@getollie/cli 0.0.1

package/library/management_systems-frontend_backend_platforms/login-registration-page-with-overlay-switch.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 1413,
+  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Make sure to ensure that the generated code is executable and displayable. I have implemented a switching effect for a login/registration page where when a user clicks on the login or registration button, an overlay appears containing a form where the user can enter their username and password, then click the submit button to login or register. When the user clicks the return button, the overlay is hidden, and the login or registration form is displayed in the main area. This effect can improve user experience, making it more convenient for users to login or register. Please implement the above code.",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the login/registration switching effect fully implemented?",
+      "description": "Check if the code properly implements the switching mechanism between login and registration forms with overlay functionality. Verify that clicking on login/registration buttons shows the appropriate overlay with form, and clicking return hides the overlay displaying the form in the main area. Score 0 if the switching effect isn't implemented, 5 if only basic toggling is present, and 10 if smoothly transitions between states with proper visibility control.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Are form input validations properly implemented?",
+      "description": "Evaluate if the code includes client-side validation for username/password fields (minimum length, required fields, password complexity, etc.). Check for real-time validation feedback as users type. Deduct 3 points if basic validation is missing, 2 points if validation exists but without user feedback, and 5 points if there's no validation at all. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Is the form submission handling implemented correctly?",
+      "description": "Review whether form submission prevents default behavior and includes proper event handling. Check if there's mock API integration or preparation for backend communication. Deduct 5 points if form submission isn't handled properly, 3 points if there's no feedback after submission, and 3 points if there's no error handling. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Is the overlay functionality properly implemented with accessibility considerations?",
+      "description": "Examine if the overlay properly covers the main content, has appropriate z-index management, and includes accessibility features (focus trapping, escape key to close, screen reader compatibility). Deduct 3 points for missing keyboard navigation, 3 points for improper focus management, and 4 points for inaccessible overlay controls. 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 form submission with empty fields, rapid toggling between forms, browser resizing, 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. Password strength indicator 2. Social media login options 3. Remember me functionality 4. Password visibility 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 event listeners for the same action) 2. Function modules unrelated to login/registration (e.g., unnecessary widgets) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., excessive animations). Deduct 3 points for each redundancy found, and directly deduct 10 points if the core functions are interfered with by redundant code.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 7,
+      "title": "Does the code have engineering quality?",
+      "description": "Review modular design (such as separating UI/validation/event handling), code organization, and maintainability. Deduct 5 points if global state pollution is found or design patterns are not used; deduct 5 points if the code duplication rate is too high (over 30%); deduct 5 points if there's no clear separation of concerns. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 8,
+      "title": "Does the interface vision meet professional 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 form design (clear labels, properly sized inputs, consistent styling). Deduct 3 points for each crowded visual element, 5 points for a glaring color combination, and 5 points for misaligned form elements. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 9,
+      "title": "Is the dynamic interaction smooth and seamless?",
+      "description": "Judge whether the transition effects conform to human perception characteristics: 1) Form switching animation duration between 200-400ms 2) Clear visual feedback for button clicks and form submission 3) Smooth overlay appearance/disappearance. Deduct 5 points for jarring transitions, 3 points for missing hover states on interactive elements, and 5 points for inconsistent animation timing. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    }
+  ],
+  "class": "Management Systems-Frontend/Backend Platforms",
+  "difficulty": "medium"
+}

package/library/management_systems-frontend_backend_platforms/logistics-management-system.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 498,
