@getollie/cli 0.0.4 → 0.2.0

package/library/web_applications-communication/responsive-html-webpage-with-tree-navigation.json

@@ -1,68 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "index": 1815,
-  "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. Please build a responsive HTML webpage index.html for me with the following requirements: Simplified Chinese language, UTF-8 encoding; tree-like navigation with unlimited levels; includes title and paragraphs; contains images and videos; has a contact form (webmail is sufficient); footer with copyright section. Thank you very much!",
-  "checklist": [
-    {
-      "id": 0,
-      "title": "Is the tree-like navigation with unlimited levels fully implemented?",
-      "description": "Review whether the code accurately implements a multi-level tree navigation structure through HTML/CSS/JavaScript, including expandable/collapsible functionality, proper nesting hierarchy, and smooth navigation transitions. Check if the navigation supports unlimited depth levels with proper indentation and visual hierarchy indicators. Score 0 if only flat navigation is provided, 5 if basic 2-3 level navigation is implemented, and 10 if true unlimited level tree navigation with full interactive features is included.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 1,
-      "title": "Is the responsive design implementation comprehensive?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the webpage implements proper responsive design using CSS media queries, flexible grid systems, and adaptive components. Check breakpoints for mobile (≤768px), tablet (769px-1024px), and desktop (≥1025px) devices. The tree navigation should collapse to mobile-friendly format, images/videos should scale appropriately, and the contact form should remain usable across all devices. Deduct 5 points if navigation breaks on mobile, 3 points if media elements don't scale properly. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 2,
-      "title": "Are the multimedia elements (images and videos) properly integrated and optimized?",
-      "description": "Check whether images and videos are properly embedded with appropriate formats, alt attributes, and responsive scaling. Evaluate loading optimization techniques such as lazy loading, proper aspect ratio maintenance, and fallback mechanisms. Videos should have controls, proper encoding, and mobile compatibility. Deduct 5 points if images lack alt attributes or proper scaling, 3 points if videos don't work on mobile devices, and 2 points if no loading optimization is implemented. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 3,
-      "title": "Is the contact form functional and properly validated?",
-      "description": "Assess whether the contact form includes proper field validation (email format, required fields), appropriate input types, and user feedback mechanisms. The form should handle submission gracefully with proper error messages and success notifications. Check for accessibility features like proper labels and ARIA attributes. Deduct 5 points if validation is missing or incomplete, 3 points if accessibility features are absent, and 2 points if form submission handling is not implemented. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 4,
-      "title": "Is the code robust?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as broken image links, failed video loading, form submission errors, navigation overflow, etc.) and provide friendly error prompts or recovery mechanisms. Code with strong robustness should effectively handle edge cases like extremely deep navigation levels, long content text, and various screen sizes. Give 10 points if fully robust, 5 points if average robustness, and 0 points if no exception handling is present.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 5,
-      "title": "Are there any innovative features that are eye-catching?",
-      "description": "Check whether the code includes surprise features that enhance user experience (e.g., 1. Smooth scroll navigation with section highlighting 2. Search functionality within the tree navigation 3. Breadcrumb trail for deep navigation 4. Dark/light theme toggle 5. Progressive web app features). Add 2-3 points for each practical innovative feature implemented (maximum 10 points).",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 6,
-      "title": "Are there any redundant features?",
-      "description": "Strictly check three types of redundancy: 1. Redundant implementation of similar functions (e.g., multiple navigation systems coexisting) 2. Function modules unrelated to the webpage purpose (e.g., built-in games or unnecessary widgets) 3. Excessive animations that affect performance or usability. Deduct 3 points for each redundancy found, and directly deduct 10 points if core navigation or content display functions are interfered with by redundant code.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 7,
-      "title": "Does the code have engineering quality?",
-      "description": "Review code organization (separation of HTML structure, CSS styling, and JavaScript functionality), semantic HTML usage, and maintainable code structure. Check for proper commenting, consistent naming conventions, and modular CSS/JS organization. Deduct 5 points if inline styles are extensively used instead of external CSS; deduct 5 points if JavaScript is not properly organized or lacks comments; deduct 3 points if HTML semantic elements are not utilized. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 8,
-      "title": "Does the interface design meet professional visual standards?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the overall design follows modern web design principles: 1) Harmonious color scheme with proper contrast ratios (WCAG AA compliance) 2) Consistent typography hierarchy with readable font sizes (≥16px for body text) 3) Proper whitespace and visual breathing room 4) Professional layout with clear visual hierarchy. Deduct 3 points for each visual inconsistency, 5 points for poor color contrast or readability issues, and 5 points for cluttered or unprofessional layout. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 9,
-      "title": "Is the user interaction smooth and intuitive?",
-      "description": "Judge whether interactive elements provide appropriate feedback and follow UX best practices: 1) Navigation hover/focus states with clear visual feedback 2) Tree navigation expand/collapse animations ≤ 300ms 3) Form field focus states and validation feedback 4) Smooth scrolling and page transitions 5) Clear visual indicators for clickable elements. Deduct 5 points for each interaction without proper feedback, 3 points for slow or jarring animations, and 5 points for unclear interactive elements. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    }
-  ],
-  "class": "Web Applications-Communication",
-  "difficulty": "easy"
-}

