@getollie/cli 0.0.1

package/library/web_applications-web_visuals/web-scraping-video-website-with-pagination.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 1600,
+  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Make sure that the generated code can be executed and displayed properly. I want to create a video website where the video URLs are collected through web scraping technologies. The video website needs to include features such as video listings, video details, recommended videos, and pagination.",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the web scraping mechanism properly implemented?",
+      "description": "Check if the code includes robust web scraping functionality with proper error handling, rate limiting, and respect for robots.txt. The implementation should handle different website structures, use appropriate parsing libraries (BeautifulSoup, Cheerio, etc.), and include proxy rotation or user-agent switching. Score 0 if no scraping code is provided, 5 if basic scraping is implemented but lacks safeguards, and 10 if a complete solution with error handling and ethical considerations is included.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Is the video listing feature complete?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the video listing includes essential metadata (title, thumbnail, duration, upload date, view count), supports different sorting options (trending, newest, most viewed), and has proper grid/list view toggles. The UI should be responsive across different screen sizes. Deduct 3 points if metadata is incomplete, 3 points for non-responsive design, and 2 points if sorting options are missing. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "How well is the video detail page implemented?",
+      "description": "Analyze if the video detail page includes a functional video player with standard controls, complete metadata display, sharing options, and proper handling of different video sources/formats. Check if the page properly handles video loading states and errors. Score 0 if the video player doesn't work, 5 if it works but lacks important features (like fullscreen or playback speed), and 10 if it's fully featured with proper error handling.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Is the recommendation system effectively implemented?",
+      "description": "Check if the code implements a recommendation algorithm based on video metadata, user history, or content similarity. The system should display recommended videos in appropriate places (sidebar, after video ends) with relevant preview information. Deduct 5 points if recommendations are random instead of algorithmic, 3 points if they lack preview information, and 2 points if they're not contextually placed. 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 broken video links, failed API requests, missing metadata, 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. Picture-in-picture mode 2. Video history with resume capability 3. Smart tagging/categorization of scraped content). 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 pagination systems coexisting) 2. Function modules unrelated to video streaming (e.g., a built-in calculator) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., heavy animations that slow down video loading). 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/UI/state management layers), appropriate caching mechanisms for scraped data, and scalability considerations. Deduct 5 points if global state pollution is found or design patterns are not used; deduct 5 points if the code duplication rate is too high (over 30%); deduct 5 points if no data persistence or caching strategy 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 video platform principles: 1) Clean layout with focus on video content 2) Proper thumbnail aspect ratios and sizes (16:9 with consistent dimensions) 3) Professional typography hierarchy (titles, descriptions, metadata). Deduct 3 points for cluttered layouts, 5 points for inconsistent thumbnail sizes, 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 video platform expectations: 1) Video loads within 3 seconds 2) Smooth transitions between listing and detail pages 3) Infinite scroll or pagination without page reloads. Deduct 5 points for each video that fails to load properly, 3 points for jerky transitions between pages, and 5 points for pagination that requires full page reloads. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    }
+  ],
+  "class": "Web Applications-Web Visuals",
+  "difficulty": "hard"
+}

package/library/web_applications-web_visuals/webpage-chick-overalls-playing-basketball.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 1494,
+  "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 display. I want a webpage showing a little chick wearing overalls and playing basketball.",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the basic HTML/CSS structure properly implemented for the chick character?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code correctly implements the structure of a chick character using HTML and CSS. Check if proper divs/elements are used for the body, head, wings, feet, and face features. The chick should be clearly recognizable with appropriate proportions. Score 0 if the chick is not implemented, 5 if basic structure exists but lacks detail, and 10 if it's fully detailed with proper nesting and organization of elements.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Are the overalls accurately depicted on the chick character?",