+  "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. ======== Role ========\nYou are an experienced code expert. You have been given a software development requirement description and are required to generate project code according to these requirements. Strictly follow the rules to help users generate complete project code that is fully annotated with simple, easy-to-understand language, without outputting anything else.\n\n======== Output Rules ========\n1. Always generate complete, runnable project code, ensuring the project is fully executable\n2. Ensure all code files you output are complete, do not omit any code\n3. Carefully review and check all code before final output, evaluating its executability. If the code cannot be executed or contains errors, regenerate it\n4. If the requirement involves external API access or needs to use user data (images, videos, audio, etc.), please provide mock data\n\n======== Project Requirements ========\nPlease write code to implement a logistics management system where administrators can track cargo transportation status, manage transport vehicles and driver information; customers can log in to view their cargo status and transportation logs.",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the core logistics tracking system properly implemented?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code correctly implements cargo tracking functionality with features like real-time status updates, location tracking, and delivery milestone recording. Check if the system maintains a complete audit trail of all cargo movements and status changes.Award 0 points if cargo tracking is missing, 5 points if basic tracking exists but lacks real-time capabilities, 10 points if the implementation includes comprehensive tracking with timestamps, location data, and status history.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Is the vehicle and driver management system complete?",
+      "description": "Review whether the system allows for comprehensive management of transport vehicles (registration, maintenance schedules, availability status) and driver information (profiles, licenses, schedules, performance metrics). Check if there are functions for assigning vehicles to drivers and routes.Award 0 points if these management functions are absent, 5 points if only basic CRUD operations are implemented, 10 points if the system includes comprehensive management with scheduling, availability tracking, and assignment algorithms.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Is the user authentication and role-based access control implemented?",
+      "description": "Check whether the system properly implements separate authentication flows for administrators and customers, with appropriate role-based access control. Verify if security measures like password hashing, session management, and protection against common attacks are implemented.Award 0 points if authentication is missing, 5 points if basic login exists but lacks proper role separation or security measures, 10 points if the system implements comprehensive and secure authentication with proper access control.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Is the customer interface for tracking cargo implemented?",
+      "description": "Evaluate if customers can log in to view their cargo status with features like historical transportation logs, current location, estimated delivery times, and notification capabilities. Check if the interface is user-friendly and provides clear visualization of cargo movements.Award 0 points if customer tracking interface is absent, 5 points if basic viewing exists but lacks interactive features, 10 points if the implementation includes comprehensive tracking visualization, search functionality, and notification systems.",
+      "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, authentication errors, etc.) and provide friendly error prompts or recovery mechanisms. Code with strong robustness should be able to effectively handle these edge cases.Award 10 points for comprehensive error handling and recovery mechanisms, 5 points for average robustness with some error handling, 0 points if no exception 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. Predictive ETAs using historical data 2. Mobile-responsive design with push notifications 3. Interactive maps showing cargo routes 4. Weather integration showing potential delivery delays).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 cargo status) 2. Function modules unrelated to logistics management (e.g., built-in games or unnecessary social features) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., heavy animations that slow page 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 business logic/view/data access layers), unit test coverage, and build process automation. Check for use of design patterns, code reusability, and maintainability.Deduct 5 points if global state pollution is found or design patterns are not used; deduct 5 points if the code duplication rate is too high (over 30%); deduct 5 points if 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) 4) Intuitive navigation and information hierarchy.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 4) Intuitive data visualization for logistics information.Deduct 5 points for each operation without feedback, 3 points for visual after-images during fast scrolling or transitions, 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": "easy"
+}

package/library/management_systems-frontend_backend_platforms/low-voltage-equipment-inventory-management-qr-excel.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 1039,
+  "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. Write a computer program for managing the inventory of low-voltage engineering equipment through QR code generation and Excel import/export functionality.",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the QR code generation functionality fully implemented?",
+      "description": "Review whether the code accurately generates QR codes for equipment items with proper error handling and configuration options. Check if the QR codes contain essential inventory information (ID, name, location, status) and if the implementation supports different QR code formats and densities. Score 0 if QR functionality is absent, 5 if basic QR generation exists but lacks configuration options, and 10 if the implementation is robust with customization features.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Is the Excel import/export functionality properly implemented?",
