@getollie/cli 0.0.1

package/library/management_systems-frontend_backend_platforms/fyne-yuan-bao-desktop-application-interface.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 223,
+  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Make sure the code you provide is executable for demonstration. How can I create a desktop application interface for \"Yuan Bao\" (Gold Ingot) using Fyne?",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the Fyne framework correctly implemented for the Gold Ingot application?",
+      "description": "Check whether the code correctly imports and initializes the Fyne framework, including proper application lifecycle management (App creation, window setup, and execution). Verify that the application entry point is properly structured with appropriate error handling. Score 0 if Fyne is not properly initialized, 5 if basic initialization exists but with flaws, and 10 if the implementation follows Fyne best practices including proper context management.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Is the Gold Ingot visualization properly implemented?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code includes a proper visual representation of a traditional Chinese Gold Ingot (Yuan Bao). Check if the visualization uses appropriate Fyne canvas elements (Rectangle, Circle, Text) or custom rendering. Deduct 5 points if the shape is too simplistic, 3 points if proper scaling is missing, and 5 points if the traditional gold color scheme (golden yellow with appropriate shading) is absent. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Are appropriate layout containers used for UI organization?",
+      "description": "Review whether the code uses proper Fyne layout containers (VBox, HBox, GridLayout, etc.) to organize UI elements in a logical way. Check if responsive design principles are applied to handle window resizing. Deduct 5 points if fixed positioning is used instead of layouts, 3 points if elements overlap incorrectly, and 5 points if the layout doesn't adapt to different screen sizes. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Is proper interaction with the Gold Ingot implemented?",
+      "description": "Check whether the code implements meaningful interactions with the Gold Ingot visualization (e.g., clicking, dragging, or animation effects). Verify that event handlers are properly registered and contain appropriate logic. Score 0 if no interaction is implemented, 5 if basic interaction exists but lacks feedback, and 10 if interactions are intuitive with visual/audio feedback and proper state management.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 4,
+      "title": "Is the code robust?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as resource loading failures, unexpected user inputs, window resizing edge cases, 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. Gold Ingot animation effects on interaction 2. Traditional Chinese background elements or themes 3. Custom widgets extending Fyne's capabilities). Add 3 points for each practical innovative feature implemented (maximum 10 points).",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 6,
+      "title": "Are there any redundant features?",
+      "description": "Strictly check three types of redundancy: 1. Redundant implementation of similar functions (e.g., multiple ways to achieve the same visual effect) 2. Function modules unrelated to the Gold Ingot application (e.g., unnecessary system integrations) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., excessive animations causing lag). 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/resource management), code organization, and maintainability. Deduct 5 points if global state pollution is found or clean architecture principles are not followed; deduct 5 points if the code duplication rate is too high (over 30%); deduct 5 points if resource management is inefficient. 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 (gold with complementary colors) 2) Proper layout spacing (element spacing follows consistent principles) 3) Professional theme application (appropriate use of Fyne themes or custom theme implementation). Deduct 3 points for each visual inconsistency, 5 points for poor color contrast affecting readability, and 5 points for disregarding platform design guidelines. 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) UI response delay ≤ 100ms 2) Transition animation duration controlled between 200-400ms 3) Clear visual feedback for user actions. Deduct 5 points for each operation without feedback, 3 points for jerky animations, and 5 points for inconsistent interaction patterns. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    }
+  ],
+  "class": "Management Systems-Frontend/Backend Platforms",
+  "difficulty": "easy"
+}

package/library/management_systems-frontend_backend_platforms/general-manager-management-system-overview.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 1008,
+  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Pay attention to ensure that the code you generate is executable and can be displayed. Regenerate the following for the General Manager:\n\nGeneral Manager:\n- View and manage personnel records\n- View and manage customer information\n- View and manage order details\n- View and manage production plans\n- View and manage material inventory\n- Review system information",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the personnel management system fully implemented?",
+      "description": "Review whether the code accurately implements CRUD operations for personnel records, including employee information display, search filtering, role-based access control, and audit logging. Score 0 if the core functionality is missing, 5 if only basic operations are implemented, and 10 if comprehensive personnel management features (including performance tracking, organizational chart visualization, and approval workflows) are included.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Is the customer information management system properly designed?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the customer management module includes contact details, purchase history, segmentation, and relationship management features. Check if the system implements data validation, duplicate detection, and privacy compliance measures. Deduct 3 points for missing search/filter functionality, 3 points for inadequate data validation, and 4 points for lack of customer segmentation features. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Is the order management functionality comprehensively implemented?",
