@getollie/cli 0.0.1

package/library/management_systems-frontend_backend_platforms/user-registration-login-system-html-css-nodejs-mariadb.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 1215,
+  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Make sure that the code you generate can be executed and displayed. User registration and login system using HTML/CSS/Node.js/MariaDB.",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the user registration form properly implemented?",
+      "description": "Check whether the registration form includes essential fields (username, email, password, confirm password), client-side validation (input format, password strength), and clear error messages. Form should prevent submission with invalid data. Score 0 if basic form elements are missing, 5 if validation is incomplete, and 10 if all validations with proper UX feedback are implemented.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Is the login system securely implemented?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the login system implements security best practices: password hashing (using bcrypt or similar), CSRF protection, rate limiting for failed attempts, and secure session management. Deduct 5 points if passwords are stored in plaintext, 3 points if there's no protection against brute force attacks, and 3 points if sessions are improperly managed. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Is the database connection and query handling properly implemented?",
+      "description": "Review the MariaDB connection setup, prepared statements usage to prevent SQL injection, proper error handling, and connection pooling for performance. Check if database operations are properly isolated in a data access layer. Deduct 5 points if SQL injection vulnerabilities exist, 3 points for improper error handling, and 3 points for lack of connection management. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Is the Node.js server architecture well-structured?",
+      "description": "Examine if the Node.js application follows proper MVC or similar architecture, uses middleware effectively (for authentication, logging, error handling), implements RESTful API patterns, and has proper route organization. Deduct 5 points for monolithic code without separation of concerns, 3 points for improper error handling, and 3 points for lack of middleware usage. 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 errors, authentication failures) 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. Two-factor authentication 2. Social login integration 3. Password recovery system 4. Remember me functionality). 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 authentication logics coexisting) 2. Function modules unrelated to user authentication (e.g., unnecessary analytics) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., heavy animations on login page). Deduct 3 points for each redundancy found, and directly deduct 10 points if the core functions are interfered with by redundant code.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 7,
+      "title": "Does the code have engineering quality?",
+      "description": "Review modular design (such as separating routes/controllers/models), unit test coverage, error logging, 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 environment variables are not properly used for configuration. 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) Form submission feedback delay ≤ 100ms 2) Success/error notification duration controlled between 3-5 seconds 3) Clear visual focus guidance for form fields. Deduct 5 points for each operation without feedback, 3 points for jarring transitions between login and registration views, and 5 points for hard-to-find password recovery or form submission buttons. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    }
+  ],
+  "class": "Management Systems-Frontend/Backend Platforms",
+  "difficulty": "medium"
+}

package/library/management_systems-frontend_backend_platforms/vc-mfc-ceramic-tile-defect-detection-software.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 383,
+  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Be careful to ensure the generated code is executable and demonstrable. Using VC++ MFC 2022, develop a software for ceramic tile surface defect detection that automatically captures tile images using an industrial camera, then performs inference using a YOLOv model to produce results. Please help me design this project, including the interface and functionality, as well as user operations in specific detail. Also, provide the software code.",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the industrial camera integration and image acquisition system fully implemented?",
+      "description": "Review whether the code properly implements industrial camera SDK integration (such as Basler, FLIR, or Hikvision camera APIs) through MFC framework, including camera initialization, parameter configuration (exposure, gain, frame rate), real-time image capture, and buffer management. Check if the system supports multiple camera brands and provides camera status monitoring. Score 0 if camera integration is not implemented, 5 if only basic capture is implemented without parameter control, and 10 if full camera control with error handling is included.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Is the YOLOv model inference engine properly integrated and optimized?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the YOLO model integration uses appropriate inference frameworks (ONNX Runtime, TensorRT, or OpenCV DNN) with proper preprocessing (image normalization, resizing) and postprocessing (NMS, confidence filtering). Check if the system supports model switching, batch processing, and GPU acceleration. Deduct 5 points if inference time exceeds 500ms per image, 3 points if confidence threshold is not configurable. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Is the defect detection results processing and visualization system comprehensive?",