+      "description": "Evaluate the implementation of Excel file handling. The code should support bidirectional data transfer (import and export), handle various Excel formats (.xlsx, .xls, .csv), and include validation mechanisms for imported data. Deduct 3 points if only one direction is supported, 3 points if data validation is missing, and 2 points if the code doesn't handle Excel formatting properly. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Is the inventory data model well-designed and implemented?",
+      "description": "Check whether the data model covers essential equipment attributes (ID, name, type, location, purchase date, maintenance history, current status). Assess whether the model supports relationships between items (e.g., components of larger equipment) and includes proper data validation. Deduct 3 points for missing critical attributes, 3 points for inadequate validation, and 4 points if the model doesn't support relationships between inventory items. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Is the integration between QR code scanning and inventory management seamless?",
+      "description": "Analyze how QR code scanning integrates with the inventory system. The code should handle scan events, update inventory records accordingly, and provide error handling for failed scans or unrecognized codes. Deduct 3 points if scan processing is unreliable, 3 points if the update mechanism isn't transactional, and 4 points if there's no scan history or audit trail. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 4,
+      "title": "Is the code robust?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code handles exceptions appropriately (file not found, corrupted Excel files, invalid QR codes, database connection issues). Check for input validation, security measures against injection attacks, and graceful degradation during failures. Code with strong robustness should provide meaningful error messages and recovery mechanisms, giving 10 points. If robustness is average, give 5 points, and if exceptions aren't handled properly, 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 inventory management experience (e.g., 1. Real-time equipment status visualization 2. Automated maintenance scheduling based on usage patterns 3. Mobile responsive design for field operations). 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 code for similar functions (e.g., multiple Excel parsing implementations) 2. Function modules unrelated to inventory management (e.g., built-in email client) 3. Excessive features that negatively impact performance. Deduct 3 points for each redundancy found, and directly deduct 10 points if the core functions are interfered with by redundant code.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 7,
+      "title": "Does the code have engineering quality?",
+      "description": "Review modular design (separation of concerns between UI, business logic, and data access layers), appropriate design patterns, unit test coverage, and documentation quality. Deduct 3 points if global state pollution is found, 3 points if the code duplication rate exceeds 20%, and 4 points if documentation is inadequate or missing. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 8,
+      "title": "Does the interface vision meet professional design standards?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the UI follows professional design principles: 1) Clean and consistent layout with proper alignment 2) Appropriate color scheme that enhances readability 3) Clear visual hierarchy emphasizing important elements. Deduct 3 points for cluttered interfaces, 3 points for poor contrast affecting readability, and 4 points for inconsistent styling across screens. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 9,
+      "title": "Is the user workflow intuitive and efficient?",
+      "description": "Assess whether the application provides an intuitive workflow for inventory management tasks: 1) Logical task progression with minimal clicks 2) Clear feedback for user actions within 100ms 3) Efficient batch operations for common tasks. Deduct 3 points for each workflow requiring excessive steps, 3 points for missing visual feedback on operations, and 4 points if common inventory tasks require complex navigation. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    }
+  ],
+  "class": "Management Systems-Frontend/Backend Platforms",
+  "difficulty": "medium"
+}

package/library/management_systems-frontend_backend_platforms/manage-member-list-webpage-fix.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 1017,
+  "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 whenever possible. Modify: Place the \"Edit Member List\" button after the \"Import List\" button. Issue: After editing the member list and clicking the \"Save Changes\" button, the window cannot be closed. Generate complete webpage code.",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the 'Edit Member List' button placement correctly implemented?",
+      "description": "Verify that the 'Edit Member List' button appears after the 'Import List' button in the DOM structure and visual layout. Check both the HTML order and any CSS positioning that might affect the visual order. Give 10 points if correctly placed, 5 points if visually correct but with improper DOM structure, and 0 points if incorrectly placed.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Is the modal window closing functionality properly implemented?",