+      "description": "Check whether the order management system includes order creation, status tracking, invoice generation, and history visualization. Evaluate if it supports filtering by date ranges, customers, and status. Deduct 3 points if there's no order analytics dashboard, 3 points if there's no order status workflow visualization, and 4 points if there's no integration between orders and customer profiles. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Are the production planning and inventory management features fully functional?",
+      "description": "Review the implementation of production scheduling, material requirements planning, and inventory tracking systems. Check for visualizations like Gantt charts for production timelines and alert mechanisms for low inventory. Deduct 3 points for missing timeline visualizations, 3 points for lack of automatic inventory adjustment from orders, and 4 points if there's no forecasting capability based on historical data. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 4,
+      "title": "Is the code robust?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as invalid input, network interruption, concurrent access conflicts, etc.) and provide friendly error prompts or recovery mechanisms. Code with strong robustness should be able to effectively handle these edge cases, giving 10 points. If the robustness is average, give 5 points, and if no exceptions are handled, give 0 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 5,
+      "title": "Are there any innovative features that are eye-catching?",
+      "description": "Check whether the code includes surprise features that enhance the experience (e.g., 1. Real-time business analytics dashboard 2. Customizable reporting engine 3. AI-driven forecasting for sales and inventory). 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 data retrieval methods doing the same thing) 2. Function modules unrelated to management tasks (e.g., unnecessary social features) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., excessive animations or visualizations 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 business logic/UI/data access 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 suitable for a business application (professional, not flashy) 2) Proper layout spacing with consistent dashboard grid systems 3) Professional typography with clear hierarchy (titles, subtitles, body text, captions). Deduct 3 points for each cluttered screen, 5 points for inconsistent design language across modules, and 5 points for poor information hierarchy. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 9,
+      "title": "Is the dynamic interaction smooth and responsive for management workflows?",
+      "description": "Judge whether the interface responds appropriately to executive-level user needs: 1) Quick access to high-level KPIs and metrics 2) Efficient drill-down capabilities from summary to detail views 3) Responsive design that works well on both desktop and tablet devices. Deduct 5 points for slow-loading dashboards (>2 seconds), 3 points for cumbersome multi-step workflows that could be simplified, and 5 points for lack of contextual help or onboarding for complex features. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    }
+  ],
+  "class": "Management Systems-Frontend/Backend Platforms",
+  "difficulty": "hard"
+}

package/library/management_systems-frontend_backend_platforms/gym-membership-management-system.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 1382,
+  "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 whenever possible. Could you help me write a gym membership management system?",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the core membership management functionality fully implemented?",
+      "description": "Check if the system includes essential member CRUD operations (Create, Read, Update, Delete), membership type definitions, and expiration handling. Score 0 if these core functions are missing, 5 if only basic operations are implemented without validation, and 10 if the system includes comprehensive membership management with proper data validation and business rules.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Is the payment and billing system properly implemented?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code includes payment processing, recurring billing, invoice generation, and payment history tracking. Check for integration with payment gateways or simulation of payment workflows. Deduct 5 points if there's no payment history tracking, and 3 points if recurring billing is not handled. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Are gym access control and attendance tracking features included?",
+      "description": "Review whether the system implements check-in/check-out functionality, attendance reports, access restrictions based on membership status, and capacity management. Deduct 5 points if there's no visual representation of attendance data, and 3 points if membership validation at check-in is inadequate. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Is the class/trainer scheduling system functional?",
+      "description": "Assess if the code includes class/session scheduling, trainer assignment, member registration for classes, and conflict prevention. Check for calendar visualization, availability checking, and notification mechanisms. Deduct 3 points if there's no conflict detection, and 5 points if there's no visual calendar interface. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 4,
+      "title": "Is the code robust?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as invalid inputs, database connection failures, concurrent operations, 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. Fitness progress tracking 2. Membership usage analytics 3. Automated member retention tools). Add 3 points for each practical innovative feature implemented (maximum 10 points).",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 6,
+      "title": "Are there any redundant features?",