+      "description": "Assess whether the code properly implements overalls on the chick, including straps, pockets, and the distinctive overall shape. Check if proper styling techniques (gradients, shadows, borders) are used to create a 3D effect. Deduct 5 points if the overalls lack key details, 3 points if the connection to the chick's body is unrealistic. Give full 10 points only if the overalls are visually distinguishable with proper fit to the chick's body.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Is the basketball interaction/animation properly implemented?",
+      "description": "Review the implementation of the basketball and the chick's interaction with it. Check if the basketball has proper styling (texture, shading) and if there's an animation showing the chick playing with it (dribbling, shooting, or holding). Score 0 if no basketball interaction exists, 5 if static basketball is present, and 10 if dynamic, realistic basketball play animation is implemented with proper physics.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Is the scene/background context appropriate for basketball play?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code includes a suitable background/environment for playing basketball (court markings, hoop, etc.). Check if the scene elements are proportional to the chick character and if there's depth perception in the implementation. Deduct 5 points if the background is incomplete, 3 points if perspective is incorrect. Full score requires a complete basketball context with proper scaling and positioning.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 4,
+      "title": "Is the code robust?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle different screen sizes (responsive design), browser compatibility, and load efficiently. Check for proper fallbacks, error handling for animations, and adaptive layouts. Code with strong robustness should work across major browsers and device sizes, giving 10 points. If the robustness is average, give 5 points, and if no adaptability is 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 basketball shooting controls 2. Sound effects when the chick plays 3. Multiple animation sequences triggered by user interaction). 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 styling with overlapping CSS rules 2. Unnecessary elements unrelated to the chick or basketball scene 3. Heavy animations or effects that affect performance without adding value. Deduct 3 points for each redundancy found, and directly deduct 10 points if the core elements (chick, overalls, basketball) are obscured by redundant elements.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 7,
+      "title": "Does the code have engineering quality?",
+      "description": "Review the code organization (separation of HTML structure, CSS styling, and JavaScript behavior), naming conventions, and optimization techniques. Deduct 5 points if global styling pollution is found; deduct 5 points if the code duplication rate is high (similar styling repeated); deduct 5 points if no performance optimizations are implemented (like CSS animations instead of JavaScript where appropriate). 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 design principles: 1) Harmonious color scheme appropriate for a playful character scene 2) Proper layout with good use of whitespace 3) Consistent styling throughout elements. Deduct 3 points for each poorly aligned element, 5 points for clashing colors, and 5 points for inconsistent styling between scene elements. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 9,
+      "title": "Is the dynamic interaction smooth and seamless?",
+      "description": "Judge whether the animations and interactions feel natural: 1) Smooth transitions for the chick's movements 2) Realistic basketball physics (bouncing, shooting) 3) Proper animation timing (not too fast or slow). Deduct 5 points for jerky animations, 3 points for unrealistic physics, and 5 points for animations that don't match a chick's natural movements. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    }
+  ],
+  "class": "Web Applications-Web Visuals",
+  "difficulty": "medium"
+}

package/library/web_applications-web_visuals/webpage-dancing-dog.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 1824,
+  "question": "You are a coding expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Be sure to ensure that the generated code is executable for display. Generate webpage code showing a dancing dog.",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is a basic HTML/CSS/JavaScript structure implemented for the dancing dog animation?",
+      "description": "Review whether the code has a proper HTML structure with necessary CSS styling and JavaScript functionality to create a foundation for the dancing dog animation. Score 0 if the basic structure is missing, 5 if only partial implementation exists, and 10 if a complete and organized structure is provided.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Is the dancing dog animation properly implemented?",
+      "description": "Evaluate the animation technique used (CSS animations, JavaScript animations, SVG animations, or canvas). Check if the dance movements are smooth, natural, and looping properly. Score 3 for basic movement, 7 for moderate animation with 2-3 dance moves, and 10 for complex, natural-looking dance sequences with multiple movements.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Is the dog character visually appealing and well-designed?",