+      "description": "Check whether the 'Save Changes' button correctly triggers the modal closing mechanism. The modal should completely disappear from view and be removed from the active DOM when clicked. Verify event listeners are properly attached and that any backdrop/overlay elements are also hidden or removed. Award 10 points if it works flawlessly, 5 points if it visually disappears but remains in DOM, and 0 points if it doesn't close at all.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Is the member list editing functionality complete?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the edit functionality allows adding new members, deleting existing ones, and modifying member information. The implementation should include input validation and proper state management. Award 10 points for full CRUD operations with validation, 7 points if basic editing works without validation, and 3 points if only partial editing capabilities exist.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Is the data persistence properly implemented?",
+      "description": "Check if the changes made to the member list are properly saved and persisted (either to localStorage, sessionStorage, or prepared for server submission). The saved data should be retrievable after the modal is closed and reopened. Give 10 points for complete persistence with error handling, 5 points for basic persistence without error handling, and 0 points if changes are lost after closing the modal.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 4,
+      "title": "Is the code robust?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as empty input fields, special characters in names, duplicate entries, 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. Drag-and-drop reordering of members 2. Real-time search/filtering 3. Bulk operations for multiple members). 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 edit the same data) 2. Function modules unrelated to member list management 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 model/view/controller layers), use of modern JavaScript practices, and code maintainability. Deduct 5 points if global variables are excessively used; deduct 5 points if the code duplication rate is too high (over 30%); deduct 5 points if event listeners are not properly managed (potential memory leaks). 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 transitions, 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": "easy"
+}

package/library/management_systems-frontend_backend_platforms/medical-equipment-maintenance-management-system.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 598,
+  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Be sure to ensure that the generated code is executable for demonstration. Please write code to implement a medical equipment maintenance management system for managing the maintenance and upkeep of various medical devices in a hospital (such as CT scanners, MRI machines, ultrasound devices, etc.). The system needs to record basic information for each device (device ID, name, model, manufacturer, purchase date, department, etc.), technical parameters, and maintenance requirements (such as maintenance cycle, key inspection items, etc.). Equipment administrators (username: equipment, password: 123456) can create periodic maintenance schedules, and the system automatically generates maintenance tasks and reminders according to the schedule. Maintenance engineers (username: engineer, password: 123456) receive tasks, perform maintenance work, fill out maintenance records (inspection items, test data, replaced parts, maintenance results, etc.), and upload on-site photos or test reports. Medical staff can report device malfunctions (describing the fault symptoms, urgency level, etc.), and maintenance engineers accept the orders, process them, and record the repair process. System administrators (username: admin, password: 123456) can view maintenance history of all equipment, fault frequency statistics, average repair time and other metrics, and generate equipment reliability analysis reports. The system should also support spare parts inventory management functions, recording the inventory status of spare parts needed for maintenance and issuing warnings when inventory is insufficient.",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the core equipment management system properly implemented?",
+      "description": "Review whether the code accurately implements CRUD operations for medical equipment (device ID, name, model, manufacturer, purchase date, department, technical parameters, maintenance requirements). Check if there's proper data validation for equipment registration and updates, and if the system enforces unique device IDs. Score 0 if equipment management is missing, 5 if basic registration exists without validation, and 10 if complete with proper validation and relationship modeling.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Is the maintenance schedule generation and task management system fully functional?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the system automatically generates maintenance tasks based on equipment maintenance cycles. Check if it includes notification mechanisms for upcoming maintenance, proper task assignment to engineers, and status tracking (pending, in-progress, completed). Deduct 5 points if automatic scheduling is missing, and 3 points if notification system is not implemented. Score 10 if the system handles recurring maintenance with proper prioritization algorithms.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Are the maintenance record keeping and fault reporting workflows properly implemented?",
+      "description": "Check if engineers can properly log maintenance activities with required fields (inspection items, test data, replaced parts, results) and if medical staff can submit fault reports with appropriate urgency levels. Verify if the system supports photo/document uploads and maintains a complete audit trail. Deduct 5 points if file upload functionality is missing, 3 points if the workflow has logical gaps. Score 10 if the complete maintenance lifecycle is properly tracked.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Is the spare parts inventory management system functional?",