+      "description": "Strictly check three types of redundancy: 1. Redundant implementation of similar functions (e.g., multiple ways to manage the same data) 2. Function modules unrelated to gym management (e.g., a built-in game) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., unnecessary animations). Deduct 3 points for each redundancy found, and directly deduct 10 points if the core functions are interfered with by redundant code.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 7,
+      "title": "Does the code have engineering quality?",
+      "description": "Review modular design (such as separating business logic/view/data access 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) 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": "Management Systems-Frontend/Backend Platforms",
+  "difficulty": "hard"
+}

package/library/management_systems-frontend_backend_platforms/hair-salon-membership-management-system.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 855,
+  "question": "You are a code expert, please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Make sure the code you produce is executable and demonstrable. Write a hair salon membership management system that includes recharging functions, entryway, and regular membership management system features.",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the membership management core system fully implemented?",
+      "description": "Review whether the code implements essential membership management features including member registration, profile management, membership levels, and status tracking. Score 0 if the core system is not implemented, 5 if only basic member data storage is available, and 10 if comprehensive membership lifecycle management (registration, upgrades, expiration handling) is present.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Is the recharging function complete and secure?",
+      "description": "Evaluate if the recharging system includes multiple payment methods, transaction records, balance history, secure payment processing with validation, and proper receipt generation. Deduct 5 points if transaction logging is missing, 3 points if payment validation is weak, and 2 points if no receipt system exists. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Is the entryway/check-in system properly implemented?",
+      "description": "Check if the system includes member check-in functionality, visitor tracking, appointment verification, and integration with the main system. Deduct 3 points if no real-time validation of membership status occurs at check-in, 3 points if visitor tracking is absent, and 4 points if the entryway system doesn't integrate with the appointment system. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Are salon-specific features and service management implemented?",
+      "description": "Verify whether the system includes salon-specific features such as service catalog, stylist scheduling, appointment booking, service history tracking, and product sales integration. Score 0 if salon operations are not implemented, 5 if only basic appointment booking exists, and 10 if comprehensive salon management features are included.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 4,
+      "title": "Is the code robust?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as invalid input data, payment failures, duplicate check-ins, concurrent transactions, 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. Intelligent appointment recommendations based on history 2. Personalized discount system 3. Client retention analytics 4. Integrated loyalty program with point redemption). Add 2.5 points for each practical innovative feature implemented (maximum 10 points).",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 6,
+      "title": "Are there any redundant features?",
+      "description": "Strictly check three types of redundancy: 1. Redundant implementation of similar functions (e.g., multiple user authentication systems) 2. Function modules unrelated to salon management (e.g., general social networking features) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., excessive animations in core transaction flows). Deduct 3 points for each redundancy found, and directly deduct 10 points if the core functions are interfered with by redundant code.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 7,
+      "title": "Does the code have engineering quality?",
+      "description": "Review modular design (such as separating business logic/view/data access layers), unit test coverage, and security best practices. Deduct 5 points if global state pollution is found or design patterns are not used; deduct 3 points if the code duplication rate is too high (over 30%); deduct 2 points if input sanitization is inadequate. 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 (preferably using salon-appropriate colors) 2) Proper layout spacing (element spacing follows the 8px multiple principle) 3) Professional font system (body font size ≥ 14px, line height over 1.5 times) 4) Clear dashboard views with key metrics. 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) Check-in/payment processing feedback delay ≤ 100ms 2) Transition animation duration controlled between 300-500ms 3) Clear visual focus guidance for new customers vs. staff interfaces. Deduct 5 points for each operation without feedback, 3 points for visual after-images during fast navigation, and 5 points for hard-to-find key function buttons. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    }
+  ],
+  "class": "Management Systems-Frontend/Backend Platforms",
+  "difficulty": "medium"
+}

package/library/management_systems-frontend_backend_platforms/hardware-electrical-retail-inventory-management-tool.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 781,
+  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Make sure that the code you generate is executable when possible. Write code for a hardware and electrical retail store inventory management tool that will allow me to create a simple and user-friendly inventory management software.",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the core inventory management system properly implemented?",