package/library/web_applications-communication/robot-dialogue-stream-printing-uniapp-mini-program.json

@@ -1,68 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "index": 1347,
-  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Make sure the code you provide is executable for demonstration purposes. Implement a robot dialogue stream printing effect in a uniapp mini-program.",
-  "checklist": [
-    {
-      "id": 0,
-      "title": "Stream printing implementation completeness",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the code accurately implements a character-by-character streaming effect for robot dialogue. Check if it includes typing speed control, cursor blinking effect, and proper text rendering. Score 0 if the stream printing effect is not implemented at all, 5 if only basic character-by-character printing is present, and 10 if it includes advanced features like variable typing speed based on content or punctuation pauses.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 1,
-      "title": "Uni-app compatibility and framework usage",
-      "description": "Check whether the implementation correctly uses uni-app APIs and follows uni-app development standards. Verify if the code utilizes proper uni-app components (like <view>, <text>), lifecycle hooks, and properly handles cross-platform compatibility issues. Deduct 3 points if platform-specific code is not properly conditioned, 3 points if non-standard HTML/CSS is used instead of uni-app components, and 5 points if the implementation doesn't follow uni-app's reactivity system. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 2,
-      "title": "User interaction and control mechanisms",
-      "description": "Assess whether the implementation provides user control mechanisms like pause/resume, speed adjustment, or skip to end functionality. Check if these controls are accessible and intuitive. Deduct 3 points if pause/resume is missing, 3 points if speed control is absent, and 4 points if there's no way to skip to the end of the dialogue. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 3,
-      "title": "Animation smoothness and performance optimization",
-      "description": "Evaluate the performance of the streaming effect. Check for frame drops, memory usage optimization, and whether requestAnimationFrame or similar techniques are used instead of simple setTimeout. Examine if long texts are properly handled without causing UI freezes. Deduct 5 points for noticeable lag on typical devices, 3 points for inefficient rendering approach, and 5 points for memory leaks in animation loops. 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 very long texts, rapid user interactions, component unmounting during animation, empty responses) 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. Dynamic text highlighting 2. Sound effects synchronized with text appearance 3. Animated emoji/icon insertion in streaming text 4. Theme customization for dialogue bubbles). 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 animation functions 2. Function modules unrelated to dialogue streaming (e.g., unnecessary third-party libraries) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., excessive animations that interfere with readability). Deduct 3 points for each redundancy found, and directly deduct 10 points if the core functions are interfered with by redundant code.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 7,
-      "title": "Does the code have engineering quality?",
-      "description": "Review modular design (such as separating animation logic/view/state management), composability of components, and proper use of uni-app patterns. 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 component is not properly encapsulated for reuse. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 8,
-      "title": "Does the interface vision meet professional design standards?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the dialogue UI follows modern chat interface design principles: 1) Distinct visual differentiation between robot and user messages 2) Proper bubble sizing and spacing (following the 8px multiple principle) 3) Professional typography (readable font size ≥ 14px, sufficient contrast). Deduct 3 points for cramped dialogue bubbles, 5 points for poor contrast between text and background, and 5 points for inconsistent styling between messages. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 9,
-      "title": "Is the dynamic interaction smooth and seamless?",
-      "description": "Judge whether the animation effects conform to human perception characteristics: 1) Natural typing rhythm (neither too fast nor too slow) 2) Smooth scrolling when content exceeds viewport 3) Clear visual indicators during loading/processing states. Deduct 5 points for jerky text appearance, 3 points for failing to auto-scroll as new text appears, and 5 points for missing loading states during response generation. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    }
-  ],
-  "class": "Web Applications-Communication",
-  "difficulty": "easy"
-}