+      "description": "Assess whether the system tracks spare parts inventory with proper stock level monitoring. Verify if it includes low-stock alerts, integration with maintenance records for automatic inventory deduction, and inventory history. Score 0 if inventory management is missing, 5 if basic tracking exists without alerts, and 10 if complete with proper integration to maintenance workflows and automated threshold alerts.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 4,
+      "title": "Is the code robust?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as invalid inputs, network issues, concurrent edits, server failures) and provide friendly error prompts or recovery mechanisms. Code should implement proper exception handling, input validation, and transaction management. If the robustness is excellent with comprehensive error handling, give 10 points. If it's 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 maintenance using equipment usage patterns 2. Mobile app integration with QR code scanning for equipment 3. Interactive equipment location maps 4. AI-based fault diagnosis suggestions). 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 record the same maintenance data) 2. Function modules unrelated to medical equipment maintenance (e.g., a built-in general chat system) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., unnecessary animations in critical workflows). 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. Examine proper use of design patterns appropriate for maintenance workflows. Deduct 5 points if global state pollution is found; deduct 5 points if the code duplication rate is too high (over 30%); deduct 5 points if 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 suitable for a healthcare setting: 1) Clean, professional color scheme (predominantly white with accent colors) 2) Proper layout spacing with clear hierarchical information display 3) Professional font system optimized for readability in clinical environments. Deduct 3 points for each cluttered screen, 5 points for inappropriate color schemes in a medical context, 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 support efficient workflows for busy healthcare professionals: 1) Quick response times for common operations (≤ 100ms) 2) Appropriate feedback for maintenance task status changes 3) Clear visual indicators for urgent items requiring attention. Deduct 5 points for each critical operation without feedback, 3 points for confusing state transitions, and 5 points for hard-to-locate critical functions like emergency repair requests. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    }
+  ],
+  "class": "Management Systems-Frontend/Backend Platforms",
+  "difficulty": "hard"
+}

package/library/management_systems-frontend_backend_platforms/meeting-feedback-tracker-with-attendance.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 1806,
+  "question": "You are a code expert, please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Be sure to ensure that the generated code is executable for demonstration whenever possible. I need to create a webpage for tracking feedback from meeting participants with the following features: 1. Ability to import multiple attendance lists containing departments, personnel, and phone numbers. 2. The webpage should be able to compile and summarize departments, personnel, and phone numbers. 3. Remove duplicate entries, and implement this in an intranet environment.",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the data import functionality fully implemented?",
+      "description": "Review whether the code provides multiple methods for importing attendance data (CSV, Excel, JSON, manual entry), handles various file formats correctly, and includes proper error handling for malformed data. Check if the import validates the required fields (departments, personnel, phone numbers). Score 0 if import functionality is missing, 5 if only basic import is available, and 10 if multiple import methods with validation are implemented.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Is the data compilation and summarization feature implemented effectively?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code properly compiles and summarizes the imported data, providing statistical information by department, personnel counts, and contact information. Check if the system offers sorting, filtering, and search capabilities. Score 0 if summarization is missing, 5 if basic compilation exists but lacks advanced features, and 10 if comprehensive data summarization with multiple viewing options is implemented.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Does the duplicate detection and removal system work properly?",
+      "description": "Assess the duplicate detection algorithm to confirm it can identify duplicate entries based on multiple criteria (exact matches, fuzzy matching on names, similar phone numbers). Verify that the system allows for manual review of potential duplicates before removal and maintains an audit log of merged/removed entries. Deduct 5 points if only exact matching is used, and 3 points if no user confirmation for removal exists. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Is the solution compatible with intranet environment constraints?",
+      "description": "Check if the implementation works entirely client-side or uses minimal server requirements suitable for intranet deployment. Verify that it doesn't rely on external services, CDNs, or APIs that would be inaccessible in an isolated network. Evaluate if local storage or internal database options are properly implemented for data persistence. Score 0 if incompatible with intranet, 5 if partially compatible with modifications needed, and 10 if fully intranet-ready.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 4,
+      "title": "Is the code robust?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as malformed input data, missing fields, network interruption, user operation errors, etc.) and provide friendly error prompts or recovery mechanisms. Code with strong robustness should be able to effectively handle these edge cases, giving 10 points. If the robustness is average, give 5 points, and if no exceptions are handled, give 0 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 5,