+      "description": "Review whether the code accurately implements CRUD operations for inventory items, including fields for SKU, product name, category, price, quantity, supplier information, and reorder thresholds. Score 0 if basic inventory operations are missing, 5 if only basic operations are implemented without validation, and 10 if comprehensive inventory management with data validation is included.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Does the system include hardware/electrical specific features?",
+      "description": "Check whether the code includes domain-specific features for hardware/electrical retail such as: serial number tracking, warranty management, compatibility indicators, bulk pricing, and technical specifications management. Deduct 2 points for each missing essential feature. Give 10 points if all retail-specific features are implemented appropriately.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Is the database design and persistence layer well-implemented?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the database schema is properly normalized with appropriate relationships between entities (products, suppliers, categories, transactions). Check if the persistence layer handles data integrity, includes backup mechanisms, and uses efficient querying patterns. Deduct 5 points if the database design is flat/denormalized without justification, and 3 points if transaction safety is not implemented.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Does the system provide comprehensive reporting and analytics?",
+      "description": "Assess whether the code implements essential retail analytics: inventory valuation, sales velocity, stockout prediction, reorder recommendations, and category performance visualization. Deduct 2 points for each missing critical report. The system should allow custom date ranges and export capabilities. Give 10 points if all key metrics are available with visualization.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 4,
+      "title": "Is the code robust?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as duplicate SKUs, negative quantities, invalid price inputs, concurrent access, and data corruption) 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. Barcode/QR code scanning integration 2. Supplier communication module 3. Automated reordering based on sales velocity). Add 3 points for each practical innovative feature implemented (maximum 10 points).",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 6,
+      "title": "Are there any redundant features?",
+      "description": "Strictly check three types of redundancy: 1. Redundant implementation of similar functions (e.g., multiple ways to update inventory) 2. Function modules unrelated to inventory management (e.g., a built-in game or irrelevant tools) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., unnecessary animations). Deduct 3 points for each redundancy found, and directly deduct 10 points if the core functions are interfered with by redundant code.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 7,
+      "title": "Does the code have engineering quality?",
+      "description": "Review modular design (such as separating data access/business logic/presentation 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 user-friendly?",
+      "description": "Judge whether the interface is truly user-friendly for retail staff: 1) Common operations require ≤ 3 clicks 2) Form auto-completion and validation 3) Clear visual feedback for actions 4) Consistent keyboard shortcuts. Deduct 5 points if bulk operations are not supported, 3 points for confusing navigation paths, and 5 points for operations that require unnecessary confirmation steps. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    }
+  ],
+  "class": "Management Systems-Frontend/Backend Platforms",
+  "difficulty": "hard"
+}

package/library/management_systems-frontend_backend_platforms/harmonyos-login-page-ui-with-logo.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 292,
+  "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.\n\n```\nbuild() {\n  Column(){\n    Image($r('app.media.logo'))\n      .width(120)\n      .height(120)\n      .margin({bottom: 30})\n    \n    Text('User Login')\n      .fontSize(32)\n      .fontWeight(FontWeight.Bold)\n      .margin({bottom: 40})\n      .fontColor('#333')\n    \n    TextInput({placeholder: 'Please enter username'})\n      .width('80%')\n      .height(50)\n      .margin({bottom: 20})\n      .fontSize(18)\n      .borderRadius(8)\n      .backgroundColor('#f5f5f5')\n      .padding({left: 15})\n      .onChange((value: string) => {this.username = value})\n    \n    TextInput({placeholder: 'Please enter password'})\n      .width('80%')\n      .height(50)\n      .margin({bottom: 30})\n      .fontSize(18)\n      .borderRadius(8)\n      .backgroundColor('#f5f5f5')\n      .padding({left: 15})\n      .type(InputType.Password)\n      .onChange((value: string) => {this.password = value})\n    \n    Button('Login')\n      .width('80%')\n      .height(50)\n      .margin({bottom: 15})\n      .fontSize(18)\n      .fontWeight(FontWeight.Medium)\n      .backgroundColor('#4285f4')\n      .borderRadius(25)\n      .onClick(() => {this.handleLogin()})\n    \n    Button('Register')\n      .width('80%')\n      .height(50)\n      .fontSize(18)\n      .fontWeight(FontWeight.Medium)\n      .backgroundColor('#34a853')\n      .borderRadius(25)\n      .onClick(()=>{\n        router.pushUrl({url:'pages/RegisterPage'})\n      })\n  }\n  .width('100%')\n  .height('100%')\n  .justifyContent(FlexAlign.Center)\n  .backgroundImage($r('app.media.background'))\n  .backgroundImageSize(ImageSize.Cover)\n}\n```\n\nPlease improve the style to make it look better and add a logo.",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the login interface layout properly implemented and visually balanced?",
+      "description": "Review whether the layout elements (logo, title, input fields, buttons) are properly aligned, spaced, and sized. Check if the column arrangement provides a clear visual hierarchy and if the justifyContent property correctly centers the content. Deduct 3 points if elements appear crowded or misaligned, 5 points if the visual hierarchy is confusing, and 5 points if responsive layout considerations are missing. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Are the input fields properly designed with appropriate user feedback?",