package/library/web_applications-communication/ros-image-display-vue-flask.json

@@ -1,68 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "index": 1470,
-  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and expert responses. Be sure the code you provide is executable and can be demonstrated. Implement displaying ROS images in a browser using Vue.js + Flask, and provide the code.",
-  "checklist": [
-    {
-      "id": 0,
-      "title": "Is the ROS image subscription and processing mechanism properly implemented?",
-      "description": "Verify if the code correctly subscribes to ROS image topics, handles different image formats (raw, compressed, etc.), and implements proper conversion to web-compatible formats (JPEG/PNG). Score 0 if ROS image subscription is missing, 5 if basic subscription exists but without format handling, and 10 if it includes comprehensive error handling and format conversion for all common ROS image types.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 1,
-      "title": "Is the Flask backend implementation complete and secure?",
-      "description": "Check if the Flask server properly initializes ROS nodes, provides appropriate endpoints (REST API or WebSocket) for image streaming, and includes security measures such as input validation and rate limiting. Deduct 3 points if CORS handling is missing, 3 points if there's no error handling for ROS node failures, and 5 points if there are no safeguards against potential memory leaks from unprocessed image buffers. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 2,
-      "title": "Is the Vue.js frontend implementation efficient and responsive?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the Vue.js application efficiently handles image rendering, implements reactive components for real-time updates, and provides image control features (zoom, pan, etc.). Deduct 3 points if images aren't efficiently cached, 5 points if there's no loading state management during image fetch, and 5 points if the UI freezes during high-frequency image updates. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 3,
-      "title": "Is the image streaming pipeline optimized for performance?",
-      "description": "Analyze whether the code implements efficient image streaming techniques such as WebSockets for real-time updates, appropriate image compression before network transfer, and client-side buffering/throttling. Score 0 if using only basic HTTP polling, 5 if using WebSockets without optimization, and 10 if implementing advanced techniques like adaptive quality based on network conditions and frame-skipping during congestion.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 4,
-      "title": "Is the code robust?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as ROS node failures, network interruptions, image corruption, 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. Multi-camera view switching 2. Overlay capabilities for sensor fusion 3. Time-synchronized playback with other ROS data). 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 image processing operations that could impact performance 2. Unnecessary DOM manipulations outside Vue's reactivity system 3. Over-engineered solutions for simple problems (e.g., complex state management for basic image display). 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 ROS interface/image processing/UI components), proper error handling, and build process configuration. Deduct 5 points if global state is overused or Vue component design principles are violated; deduct 5 points if the code duplication rate is too high (over 30%); deduct 5 points if there's no proper development/production environment 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 with good contrast for image visibility 2) Proper layout spacing that maximizes image viewing area 3) Clean, non-intrusive controls that don't obscure important image content. Deduct 3 points for each UI element that obscures image content unnecessarily, 5 points for poor contrast making images hard to see, and 5 points for chaotic control placement. 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) Image loading indicators appear within 100ms 2) Smooth transitions between images/camera views 3) Responsive controls with clear visual feedback. Deduct 5 points for image displays without loading states, 5 points for jittery or choppy image rendering during high-frequency updates, and 3 points for interaction delays exceeding 200ms. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    }
-  ],
-  "class": "Web Applications-Communication",
-  "difficulty": "medium"
-}