+      "description": "Judge whether the dog character is visually appealing. This can be through SVG graphics, CSS art, image sprites, or 3D models. Check for proper articulation points for animation, character proportion, and aesthetic appeal. Deduct 5 points if the dog is too simplistic (stick figure), 3 points if proportions are awkward, and 2 points if the design lacks charm or personality.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Are interactive elements included to enhance the dancing experience?",
+      "description": "Check if the implementation includes user interaction capabilities like clicking to change dance moves, speed controls, music toggle, or customization options. Score 0 if no interaction exists, 5 if basic interaction is implemented, and 10 if multiple engaging interactive elements are present.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 4,
+      "title": "Is the code robust?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as browser compatibility issues, screen size variations, script errors, etc.) and provide graceful degradation. Code with strong robustness should include error handling, responsive design principles, and browser compatibility checks, giving 10 points. If the robustness is average, give 5 points, and if no error handling or adaptability is implemented, 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. Sound effects synchronized with dance moves 2. Environmental interactions like the dog responding to cursor movement 3. Customizable dog appearance). 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 animation definitions (e.g., multiple animation frameworks doing the same job) 2. Function modules unrelated to the dancing dog (e.g., unrelated UI elements) 3. Excessive effects that affect performance (e.g., too many particles or complex shadows). Deduct 3 points for each redundancy found, and directly deduct 10 points if 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 animation logic/view/control layers), code organization, and maintainability. Deduct 5 points if global state pollution is found or if animation and business logic are mixed; deduct 5 points if the code duplication rate is too high (over 30%); deduct 5 points if the code lacks comments or documentation. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 8,
+      "title": "Does the interface vision meet professional design standards?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the overall design follows modern design principles: 1) Harmonious color matching (no more than 3 primary colors) 2) Proper layout spacing (element spacing follows the 8px multiple principle) 3) Professional visual hierarchy (clear distinction between the dancing dog and background elements). Deduct 3 points for cluttered design elements, 5 points for jarring color combinations, and 5 points for poor visual focus on the dancing dog. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 9,
+      "title": "Is the animation performance optimized?",
+      "description": "Judge whether the animation runs smoothly without causing browser lag: 1) Uses requestAnimationFrame or CSS animations over setTimeout 2) Implements GPU acceleration where appropriate 3) Optimizes repaints and reflows. Deduct 5 points for noticeable frame drops during animation, 3 points for lack of performance optimization techniques, and 5 points if the animation causes significant browser strain on average devices. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    }
+  ],
+  "class": "Web Applications-Web Visuals",
+  "difficulty": "easy"
+}

package/library/web_applications-web_visuals/webpage-lets-farm-variety-show-html.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 1448,
+  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate, professional responses. Be sure to provide executable code where possible. Design a webpage for \"Let's Farm\" variety show in HTML format using PyCharm.",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the basic structure of the 'Let's Farm' variety show webpage implemented correctly?",
+      "description": "Check if the HTML structure includes DOCTYPE declaration, head with appropriate meta tags, title, and a well-structured body with semantic HTML5 elements (header, main, footer, etc.). Score 0 if only basic tags are present without semantic structure, 5 if basic semantic structure is implemented but lacks organization, and 10 if a complete, well-organized semantic HTML structure is implemented.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Is the visual design suitable for a farming variety show theme?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the webpage incorporates appropriate farming-related visual elements (images, color schemes with greens/earthy tones, nature-inspired design elements). Deduct 5 points if the theme is barely recognizable as farm-related, 3 points if the theme is present but inconsistently applied. Give 10 points for a cohesive, immersive farming theme that effectively represents the show.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Is responsive design implemented for multiple device compatibility?",
+      "description": "Check if the code includes viewport meta tag, media queries, flexible grid layouts, and responsive images. Score 0 if the page is fixed-width only, 5 if basic responsiveness is implemented but breaks at certain viewports, and 10 if the page is fully responsive across all common device sizes with appropriate content adaptation.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Are show-specific features implemented and functional?",