+      "description": "Evaluate if text input fields include proper validation feedback, focus states, and error handling. Check if the password field properly obscures text and if there are clear visual cues for input status. Deduct 3 points if validation feedback is missing, 3 points if there's no visual indication of focus state, and 4 points if there's no error handling for invalid inputs. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Is the authentication flow complete with proper error handling?",
+      "description": "Assess whether the handleLogin() function includes proper user authentication logic, loading states, error messages, and security measures (like input sanitization). Deduct 5 points if there's no loading state during authentication, 5 points if error handling is inadequate, and 5 points if no security measures are implemented for handling credentials. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Is the navigation between login and registration pages properly implemented?",
+      "description": "Check if the navigation using router.pushUrl() is correctly implemented with proper state management between pages. Verify if there's a way to return to the login page from registration and if the navigation preserves user input when appropriate. Deduct 3 points if back navigation is missing, 4 points if state isn't preserved appropriately between navigations, and 3 points if there are no animations for page transitions. 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 empty inputs, network issues during login, memory leaks) 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. Biometric authentication option 2. Remember me functionality 3. Password strength indicator 4. Social login options). Add 3 points for each practical innovative feature implemented (maximum 10 points).",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 6,
+      "title": "Are there any redundant features?",
+      "description": "Strictly check three types of redundancy: 1. Redundant style declarations (e.g., multiple margin definitions) 2. Unnecessary components that don't contribute to the login functionality 3. Overly complex animations that might affect performance on lower-end 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 UI/logic/state management), reusability of components, and proper organization of resources. Deduct 5 points if business logic is mixed with UI code; deduct 5 points if there's significant code duplication; deduct 5 points if resources like images are not properly organized. 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 consistent principles) 3) Professional font system (appropriate font sizes and weights for hierarchy). Deduct 3 points for each crowded visual element, 5 points for a glaring color combination, and 5 points for inconsistent visual styling. 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) Immediate visual feedback for button presses 2) Smooth transitions between states 3) Appropriate loading indicators. Deduct 5 points for each interaction without feedback, 3 points for jarring transitions, and 5 points for confusing interaction patterns. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    }
+  ],
+  "class": "Multimedia Editing-Image Editing",
+  "difficulty": "medium"
+}

package/library/management_systems-frontend_backend_platforms/hbuilder-html-ward-management-system.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 900,
+  "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. Help me create an HTML for a ward management system that can run on Hbuilder.",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the ward management system's core functionality implemented?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code implements essential ward management features: patient registration, bed assignment, staff scheduling, and patient records management. Score 0 if core functionalities are missing, 5 if only basic features are implemented, and 10 if comprehensive ward management capabilities are included with proper data validation.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Is the UI structure properly designed for a ward management system?",
+      "description": "Check whether the HTML structure follows proper hierarchy with semantic elements (header, nav, main, section, footer). Verify the presence of responsive design for different screen sizes (desktop, tablet, mobile) since ward staff may use various devices. Deduct 3 points if semantic HTML is not used, 3 points if responsiveness is missing, and 4 points if the navigation structure is confusing.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Is the data management and persistence properly implemented?",
+      "description": "Assess whether the system implements proper data handling mechanisms: local storage usage, form validation, and state management. Check for data integrity features like input validation and proper data structures. Deduct 5 points if no data persistence is implemented, and 5 points if input validation is inadequate or missing.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Is HBuilder compatibility considered in the implementation?",
+      "description": "Verify whether the code utilizes HBuilder-specific features or plugins properly, like HTML5+ API integration, MUI components, or other HBuilder capabilities. Check if the app is configured for HBuilder deployment. Deduct 5 points if HBuilder compatibility issues exist, and 5 points if no HBuilder-specific optimizations are included.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 4,
+      "title": "Is the code robust?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as invalid input data, network issues, or user operation errors) and provide friendly error prompts or recovery mechanisms. Code with strong robustness should effectively handle these edge cases, giving 10 points. If the robustness is average, give 5 points, and if no exceptions are handled, give 0 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 5,
+      "title": "Are there any innovative features that are eye-catching?",
+      "description": "Check whether the code includes surprise features that enhance the experience (e.g., 1. Real-time bed occupancy visualization 2. Patient critical status alerts 3. Drag-and-drop bed assignment interface). Add 3 points for each practical innovative feature implemented (maximum 10 points).",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 6,