package/library/web_applications-communication/rust-nuxt-windows-im-client.json

@@ -1,68 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "index": 1447,
-  "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 and demonstrable. Please build an IM client using Rust and Nuxt - a PC client specifically. No need to build the server side. I need to run this client on Windows.",
-  "checklist": [
-    {
-      "id": 0,
-      "title": "Is the Rust-Nuxt integration architecture properly implemented?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the code establishes a robust architecture that bridges Rust backend logic with Nuxt frontend. Look for proper use of FFI (Foreign Function Interface) patterns like tauri, napi-rs, or rust-webpack. Score 0 if there's no integration between Rust and Nuxt, 5 points if basic integration exists but with architectural flaws, 10 points for a clean, maintainable architecture with proper separation of concerns.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 1,
-      "title": "Is the IM core functionality implemented in Rust?",
-      "description": "Check whether essential IM features (message handling, connection management, encryption) are implemented in Rust. The Rust code should handle networking, security protocols, and persistent storage. Deduct 5 points if network connection management is missing, 3 points if encryption is absent, and 2 points if offline message handling is not implemented. Full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 2,
-      "title": "Is the Nuxt UI implementation complete with necessary IM components?",
-      "description": "Assess whether the Nuxt frontend includes all necessary IM UI components: chat list, conversation view, message composition area, contact management, and notification system. Score 0 if major components are missing, 5 points if basic functionality exists but lacks polish, 10 points for a comprehensive implementation with proper component hierarchy and state management.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 3,
-      "title": "Is Windows compatibility ensured for distribution and execution?",
-      "description": "Verify that the application can be built for and run on Windows systems. Check for proper build configuration (static linking of C/C++ dependencies), Windows-specific path handling, and system integration features like startup, notifications, and taskbar integration. Deduct 5 points if the build process isn't automated for Windows, 3 points if Windows-specific features aren't handled properly. Full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 4,
-      "title": "Is the code robust?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common IM-specific abnormal situations (network instability, malformed messages, authentication failures) and provides friendly error prompts or recovery mechanisms. Code with strong robustness should gracefully handle connection drops, message failures, and user errors. Give 10 points for comprehensive error handling, 5 points for average robustness, and 0 points if exceptions are unhandled.",
-      "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. End-to-end encryption with key verification 2. Custom message formatting with Markdown 3. Voice/video message support 4. Smart notification management based on user activity). 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 handle the same message type) 2. Function modules unrelated to IM functionality (e.g., built-in games not related to messaging) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., excessive animations or effects that slow down message display). 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 (separating network/UI/persistence layers), test coverage (unit tests for Rust, component tests for Nuxt), and build process automation. Deduct 5 points if global state pollution is found; deduct 5 points if the code duplication rate exceeds 30%; deduct 5 points if the build process isn't properly automated with cross-platform support. 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 modern messaging app design principles: 1) Consistent color scheme with clear read/unread states 2) Proper message bubble spacing and alignment 3) Professional typography hierarchy for messages vs. metadata. Deduct 3 points for cluttered conversation views, 5 points for poor information hierarchy, and 5 points for inconsistent visual language between different sections. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 9,
-      "title": "Is the dynamic interaction smooth and seamless?",
-      "description": "Judge whether the IM-specific interactions meet user expectations: 1) Message send/receive feedback under 100ms 2) Smooth scrolling through message history 3) Real-time typing indicators and read receipts 4) Seamless state transitions between online/offline modes. Deduct 5 points for laggy message rendering, 3 points for jerky scrolling, and 5 points for unclear connection status indicators. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    }
-  ],
-  "class": "Web Applications-Communication",
-  "difficulty": "hard"
-}

package/library/web_applications-communication/sdu-compuex-network-repair-activity-record.json