+      "description": "Review implementation of variety show essential elements: episode listing, cast profiles, show schedule, highlight clips or galleries, and interactive elements (voting systems, comments). Deduct 2 points for each missing core feature. The webpage should clearly communicate the show's concept and engage the target audience. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 4,
+      "title": "Is the code robust?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code handles potential issues (broken image links, form validation, accessibility considerations) and provides fallbacks. Code with strong robustness should validate user inputs, include alt text for images, and have error handling for external resources. Give 10 points for comprehensive error handling, 5 points for basic protection, and 0 points if no error handling exists.",
+      "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 farm map 2. Season-based theme switching 3. Animated farm elements 4. Virtual crop growing simulation). 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. Duplicate content sections 2. Feature modules unrelated to the farming show theme 3. Excessive decorative elements that harm usability or performance (e.g., too many animations, unnecessarily heavy background videos). Deduct 3 points for each redundancy found, and directly deduct 10 points if core content is obscured by redundant elements.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 7,
+      "title": "Does the code have engineering quality?",
+      "description": "Review code organization (separate CSS/JS files or properly organized internal sections), naming conventions, comments, and optimization for performance. Deduct 5 points if styles and scripts are scattered throughout the HTML; deduct 5 points if code is poorly formatted or inconsistently named; deduct 5 points if no performance optimizations are implemented (image optimization, resource loading strategy). 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-Web Visuals",
+  "difficulty": "easy"
+}

package/library/web_applications-web_visuals/webpage-tree-growing-animation.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 447,
+  "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 when possible. Create a webpage showing a tree growing.",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the tree growing animation fully implemented?",
+      "description": "Review whether the code accurately implements a tree growth animation through HTML/CSS/JavaScript, showing progression from seed/sapling to full tree. Check for clear visual stages of growth, proper timing, and smooth transitions between stages. Score 0 if no animation exists, 5 if only basic static-to-static transitions are implemented, and 10 if the animation shows organic, natural growth patterns.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Is the tree structure anatomically realistic?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the tree implementation includes proper botanical elements (trunk, branches, leaves, possibly roots) with natural branching patterns. Check if the branching algorithm follows realistic principles like L-systems or fractal patterns. Deduct 5 points if the tree structure is overly simplistic (just a trunk and few branches), and 3 points if the branching angles are unnaturally uniform. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Are environmental factors incorporated into the tree growth?",
+      "description": "Assess whether the code integrates environmental elements that affect the tree's growth (e.g., simulated sunlight, seasons, weather conditions, or user interaction). Check if these factors visibly influence the tree's development direction, speed, or appearance. Deduct 5 points if no environmental factors exist, and 3 points if factors exist but have minimal visual impact on growth. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Is the rendering technique appropriate and efficient?",
+      "description": "Examine the technical approach used for rendering the tree (Canvas, SVG, CSS, WebGL, etc.) and whether it's appropriate for the complexity of the animation. Check for performance optimization like limiting redraws to changed elements only. Deduct 5 points for excessive DOM manipulation causing jank, 5 points if the technique chosen severely limits visual quality, and 3 points if no performance considerations are evident. 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 window resizing, browser compatibility issues, different screen sizes, etc.) and provides appropriate fallbacks. Code with strong robustness should gracefully degrade on older browsers and respond appropriately to viewport changes, giving 10 points. If the robustness is average, give 5 points, and if no edge cases 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 influence growth 2. Day/night cycle affecting the tree 3. Wildlife/insects appearing around the tree 4. Seasonal changes with appropriate visuals). 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 working simultaneously) 2. Function modules unrelated to tree growth (e.g., unnecessary UI elements) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., excessive particle systems that slow down the page). 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 rendering logic/animation/user interaction), code organization, and maintainability. Deduct 5 points if global state pollution is found or if 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 visual presentation meet professional design standards?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the overall design follows modern design principles: 1) Harmonious color palette appropriate for natural elements 2) Proper visual balance and composition 3) Attention to detail in tree textures and environment. Deduct 3 points for unrealistic coloring, 5 points for poor composition that distracts from the tree, and 5 points for low-quality visual assets. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 9,