+      "description": "Check whether the detection results include proper bounding box rendering, defect classification labels, confidence scores, and defect statistics. Evaluate if the system provides result export functionality (XML/JSON/CSV formats), defect image cropping, and historical result database storage. Deduct 5 points if detection results are not properly visualized, 3 points if export functionality is missing. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Is the complete workflow automation and quality control system implemented?",
+      "description": "Review whether the software includes automated workflow management such as continuous monitoring mode, batch processing capabilities, quality control thresholds, alarm mechanisms for defective tiles, and production line integration interfaces. Check if the system provides calibration tools, ROI selection, and inspection parameter adjustment. Deduct 5 points if automation workflow is not implemented, 3 points if quality control features are missing. Give 10 points if fully implemented.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 4,
+      "title": "Is the code robust?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as camera disconnection, model loading failure, memory overflow, invalid image formats, etc.) and provide friendly error prompts or recovery mechanisms. Code with strong robustness should include proper exception handling, resource cleanup, and graceful degradation. Give 10 points if fully robust, 5 points if partially handled, and 0 points if no exception handling is present.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 5,
+      "title": "Are there any innovative features that enhance industrial usability?",
+      "description": "Check whether the code includes advanced features that improve industrial application value (e.g., 1. Real-time defect trend analysis and reporting 2. Multi-spectral imaging support 3. AI-assisted defect severity grading 4. Production line speed optimization 5. Remote monitoring capabilities). Add 2 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 image processing pipelines) 2. Function modules unrelated to defect detection (e.g., built-in games or entertainment features) 3. Resource-intensive effects that impact real-time performance (e.g., unnecessary animations during detection). Deduct 3 points for each redundancy found, and directly deduct 10 points if core detection functions are interfered with by redundant code.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 7,
+      "title": "Does the code have engineering quality?",
+      "description": "Review modular design (separating camera control/image processing/AI inference/UI layers), proper MFC architecture usage, memory management, and thread safety. Deduct 5 points if memory leaks are found or improper resource management; deduct 5 points if the code lacks proper class hierarchy design; deduct 5 points if threading is not properly implemented for real-time processing. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 8,
+      "title": "Does the interface design meet industrial software standards?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the MFC interface follows industrial software design principles: 1) Professional color scheme suitable for factory environments (high contrast, easy readability) 2) Logical layout with clear functional grouping 3) Industrial-standard fonts and sizing (minimum 12px for readability in industrial settings) 4) Proper status indicators and progress feedback. Deduct 3 points for each cluttered interface element, 5 points for poor color contrast affecting readability, and 5 points for non-intuitive control placement. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 9,
+      "title": "Is the real-time performance and user interaction optimized for industrial use?",
+      "description": "Judge whether the software meets industrial real-time requirements: 1) Image capture and display refresh rate ≥ 10 FPS 2) Detection result display latency ≤ 200ms 3) Clear visual indicators for system status and operation feedback 4) Keyboard shortcuts for frequent operations. Deduct 5 points for each operation without immediate feedback, 3 points for laggy real-time display, and 5 points for missing critical status indicators. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    }
+  ],
+  "class": "Management Systems-Frontend/Backend Platforms",
+  "difficulty": "hard"
+}

package/library/management_systems-frontend_backend_platforms/vehicle-management-system-vue-frontend.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 1591,
+  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and expert responses. Make sure the code you provide is executable for demonstration purposes. For a vehicle management system with functionalities like license plate recognition, parking fee management, and vehicle entry/exit table display, as a front-end engineer who only knows Vue, how should I write the code?",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the license plate recognition system fully implemented?",
+      "description": "Review whether the code accurately implements license plate recognition functionality through Vue.js, including image upload/capture interface, OCR integration or simulation, and real-time recognition feedback. Check if it handles various license plate formats (different regions/countries) and provides confidence scoring. Score 0 if no recognition logic is implemented, 5 if only basic image upload is provided, and 10 if complete recognition with validation and error handling is included.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Is the parking fee management system comprehensively designed?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the Vue implementation includes complete fee calculation logic with configurable rate structures (hourly/daily/monthly), automatic time tracking from entry to exit, discount/promotion handling, and payment integration or simulation. Check for proper data validation and fee adjustment capabilities. Deduct 5 points if time calculation is inaccurate, 3 points if no payment workflow is provided. Full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Is the vehicle entry/exit table display properly implemented with real-time updates?",