+      "title": "Are there any redundant features?",
+      "description": "Strictly check three types of redundancy: 1. Redundant implementation of similar functions (e.g., multiple patient search methods) 2. Function modules unrelated to ward management (e.g., a built-in game for staff) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., unnecessary animations). Deduct 3 points for each redundancy found, and directly deduct 10 points if the core functions are interfered with by redundant code.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 7,
+      "title": "Does the code have engineering quality?",
+      "description": "Review modular design (such as separating data/view/controller layers), code organization, and maintainability. Deduct 5 points if global variable pollution is found or if proper JavaScript patterns are not used; deduct 5 points if the code duplication rate is too high (over 30%); deduct 5 points if the code structure makes future maintenance difficult. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 8,
+      "title": "Does the interface design meet healthcare UI standards?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the UI follows healthcare design principles: 1) Clean, professional color scheme appropriate for medical settings 2) Proper information hierarchy with critical patient data easily accessible 3) Consistent typography suitable for clinical reading (body font size ≥ 14px, clear headings). Deduct 3 points for visual clutter, 5 points for inappropriate color schemes for healthcare, and 5 points for poor information architecture. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 9,
+      "title": "Is the dynamic interaction smooth and user-friendly for healthcare staff?",
+      "description": "Judge whether the system is optimized for healthcare workflows: 1) Quick access to critical patient information (≤ 2 clicks) 2) Form completion and submission within 30 seconds 3) Clear visual indicators for patient status changes. Deduct 5 points for each workflow requiring excessive steps, 3 points for slow-loading interfaces, and 5 points for confusing navigation between key system areas. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    }
+  ],
+  "class": "Management Systems-Frontend/Backend Platforms",
+  "difficulty": "easy"
+}

package/library/management_systems-frontend_backend_platforms/higher-math-grade-management-system.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 835,
+  "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 demonstration. Design a main interface for a higher mathematics grade information management system after student login, including functions such as grade inquiry, grade analysis, information notifications, and comparison with previous grades.",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the student login system fully implemented?",
+      "description": "Examine whether the code implements secure user authentication with proper session management, input validation, and protection against common security threats (like SQL injection, XSS). Check if it includes password hashing, CSRF protection, and proper error handling. Score 0 if authentication is missing, 5 if basic login exists with security flaws, and 10 if a complete, secure authentication system is implemented.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Is the grade inquiry feature complete and user-friendly?",
+      "description": "Verify if the grade inquiry system provides comprehensive views (by subject, semester, academic year), allows filtering/sorting, and includes detailed grade breakdown. Check for data visualization elements that enhance readability. Deduct 5 points if only basic listing is available without filtering options; deduct 3 points if there's no visual representation of grades. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Does the grade analysis functionality provide meaningful insights?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the analysis includes statistical measures (mean, median, standard deviation), percentile rankings, performance trends over time, and subject-specific analytics. Check for comparative analysis against class/department averages. Deduct 5 points if only basic statistics are shown; deduct 5 points if visualizations (charts, graphs) are missing or poorly implemented. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Is the notification system properly implemented with comparison features?",
+      "description": "Assess whether the system includes real-time notifications for new grades, important announcements, and grade changes. Check if the grade comparison feature allows side-by-side analysis between current and previous performance with clear visual indicators for improvement/decline. Deduct 5 points if notifications are static only; deduct 5 points if comparison lacks visual differentiation or trend analysis. 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 missing grade data, network issues, edge cases in calculations, etc.) and provide friendly error messages 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. Predictive grade forecasting based on current performance 2. Personalized study recommendations based on weak areas 3. Peer anonymized performance comparison). Add 3 points for each practical innovative feature implemented (maximum 10 points).",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 6,
+      "title": "Are there any redundant features?",
+      "description": "Strictly check three types of redundancy: 1. Redundant implementation of similar functions (e.g., multiple ways to view the same information) 2. Function modules unrelated to grade management (e.g., a built-in general calculator) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., excessive animations). Deduct 3 points for each redundancy found, and directly deduct 10 points if the core functions are interfered with by redundant code.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 7,
+      "title": "Does the code have engineering quality?",
+      "description": "Review modular design (such as separating data logic/view/controller 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) 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": "Management Systems-Frontend/Backend Platforms",
+  "difficulty": "hard"
+}