+      "title": "Is the animation smooth and natural-looking?",
+      "description": "Judge whether the growth animation conforms to natural growth patterns: 1) Smooth interpolation between growth stages 2) Appropriate timing that balances between visible growth and realism 3) Natural movement like subtle swaying or response to simulated wind. Deduct 5 points for jerky transitions, 3 points for unnaturally linear growth rates, and 5 points for static elements that should move naturally. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    }
+  ],
+  "class": "Web Applications-Web Visuals",
+  "difficulty": "easy"
+}

package/library/web_applications-web_visuals/webpage-white-cat-playing-ping-pong.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 1344,
+  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Be sure to ensure the generated code is executable for display. You are a skilled web designer - please help me design a webpage that shows a white cat playing ping pong, using HTML language.",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the core ping pong animation implemented?",
+      "description": "Review whether the code creates a functional animation of a white cat playing ping pong. Check for proper motion paths of the ball, realistic paddle movement, and cat character reactions. Score 0 if there's no animation, 5 if only basic static positioning exists, and 10 if there's a complete animation loop with proper physics.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Is the white cat character properly designed and animated?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the cat is clearly identifiable as white, has proper proportions, and demonstrates appropriate movements for ping pong (like swinging motions, reaction poses). Deduct 3 points if the cat lacks defining features, 5 points if it's not clearly white, and 5 points if it has no animation or interaction with the ping pong elements. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Is the ping pong game environment properly visualized?",
+      "description": "Check whether the code creates a convincing ping pong setting with appropriate elements (table, net, paddle, ball) with correct proportions and positioning. Deduct 3 points for each missing essential element, 5 points if the spatial relationship between elements is incorrect. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Is the implementation technically appropriate?",
+      "description": "Assess whether the code uses appropriate HTML/CSS/JS techniques for the animation. Check for modern approaches like CSS animations, canvas, SVG, or proper JavaScript animation frameworks instead of outdated methods. Deduct 5 points for deprecated techniques (like <marquee>), 3 points for excessive use of images where vector graphics would be more appropriate. 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 browser resizing, different screen sizes, script errors) and provides 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. User-controlled cat movements 2. Sound effects for ping pong hits 3. Score tracking system 4. Day/night mode toggle). 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 controls) 2. Function modules unrelated to the cat playing ping pong 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., unnecessary complex 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 animation logic/view layers), code organization, and maintainability. Deduct 5 points if global style/script pollution is found; deduct 5 points if the code duplication rate is too high (over 30%); deduct 5 points if there are no comments for complex logic. 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 3) Professional typography (if text is included). Deduct 3 points for each crowded visual element, 5 points for a glaring color combination, and 5 points for poor composition that makes the scene unclear. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 9,
+      "title": "Is the dynamic interaction smooth and responsive?",
+      "description": "Judge whether the animations conform to human perception characteristics: 1) Smooth motion without stuttering 2) Appropriate animation timing (not too slow or fast) 3) Natural physics in ball movement and bouncing. Deduct 5 points for jerky animations, 3 points for unrealistic physics, and 5 points for animations that run at inappropriate speeds making the ping pong game look unnatural. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    }
+  ],
+  "class": "Web Applications-Web Visuals",
+  "difficulty": "easy"
+}

package/library/web_applications-web_visuals/wechat-mini-program-image-functionality.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 768,