+      "description": "Check whether the Vue components provide comprehensive vehicle tracking with sortable/filterable tables, real-time status updates, search functionality by license plate/time/status, and proper pagination for large datasets. Evaluate if the data structure supports CRUD operations and maintains state consistency. Deduct 5 points if table performance degrades with >100 records, 3 points if search/filter functions are missing. Full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Is the complete vehicle management workflow integrated?",
+      "description": "Assess whether the code provides end-to-end workflow integration from vehicle entry (license plate scan) → parking space assignment → fee calculation → exit processing → receipt generation. Check for proper state management using Vuex/Pinia, component communication, and data persistence simulation. Deduct 5 points if workflow breaks between modules, 3 points if state management is inconsistent. Give 10 points if fully integrated with proper error handling.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 4,
+      "title": "Is the code robust?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as invalid license plates, network failures, concurrent operations, invalid time ranges, etc.) and provide friendly error prompts or recovery mechanisms. Code with strong robustness should effectively handle edge cases like duplicate entries, system crashes, and data corruption. Give 10 points if fully robust, 5 points if average robustness, and 0 points if no exception handling.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 5,
+      "title": "Are there any innovative features that are eye-catching?",
+      "description": "Check whether the code includes surprise features that enhance the vehicle management experience (e.g., 1. Real-time parking space availability visualization 2. Automated notification system for overstay 3. Analytics dashboard with usage patterns 4. Mobile-responsive design with QR code integration). 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 fee calculation methods coexisting) 2. Function modules unrelated to vehicle management (e.g., built-in weather widget) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., excessive animations on table updates). Deduct 3 points for each redundancy found, and directly deduct 10 points if core vehicle management functions are interfered with by redundant code.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 7,
+      "title": "Does the code have engineering quality?",
+      "description": "Review Vue.js best practices including proper component composition, composables usage, TypeScript integration, and build process optimization. Check for proper separation of concerns (components/services/stores), code reusability, and maintainability. Deduct 5 points if global state pollution is found or Vue patterns are misused; deduct 5 points if component coupling is too high; deduct 5 points if no build optimization is implemented. 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) Consistent iconography for vehicle management actions. Deduct 3 points for each crowded visual element, 5 points for glaring color combinations, and 5 points for chaotic data table layouts. 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) Form submission feedback delay ≤ 100ms 2) Table loading/filtering transition animations controlled between 300-500ms 3) Clear visual focus guidance for license plate input and fee calculations 4) Smooth real-time updates without jarring refreshes. Deduct 5 points for each operation without feedback, 3 points for visual glitches during data updates, and 5 points for hard-to-find critical management functions. Full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    }
+  ],
+  "class": "Management Systems-Frontend/Backend Platforms",
+  "difficulty": "hard"
+}

package/library/management_systems-frontend_backend_platforms/vehicle-personnel-management-with-reminders.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 817,
+  "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 and demonstrable. Create a website for organizing vehicle and personnel information that provides reminders when information expires and includes search functionality.",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the data model properly designed for vehicle and personnel information management?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the data structures include essential fields for vehicles (registration, insurance, inspection dates) and personnel (license validity, medical certifications, training records). Check if expiration dates are properly typed as Date objects for comparison operations. Score 0 if basic data structures are missing, 5 if only basic properties exist without validation, and 10 if the model is comprehensive with proper typing and validation rules.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Is the expiration reminder system fully implemented?",
+      "description": "Review the implementation of the reminder system, checking if it includes configurable thresholds (30/60/90 day warnings), multiple notification methods (UI indicators, email alerts, etc.), and priority levels based on expiration proximity. Deduct 5 points if only basic date comparison is implemented without configurable thresholds, deduct 3 points if multiple notification methods are missing. Full score requires a complete notification lifecycle with dismissal and snooze functionality.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Is the search functionality comprehensive and efficient?",