+      "title": "Are there any innovative features that are eye-catching?",
+      "description": "Check whether the code includes surprise features that enhance the experience (e.g., 1. Intelligent duplicate suggestion system 2. Data visualization of attendance patterns 3. Export options with customizable reports). 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 perform the same data processing) 2. Function modules unrelated to attendance tracking (e.g., a built-in calendar system) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., unnecessary 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 data processing logic from UI components), 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 scrolling through attendance lists, 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": "easy"
+}

package/library/management_systems-frontend_backend_platforms/meeting-room-reservation-system.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 656,
+  "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 whenever possible. \n\n======== Role ========\nYou are an experienced code expert. You're given a software development requirement description and asked to generate project code based on these requirements. Strictly follow the rules to help users generate complete project code with simple, easy-to-understand comments, and don't output anything else.\n\n======== Output Rules ========\n1. Always generate complete, runnable project code, ensuring the project is fully executable\n2. Ensure all code files you output are complete, don't omit any code\n3. Carefully review and check all code before final output, evaluating its executability. If the code cannot be executed or contains errors, regenerate it\n4. If the requirements involve external API access or need to use user data (images, videos, audio, etc.), please provide mock data\n\n======== Project Requirements Description ========\nPlease write a meeting room reservation system. Users can select meeting rooms, dates, and time slots through the front-end interface. If a meeting room has already been reserved, the system needs to update status in real-time and remind users to select another time. Administrators can view all reservation records through the back-end interface and modify or cancel reservations.",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the meeting room reservation interface fully implemented?",
+      "description": "Review whether the code accurately implements the room selection, date picker, and time slot selection components through HTML/CSS/JavaScript. Check if it includes visual indicators for available vs. reserved slots, interactive selection functionality, and form validation for booking details. Score 0 if the core reservation UI is not implemented, 5 if only basic selection is available, and 10 if complete with validation and user feedback.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Is the real-time status update mechanism implemented?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the system includes real-time updates when meeting rooms become reserved by other users, either through WebSockets, polling, or other event-driven mechanisms. Check if the UI immediately reflects changes and provides clear notifications to users when their selected slot becomes unavailable. Deduct 5 points if updates require page refresh, 3 points if notifications are unclear. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Is the administrator backend interface complete?",
+      "description": "Check if the admin interface includes comprehensive views for all reservations with filtering/sorting capabilities, and provides functionality to modify or cancel any reservation. Evaluate whether it includes user management, reporting features, and audit logs. Deduct 5 points if modification functionality is missing, 3 points if filtering/sorting is limited, and 5 points if the interface lacks responsive design. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Is the data persistence and state management well-designed?",
+      "description": "Assess whether the system implements proper data storage for reservations, with appropriate database schema design (or equivalent state management). Check if reservation conflicts are correctly prevented through locking mechanisms or transaction handling. Deduct 5 points if race conditions are possible, 3 points if data validation is incomplete, and 3 points if the system lacks proper error handling for database operations. 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 concurrent bookings, network interruption, invalid date/time selections, 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. Calendar heat map showing busy periods 2. Room layout visualization with equipment details 3. Integration with calendar apps for automatic reminders). 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 date picker implementations) 2. Function modules unrelated to room reservation (e.g., built-in chat system) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., unnecessary animations on every page load). 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 reservation logic/view/data layers), unit test coverage, and build process automation. Deduct 5 points if global state pollution is found or design patterns are not used; deduct 5 points if the code duplication rate is too high (over 30%); deduct 5 points if the build process is not automated. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 8,