+  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Be sure to provide executable code whenever possible. Write code for a WeChat Mini Program that implements image functionality. You can use Vant components or not.",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the core image functionality fully implemented?",
+      "description": "Check if the code includes essential image handling functions like uploading, displaying, previewing, and possibly editing images. Score 0 if the image functionality is not implemented, 5 if only basic image display is provided, and 10 if comprehensive image handling (upload, preview, zoom, etc.) is included.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Is the WeChat Mini Program file structure correctly organized?",
+      "description": "Verify that the code follows the standard WeChat Mini Program structure with proper organization of app.js, app.json, app.wxss, and page folders containing .js, .json, .wxml, and .wxss files. Deduct 5 points if crucial configuration files are missing, 3 points if the structure is disorganized. Full score requires proper component encapsulation and clear separation of concerns.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Are WeChat Mini Program API permissions properly handled?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code correctly requests user permissions for accessing device camera/album, ensures scope.writePhotosAlbum for saving images, and handles user rejection scenarios. Deduct 5 points if permissions are hardcoded without user consent, and 3 points if rejection handling is missing. Full score requires comprehensive permission flows with clear user guidance.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Is the image component integration properly implemented?",
+      "description": "Assess whether the code correctly implements image components (either native or Vant). Check for proper handling of image loading states, lazy loading for performance, and fallback mechanisms for failed loads. Deduct 5 points if there's no loading state management, 3 points if image caching strategies are missing. Full score requires optimized image delivery with proper error handling.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 4,
+      "title": "Is the code robust?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as network errors during image upload/download, oversized images, unsupported formats, 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. Image filters/effects 2. Smart cropping/compression 3. OCR text extraction from images). Add 3 points for each practical innovative feature implemented (maximum 10 points).",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 6,
+      "title": "Are there any redundant features?",
+      "description": "Strictly check three types of redundancy: 1. Redundant implementation of similar image handling functions 2. Function modules unrelated to image processing 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., excessive animations during image transitions). Deduct 3 points for each redundancy found, and directly deduct 10 points if the core functions are interfered with by redundant code.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 7,
+      "title": "Does the code have engineering quality?",
+      "description": "Review modular design (such as separating UI/logic/network layers), component reusability, and build process optimization. Deduct 5 points if global state pollution is found or component patterns are not used; deduct 5 points if the code duplication rate is too high (over 30%); deduct 5 points if there are no performance optimizations for image loading and processing. 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 WeChat Mini Program design principles: 1) Consistent with WeChat's visual language 2) Proper layout spacing (following the 8px grid system) 3) Professional typography (legible text with proper contrast for image overlays). Deduct 3 points for each inconsistent UI element, 5 points for poor image presentation layout, and 5 points for accessibility issues with image interactions. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 9,
+      "title": "Is the dynamic interaction smooth and seamless?",
+      "description": "Judge whether the image-related interactions meet user expectations: 1) Image loading indicators appear within 100ms 2) Smooth transitions between image states (loading/preview/full view) 3) Responsive touch gestures for image manipulation. Deduct 5 points for operations without visual feedback, 3 points for jerky animations during image transitions, and 5 points for unresponsive image interactions. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    }
+  ],
+  "class": "Web Applications-Web Visuals",
+  "difficulty": "easy"
+}

package/library/web_applications-web_visuals/xiaohongshu-style-html-image-code-for-screenshots.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 732,
+  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Make sure the generated code is executable for display. Generate HTML code in Xiaohongshu (Little Red Book) style, where the retrieved code format should be image code (not text or requiring image link replacement), so I can directly take screenshots and post to Xiaohongshu. The retrieved code format should be image code (not text or requiring image link replacement), so I can directly take screenshots and post to Xiaohongshu.",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the HTML structure properly implemented in Xiaohongshu style?",