+      "description": "Assess the search implementation for features like real-time filtering, advanced search criteria (multi-field, range queries for dates), and search result sorting/grouping. Check if the search algorithm uses efficient indexing techniques for large datasets. Score 0 if only basic string matching exists, 5 if there's functional but limited search, and 10 if advanced search with optimized performance is implemented.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Is there a reporting system for tracking expiration metrics?",
+      "description": "Examine whether the system includes analytical reporting features showing expiration trends, compliance rates, and upcoming renewal workloads. Check for visual representations (charts/graphs) and data export options. Deduct 5 points if only basic lists are provided without aggregation, deduct 3 points if visual representations are missing. Full score requires comprehensive analytics with interactive visualizations.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 4,
+      "title": "Is the code robust?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (invalid date inputs, search with no results, concurrent user updates, 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. Visual timeline of upcoming expirations 2. Automated document renewal workflow 3. Integration with vehicle/personnel identity verification services). Add 3 points for each practical innovative feature implemented (maximum 10 points).",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 6,
+      "title": "Are there any redundant features?",
+      "description": "Strictly check three types of redundancy: 1. Redundant implementation of similar functions (e.g., multiple search implementations) 2. Function modules unrelated to vehicle/personnel information management 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., unnecessary animations on critical pages). 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 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/vehicle-travel-recording-app-development.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 1226,
+  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Be sure to provide executable code when possible. I am a professional business driver, please help me develop an app to record vehicle travel.",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the core vehicle tracking functionality fully implemented?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code includes accurate GPS location tracking, distance calculation algorithms, and trip recording mechanisms. Check if the implementation handles location updates efficiently (using proper intervals to balance accuracy and battery usage). Score 0 if core tracking is missing, 5 if basic location recording is implemented, and 10 if it includes advanced features like background tracking and offline functionality.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Is the trip management system comprehensive?",
+      "description": "Review whether the application provides complete trip lifecycle management including start/pause/resume/end operations, automatic trip detection, and manual trip editing capabilities. Deduct 5 points if trip categorization (business vs. personal) is missing, and 3 points if there's no ability to annotate or tag trips. Give 10 points if the trip management system is fully featured with validation checks.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Are business-specific reporting features implemented?",
+      "description": "Check if the code includes business-specific reporting such as expense calculations, mileage summaries, and exportable reports in standard formats (PDF, CSV). Verify if tax-related calculations are supported (e.g., business vs. personal mileage separation). Deduct 5 points if export functionality is missing, and 3 points if the reports lack customization options. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Is the data persistence and synchronization mechanism reliable?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the app implements proper data storage (local database like SQLite/Realm), backup mechanisms, and cloud synchronization options. Check if data integrity is maintained through proper transaction handling and conflict resolution. Deduct 5 points if there's no automated backup system, and 3 points if cross-device synchronization is missing. Give 10 points for a complete implementation with data recovery options.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 4,
+      "title": "Is the code robust?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as GPS signal loss, network interruption, app backgrounding, 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. Automatic business destination recognition 2. Integration with expense management systems 3. Voice commands for hands-free operation while driving). 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 location tracking methods running simultaneously) 2. Function modules unrelated to business driving (e.g., a built-in music player) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance or distract while driving (e.g., complex animations during navigation). 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 location services/UI/data storage 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 standards for vehicle apps: 1) High-contrast display readable in varying light conditions 2) Proper layout with touch targets ≥ 48px for use while stationary 3) Simplified interface with minimal interaction required while driving. Deduct 3 points for each hard-to-read element, 5 points for distracting interface elements, and 5 points for designs requiring complex interactions while driving. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 9,