+      "title": "Does the interface vision meet professional design standards?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the overall design follows modern design principles: 1) Harmonious color matching (no more than 3 primary colors) 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 calendar or room switching, 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/mini-program-video-monitoring-playback.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 1675,
+  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Be sure the code you generate is executable and demonstrable. Write a mini program to implement features such as real-time monitoring video viewing, historical playback, etc., including time-based viewing functionality.",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the real-time video monitoring system fully implemented?",
+      "description": "Review whether the code properly implements real-time video streaming functionality using technologies like WebRTC, HLS, or RTSP. Check if it handles stream initialization, buffering strategies, and quality adaptation based on network conditions. Score 0 if video monitoring is not implemented, 5 if basic streaming is implemented without optimizations, and 10 if it includes adaptive bitrate streaming with minimal latency (<2 seconds).",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Is the historical video playback functionality complete?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code implements a robust video archive system with features like seeking, timestamp navigation, and different playback speeds. Check if it uses efficient video indexing for quick access to specific time segments and if it handles large video files properly. Deduct 5 points if seeking is not smooth or has significant lag, and 3 points if playback speed controls are missing. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Is time-based viewing functionality properly implemented?",
+      "description": "Check if the time navigation system allows precise selection of date/time ranges with proper calendar UI and timeline scrubbing. Verify if the code efficiently handles time zone conversions and displays timestamps accurately. Deduct 4 points if the timeline UI is not intuitive, 3 points if it lacks proper date range selection, and 3 points if timestamp display is inaccurate. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Is there a seamless transition between live and recorded content?",
+      "description": "Evaluate if the program provides smooth transitions between live streaming and historical playback modes without requiring page reloads or significant UI changes. Check if the application maintains context when switching modes and properly manages the video buffer. Deduct 5 points if mode switching requires page refresh, 3 points if UI consistency is broken between modes, and 2 points if there's noticeable delay (>1s) during transitions. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 4,
+      "title": "Is the code robust?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code handles common video streaming issues (network interruptions, codec incompatibilities, broken streams) and provides graceful error handling with informative user feedback. Check for proper memory management during long streaming sessions and resilience against unexpected inputs. Give 10 points for comprehensive error handling with recovery strategies, 5 points for basic error detection without recovery options, and 0 points if errors crash the application.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 5,
+      "title": "Are there any innovative features that are eye-catching?",
+      "description": "Check whether the code includes surprise features that enhance the experience (e.g., 1. AI-based motion detection alerts 2. Video analytics/object recognition 3. Multi-camera synchronized viewing 4. Smart bookmarking of important events). 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. Multiple competing implementations of similar video processing functions 2. Excessive UI elements unrelated to video surveillance (e.g., unnecessary social features) 3. Resource-intensive visual effects that impact streaming performance. Deduct 3 points for each redundancy found, and directly deduct 10 points if core video functionality is compromised by redundant code.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 7,
+      "title": "Does the code have engineering quality?",
+      "description": "Review modular design (such as separating video processing logic/UI components/data management), code reusability, and performance optimization techniques. Deduct 5 points if global state management is chaotic; deduct 3 points if stream handling and UI rendering are not properly separated; deduct 2 points if the codebase lacks comments or documentation. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 8,
+      "title": "Does the interface vision meet professional surveillance system standards?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the design follows professional video monitoring principles: 1) Clear video display area with proper aspect ratio preservation 2) Non-intrusive controls that don't obscure important content 3) High-contrast UI elements for visibility in dark environments. Deduct 3 points for each poorly arranged control panel, 4 points for improper video scaling/cropping, and 3 points for color schemes that strain the eyes during extended viewing. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 9,
+      "title": "Is the video playback interaction smooth and responsive?",
+      "description": "Judge whether the video controls behave according to user expectations: 1) Seeking response time ≤ 200ms 2) Play/pause toggle ≤ 100ms 3) Intuitive timeline navigation with preview thumbnails. Deduct 4 points for laggy timeline scrubbing, 3 points for delayed playback controls, and 3 points for confusing timeline indicators that make it difficult to locate specific moments. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    }
+  ],
+  "class": "Management Systems-Frontend/Backend Platforms",
+  "difficulty": "medium"
+}