+      "description": "Evaluate if the HTML structure follows Xiaohongshu's characteristic layout with card-based design, proper use of divs for content blocks, and appropriate heading hierarchy. Check if it includes essential Xiaohongshu UI elements like the avatar circle, like/comment buttons, and hashtag styling. Score 0 if the structure doesn't resemble Xiaohongshu at all, 5 if basic elements are present but poorly organized, and 10 if the structure precisely mirrors Xiaohongshu's format.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Does the code include appropriate image implementation for screenshots?",
+      "description": "Check whether images are properly implemented as embedded data URLs or base64 encoded strings instead of external URLs. Verify that no image requires manual link replacement. Images should render directly when the HTML is loaded. Score 0 if images are implemented as external links requiring replacement, 5 if images are implemented but with poor optimization, and 10 if all images are perfectly embedded for direct screenshot capability.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Is the Xiaohongshu visual styling accurately reproduced?",
+      "description": "Evaluate if the CSS accurately reproduces Xiaohongshu's distinctive visual style, including the characteristic color palette (red brand color #FF2442), rounded corners (8-12px), shadow effects, font choices, and content spacing. Score 0 if styling doesn't match Xiaohongshu, 5 if basic styling is similar but lacks precision, and 10 if the styling is indistinguishable from the actual Xiaohongshu app.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Are interactive elements properly implemented for demonstration purposes?",
+      "description": "Assess if the code includes Xiaohongshu-specific interactions like double-tap to like, horizontal scroll galleries, expandable text sections, and floating action buttons. Check if these are implemented with appropriate JavaScript that works in a standalone HTML file. Deduct 3 points if essential interactions are missing, 5 points if interactions are buggy, and award full 10 points for perfectly implemented interactions that mirror the Xiaohongshu experience.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 4,
+      "title": "Is the code robust?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as image loading failures, responsive layout breakpoints, touch vs. mouse interactions, etc.) and provide fallbacks or graceful degradation. Code with strong robustness should work across different browsers and viewports, 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. Animated like button effects 2. Simulated comment typing animation 3. Parallax scrolling for images). Add 3 points for each practical innovative feature implemented (maximum 10 points).",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 6,
+      "title": "Are there any redundant features?",
+      "description": "Strictly check three types of redundancy: 1. Redundant styling with overlapping CSS rules 2. Function modules unrelated to Xiaohongshu's core experience 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., excessive animations or transitions). Deduct 3 points for each redundancy found, and directly deduct 10 points if the core functions are interfered with by redundant code.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 7,
+      "title": "Does the code have engineering quality?",
+      "description": "Review modular design (such as separating structure/style/behavior), code reusability, and performance optimization. Deduct 5 points if global style pollution is found; deduct 5 points if the code duplication rate is too high (over 30%); deduct 5 points if no performance considerations are implemented (such as image optimization, animation throttling). The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 8,
+      "title": "Does the interface vision meet Xiaohongshu's aesthetic standards?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the overall design follows Xiaohongshu's distinct aesthetic principles: 1) Warm, vibrant color scheme dominated by reds and pinks 2) Clean white space with proper content density 3) Typography that balances readability with stylistic flair (proper use of weights and sizes). Deduct 3 points for each misaligned visual element, 5 points for incorrect brand colors, and 5 points for improper content proportions. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 9,
+      "title": "Is the mobile responsiveness properly implemented?",
+      "description": "Judge whether the design adapts properly to mobile viewports: 1) Proper meta viewport tag implementation 2) Fluid layouts that adjust to different screen sizes 3) Touch-friendly tap targets (minimum 44×44px). Deduct 5 points for horizontal scrollbars on mobile, 3 points for overlapping elements at certain breakpoints, and 5 points for text that becomes illegible at mobile sizes. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    }
+  ],
+  "class": "Web Applications-Web Visuals",
+  "difficulty": "medium"
+}

package/package.json

@@ -0,0 +1,25 @@
+{
+  "name": "@getollie/cli",
+  "private": "false",
+  "version": "0.0.1",
+  "module": "index.ts",
+  "type": "module",
+  "bin": {
+    "ollie": "src/cli.ts"
+  },
+  "files": [
+    "src",
+    "library"
+  ],
+  "devDependencies": {
+    "@types/bun": "latest",
+    "ollie": "."
+  },
+  "peerDependencies": {
+    "typescript": "^5"
+  },
+  "dependencies": {
+    "@commander-js/extra-typings": "^14.0.0",
+    "commander": "^14.0.1"
+  }
+}