+      "title": "Is the dynamic interaction suitable for use in a vehicle environment?",
+      "description": "Judge whether the app interactions are appropriate for a driving context: 1) Voice feedback for critical operations 2) Single-tap or voice command for essential functions 3) Automatic mode switching between driving/stationary states. Deduct 5 points for interactions requiring precise touch control while moving, 3 points for distracting animations or notifications, and 5 points for critical functions buried in menus. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    }
+  ],
+  "class": "Management Systems-Frontend/Backend Platforms",
+  "difficulty": "hard"
+}

package/library/management_systems-frontend_backend_platforms/vue-b-s-architecture-project-setup.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 1076,
+  "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 purposes. Using viz_dashboard as the project name, help me set up a Vue B/S architecture project with a stable Vue 3 version. Please provide detailed steps for the solution.",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the Vue 3 project setup process fully implemented?",
+      "description": "Review whether the code accurately implements the Vue 3 project setup using proper tools (Vue CLI, Vite, etc.), includes the necessary configuration files, and follows the recommended project structure. Score 0 if the setup process is missing or incorrect, 5 if basic setup is provided but incomplete, and 10 if a comprehensive and well-documented setup process is provided with proper package.json configuration.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Is the B/S (Browser/Server) architecture properly established?",
+      "description": "Check whether the code sets up a clear separation between frontend (browser) and backend (server) components, establishes proper communication patterns between them, and implements the necessary API interfaces. Deduct 5 points if there's no clear definition of API endpoints, 3 points if authentication mechanisms aren't addressed, and 3 points if error handling for network requests is missing. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Is the Vue 3 implementation leveraging its key features?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code correctly uses Vue 3's Composition API, properly implements reactive state management, and takes advantage of Vue 3-specific features (e.g., Teleport, Fragments, emits declaration). Deduct 5 points if the code uses Options API exclusively without explanation, 3 points if reactivity isn't properly implemented, and 3 points if component structure is inefficient. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Is the dashboard architecture suitable for visualization?",
+      "description": "Check whether the dashboard structure follows best practices for data visualization applications: proper layout system, component hierarchy that supports different chart types, and responsive design principles. Deduct 5 points if the dashboard layout doesn't support dynamic content positioning, 3 points if visualization libraries aren't properly integrated, and 3 points if the architecture doesn't support different screen sizes. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 4,
+      "title": "Is the code robust?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as network failures, API errors, malformed data, etc.) and provides 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. Dark mode with auto detection 2. Dashboard layout customization 3. Interactive data exploration 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 state management solutions) 2. Function modules unrelated to dashboard visualization (e.g., unnecessary external services) 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 component reusability, separation of concerns), TypeScript integration, code formatting tools, and build process configuration. Deduct 5 points if global state management is poorly implemented; deduct 5 points if the code duplication rate is too high (over 30%); deduct 5 points if the build and deployment process is not properly configured. 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 interactions, 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/vue-book-management-system-frontend-page.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 1297,
+  "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 as much as possible. Create a front-end page for a book management system using Vue.",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Does the Vue component architecture follow best practices?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code follows Vue.js best practices with proper component hierarchy, single-responsibility components, and proper use of props/events. Check if components are reusable and properly named. Score 0 if basic Vue syntax is incorrect, 5 if components exist but with poor organization, and 10 if components follow all best practices with proper encapsulation.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Is the book data management system fully implemented?",
+      "description": "Review whether the code implements CRUD operations for books (Create, Read, Update, Delete) with proper form validation and error handling. Check if sorting, filtering, and search functionality are implemented. Score 0 if basic operations are missing, 5 if only basic listing and adding are implemented, and 10 if all operations are fully functional with validation.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Is state management properly implemented?",
+      "description": "Assess whether the application uses appropriate state management techniques (Vuex store, Composition API, or Pinia) for handling book data, user interactions, and UI state. Check if state mutations follow proper patterns with actions/mutations or reactive methods. Deduct 5 points if global state is directly mutated, 3 points if reactivity issues exist. Full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Is routing and navigation properly implemented?",
