen sizes. Deduct 3 points for each crowded visual element, 5 points for poor color contrast or accessibility issues, and 5 points for non-responsive layout. Full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 9,
+      "title": "Is the multimedia interaction smooth and seamless?",
+      "description": "Judge whether multimedia elements and interactions conform to user experience standards: 1) Video/audio loading feedback with progress indicators 2) Smooth playback controls with ≤100ms response time 3) Proper volume controls and mute functionality 4) Clear visual focus states for interactive elements 5) Seamless transitions between tutorial sections. Deduct 5 points for each media element without proper controls, 3 points for laggy interactions, and 5 points for unclear navigation states. Full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    }
+  ],
+  "class": "Web Applications-Education/Learning",
+  "difficulty": "medium"
+}

package/library/web_applications-education_learning/video-interactive-q-a-creation-tool.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 669,
+  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Ensure that the code you generate is executable for demonstration. Please develop a video interactive Q&A creation tool that allows educators to upload instructional videos and insert interactive questions (such as single-choice, multiple-choice, fill-in-the-blank, etc.) at specific time points in the video. When learners watch to the corresponding time point, the video will automatically pause, display the question, and continue playing after the answer is provided. The system needs to collect data on learners' responses and generate learning reports. It should support question bank management and random question selection functionality.",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the video player integration and control fully implemented?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code properly integrates a video player with full control capabilities (play, pause, seek, volume) and implements precise timing mechanisms to pause at question points. Score 0 if no functional video player exists, 5 if basic video playback works but has timing accuracy issues (>500ms error), and 10 if the integration is seamless with frame-accurate question triggering (<100ms error).",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Is the interactive question system properly implemented?",
+      "description": "Check if the code supports all required question types (single-choice, multiple-choice, fill-in-the-blank) with proper validation, feedback mechanisms, and timed insertion. Deduct 3 points if any question type is missing, 2 points for each type that lacks proper validation, and 3 points if question timing insertion is imprecise or buggy. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Is the educator interface for content creation comprehensive?",
+      "description": "Assess whether educators can efficiently upload videos, create questions with a rich editor, set timing points via visual timeline, preview the learner experience, and manage existing content. Deduct 2 points if video upload lacks progress indicators or format validation, 3 points if the question editor is too basic (lacking formatting options or media insertion), 3 points if timeline manipulation is not intuitive, and 2 points if preview functionality is absent. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Are the data collection and learning report generation features complete?",
+      "description": "Evaluate the implementation of response tracking, analytics generation, and visualization of learning outcomes. Check for per-question statistics, per-student performance tracking, and trend analysis capabilities. Deduct 3 points if raw data is stored without proper aggregation, 3 points if visualization is missing or poorly implemented, 2 points if export options are limited, and 2 points if historical comparison features are absent. 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 video playback errors, network interruptions, partial answers, 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 experience (e.g., 1. AI-based question generation from video content 2. Heat maps showing where students struggle most 3. Adaptive difficulty based on student performance). 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 implementations of similar functions (e.g., multiple video control mechanisms) 2. Function modules unrelated to the core educational purpose (e.g., complex social features) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., excessive animations that distract from learning). 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 video player/question logic/analytics 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) Question appearance transitions are smooth without jarring the learning experience 2) Video pauses and resumes without visual artifacts 3) Clear visual focus guidance when questions appear. Deduct 5 points for each operation without feedback, 3 points for laggy transitions between video and questions, and 5 points for confusing UI state changes when answering questions. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    }
+  ],
+  "class": "Web Applications-Education/Learning",
+  "difficulty": "hard"
+}