+      "description": "Evaluate if Vue Router is correctly implemented with appropriate route configuration, navigation guards, and page transitions. Check if route parameters are used for book details and URL state preservation. Deduct 5 points if navigation doesn't work correctly, 3 points if route guards are missing for protected areas. 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 book lists, form input errors, API failures, 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. Book cover preview with zoom 2. Drag-and-drop organization of books 3. Reading progress tracking 4. Book recommendation engine). 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 fetching mechanisms coexisting) 2. Function modules unrelated to book management (e.g., a built-in music player) 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 component organization, code splitting, proper use of Vue lifecycle hooks, and build optimizations. Check for consistent coding style, proper commenting, and use of TypeScript or PropTypes if applicable. Deduct 5 points if global component registration is overused; deduct 5 points if code duplication rate is too high (over 30%); deduct 5 points if the build process is not optimized. 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 of book 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/vue-elementui-express-survey-system.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 982,
+  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate, professional responses. Make sure the code you generate is executable for demonstration purposes. Please design a survey system based on Vue + ElementUI + Express.",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the Vue front-end architecture properly implemented?",
+      "description": "Evaluate if the code follows Vue best practices with proper component structure, Vuex state management, Vue Router configuration, and lifecycle hooks usage. Check for single-file components with clear separation of template, script, and style. Score 0 if only basic Vue syntax is used without architecture, 5 if basic component structure exists but lacks proper state management, and 10 if a complete Vue architecture with proper data flow is implemented.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Is the ElementUI integration complete and appropriate?",
+      "description": "Assess whether ElementUI components are correctly imported and used following library guidelines. Check for proper form validation using ElementUI's built-in validators, responsive layouts using its grid system, and theme customization. Deduct 5 points for global import instead of on-demand loading (affecting performance), 3 points for inconsistent ElementUI styling overrides, and 3 points for not utilizing ElementUI's form validation capabilities. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Is the Express backend implementation comprehensive?",
+      "description": "Review the Express server implementation including middleware usage (cors, body-parser, etc.), RESTful API design, error handling middleware, and database integration. Check for proper route organization and controller separation. Deduct 5 points if authentication middleware is missing, 3 points if error handling is incomplete, and 5 points if API endpoints don't follow RESTful principles. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Is there a complete survey creation and response workflow?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the system implements a full survey lifecycle: creation, distribution, response collection, and result analysis. Check for features like different question types (multiple choice, rating scales, open-ended questions), skip logic, and survey analytics. Score 0 if only basic form creation exists, 5 if survey creation and collection are implemented but lack analytics, and 10 if the complete workflow including visualization of results is implemented.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 4,
+      "title": "Is the code robust?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as network errors, form validation failures, server unavailability, etc.) and provide friendly error prompts or recovery mechanisms. Check for input sanitization to prevent XSS attacks and proper handling of concurrent submissions. 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 collaborative survey editing 2. Survey result visualization with charts 3. Survey templates and branching logic 4. Export to multiple formats like PDF/Excel). 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 form validation systems coexisting) 2. Function modules unrelated to surveys (e.g., a built-in file manager) 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 API calls/UI components/business logic), test coverage, and build process automation. Check for proper use of environment variables, code linting, and security best practices. 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 beyond ElementUI's theme) 2) Proper layout spacing (element spacing follows the 8px multiple principle) 3) Professional form layouts with proper labels and help text. Deduct 3 points for each crowded visual element, 5 points for a glaring color combination, and 5 points for chaotic form layouts. 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) Form submission feedback delay ≤ 100ms 2) Transition animation duration controlled between 300-500ms 3) Clear visual focus guidance for multi-step forms. Deduct 5 points for each operation without loading states, 3 points for jarring transitions between survey pages, and 5 points for confusing navigation in multi-page surveys. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    }
+  ],
+  "class": "Management Systems-Frontend/Backend Platforms",
+  "difficulty": "medium"
+}