package/library/web_applications-education_learning/virtual-spread-plate-experiment-webpage.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 231,
+  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Be careful to ensure that the generated code is executable for demonstration. I am a biology teacher and need help designing an HTML webpage for a virtual experiment demonstration of the spread plate technique for a biology class. The webpage should include experimental materials and equipment: test tubes with yeast culture broth, cotton plugs, solid culture medium, inoculation loops, alcohol lamp (flammable), clean bench, and inoculation loops. The material and tool icons should be aesthetically pleasing and resemble actual images, with colors matching the real objects. Icons should be positioned on both sides of the page, movable, and highly interactive.",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the spread plate technique procedure accurately implemented?",
+      "description": "Review whether the code accurately implements all key steps of the spread plate technique (sterilizing the loop, cooling, sampling, inoculation, spreading, incubation). Score 0 if core procedure steps are missing, 5 if basic steps are implemented but lack scientific accuracy, and 10 if all microbiology protocols are followed with proper sequence and safety considerations.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Are all required experimental materials and equipment fully implemented?",
+      "description": "Check whether all materials (test tubes with yeast culture broth, cotton plugs, solid culture medium, inoculation loops, alcohol lamp, clean bench) are implemented with proper visual representation. Deduct 2 points for each missing item. All items must be interactive and movable. Full implementation with accurate visual representation scores 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Is the drag-and-drop interaction system properly implemented?",
+      "description": "Evaluate the quality of the drag-and-drop system for moving experimental tools. Check for smooth animation (60fps), precise positioning, proper z-index management, and intuitive interaction. Deduct 3 points if there's noticeable lag, 3 points if tool positioning is imprecise, and 4 points if tools can't be reliably manipulated. Full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Are experimental safety procedures and scientific accuracy maintained?",
+      "description": "Assess if the simulation enforces proper microbiology safety protocols (flame sterilization, aseptic technique, contamination prevention) and follows scientific accuracy. Deduct 5 points if critical safety procedures are missing or incorrect. Deduct 5 points if the simulation allows scientifically impossible actions. 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 rapid multiple clicks, dropping objects in invalid areas, browser resizing) 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 learning experience (e.g., 1. Microscopic view of yeast cells 2. Time-lapse of colony growth 3. Quiz integration to test student knowledge). 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 drag-and-drop systems) 2. Function modules unrelated to the spread plate technique (e.g., unrelated biological processes) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., excessive animations that distract from learning). 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 experiment logic/view/interaction layers), code organization, 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 clear separation of concerns. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 8,
+      "title": "Does the interface vision meet professional educational design standards?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether material and tool icons are aesthetically pleasing and resemble actual lab equipment with accurate colors. Check for: 1) Visual clarity and high-quality graphics 2) Proper layout with tools easily accessible on both sides of the page 3) Clear visual instructions and labels. Deduct 3 points for each low-quality or unrealistic icon, 5 points for poor layout of materials, and 5 points for confusing visual hierarchy. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 9,
+      "title": "Is the dynamic interaction smooth and educational?",
+      "description": "Judge whether the dynamic effects support learning objectives: 1) Clear visual feedback when tools are used correctly/incorrectly 2) Appropriate animation speed that matches real laboratory timing 3) Instructional cues that guide proper technique. Deduct 5 points for each operation without feedback, 3 points for animations that are too fast to observe properly, and 5 points for missing educational guidance during critical steps. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    }
+  ],
+  "class": "Web Applications-Education/Learning",
+  "difficulty": "hard"
+}

package/library/web_applications-education_learning/visualization-based-q-a-software-20-questions.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 1465,
+  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Be sure to produce executable code for demonstration. Write a visualization-based Q&A software that includes 20 questions.",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the Q&A system core functionality fully implemented?",
+      "description": "Review whether the code accurately implements a complete question-answer system with 20 questions through HTML/JavaScript, including question navigation, answer selection/input validation, and scoring mechanism. Score 0 if basic Q&A logic is missing, 5 if only simple question display is implemented, and 10 if complete interactive Q&A with proper validation and scoring is included.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Is the visualization component effectively implemented?",
+      "description": "Check whether the visualization includes dynamic progress indicators, interactive charts/graphs for results display, and real-time visual feedback during Q&A sessions. Must include data visualization libraries (Chart.js/D3.js) or custom SVG implementations. Deduct 5 points if only static progress bars are used, and 3 points if result visualization lacks interactivity. Full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Is the question management system well-designed with proper data structure?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the 20 questions are properly structured with categorization, difficulty levels, and metadata. Check if question randomization, filtering, and adaptive questioning logic are implemented. Deduct 5 points if questions are hard-coded without structure, and 3 points if no question management features exist. Full score requires dynamic question loading and intelligent sequencing.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Is comprehensive user progress tracking and analytics implemented?",
+      "description": "Check whether the code includes detailed progress tracking, performance analytics, time tracking per question, and historical data storage. Must include visual dashboards showing user performance trends and detailed statistics. Deduct 5 points if no data persistence is implemented, and 3 points if analytics are basic without visualization. Give 10 points if fully implemented with rich analytics.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 4,
+      "title": "Is the code robust?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as invalid inputs, browser compatibility issues, data corruption, session timeouts, etc.) and provide friendly error prompts or recovery mechanisms. Code with strong robustness should be able to effectively handle these edge cases, giving 10 points. If the robustness is average, give 5 points, and if no exceptions are handled, give 0 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 5,
+      "title": "Are there any innovative features that are eye-catching?",
+      "description": "Check whether the code includes surprise features that enhance the experience (e.g., 1. Adaptive difficulty adjustment based on performance 2. Social sharing of results with custom visualizations 3. Voice input/output capabilities 4. Gamification elements like achievements/badges). 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 scoring systems coexisting) 2. Function modules unrelated to Q&A (e.g., built-in games or entertainment features) 3. Excessive animations that impact performance (e.g., complex particle effects on every interaction). Deduct 3 points for each redundancy found, and directly deduct 10 points if core Q&A 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 question logic/UI components/data management), code organization, and maintainability. Deduct 5 points if global state pollution is found or no design patterns are used; deduct 5 points if code duplication rate is too high (over 30%); deduct 5 points if no proper separation of concerns exists. 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 typography (body font size ≥ 14px, line height over 1.5 times) 4) Clear visual hierarchy for questions and answers. Deduct 3 points for each crowded visual element, 5 points for glaring color combinations, and 5 points for chaotic text 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) Question transition animations (300-500ms duration) 2) Answer selection feedback ≤ 100ms 3) Progress visualization updates smoothly 4) Clear visual focus guidance throughout the Q&A flow. Deduct 5 points for each operation without feedback, 3 points for jarring transitions between questions, and 5 points for unclear navigation or progress indicators. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    }
+  ],
+  "class": "Web Applications-Education/Learning",
+  "difficulty": "medium"
+}