@@ -1,68 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "index": 1256,
-  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Ensure that the generated code is executable for demonstration purposes. Help me write a \"SDU COMPUEX Shandong University Digital Technology Club Activity Record Sheet\" for a \"Network Repair System Development\" project. The background is Shandong University. The Network Repair System Development is based on Python FastAPI+Vue3, supporting repair requests from multiple campuses, with real-time responses and email notifications.",
-  "checklist": [
-    {
-      "id": 0,
-      "title": "Is the Python FastAPI backend implementation complete?",
-      "description": "Review whether the code properly implements RESTful API endpoints using FastAPI, including authentication, error handling, and middleware for cross-campus repair requests. Check if proper dependency injection, request validation, and response models are implemented. Score 0 if core API endpoints are missing, 5 if basic endpoints are implemented but lack proper validation/error handling, and 10 if the implementation is complete with documentation.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 1,
-      "title": "Is the Vue3 frontend implementation complete?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the Vue3 frontend includes all necessary components for the repair system (request form, status tracking, admin dashboard), uses Composition API or Options API consistently, and implements proper state management (Vuex/Pinia). Deduct 3 points if responsive design is missing, 3 points if component reusability is poor, and 4 points if proper form validation is absent. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 2,
-      "title": "Is the real-time notification system properly implemented?",
-      "description": "Check if the system implements WebSockets or Server-Sent Events for real-time status updates, and verify if the email notification system uses proper templates and error handling. Deduct 5 points if the notification system doesn't handle connection drops, 3 points if email templates are hardcoded without variables, and 2 points if notification preferences aren't configurable. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 3,
-      "title": "Is the multi-campus support architecture properly designed?",
-      "description": "Assess whether the system implements proper data segregation for multiple campuses, includes campus-specific configurations, and handles cross-campus reporting/analytics. Deduct 4 points if campus data isn't properly isolated, 3 points if the system lacks campus-specific customization, and 3 points if cross-campus analytics are missing. 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, network failures, database connection issues, etc.) and provide friendly error prompts or recovery mechanisms. Code with strong robustness should be able to effectively handle these edge cases, giving 10 points. If the robustness is average, give 5 points, and if no exceptions are handled, give 0 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 5,
-      "title": "Are there any innovative features that are eye-catching?",
-      "description": "Check whether the code includes surprise features that enhance the experience (e.g., 1. AI-powered categorization of repair requests 2. Interactive heatmap of repair locations 3. Priority calculation based on historical patterns). Add 3 points for each practical innovative feature implemented (maximum 10 points).",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 6,
-      "title": "Are there any redundant features?",
-      "description": "Strictly check three types of redundancy: 1. Redundant implementation of similar functions (e.g., multiple notification systems doing the same thing) 2. Function modules unrelated to network repair (e.g., a built-in weather widget) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., unnecessary animations). Deduct 3 points for each redundancy found, and directly deduct 10 points if the core functions are interfered with by redundant code.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 7,
-      "title": "Does the code have engineering quality?",
-      "description": "Review modular design (such as separating business logic/view/data 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, preferably using Shandong University's brand colors) 2) Proper layout spacing (element spacing follows the 8px multiple principle) 3) Professional font system (body font size ≥ 14px, line height over 1.5 times). Deduct 3 points for each crowded visual element, 5 points for a glaring color combination, and 5 points for chaotic text-image layout. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 9,
-      "title": "Is the dynamic interaction smooth and seamless?",
-      "description": "Judge whether the dynamic effects conform to human perception characteristics: 1) Click feedback delay ≤ 100ms 2) Transition animation duration controlled between 300-500ms 3) Clear visual focus guidance. Deduct 5 points for each operation without feedback, 3 points for visual after-images during fast sliding, and 5 points for hard-to-find key function buttons. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    }
-  ],
-  "class": "Web Applications-Communication",
-  "difficulty": "hard"
-}

package/library/web_applications-communication/secret-mailbox-webpage.json

@@ -1,68 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "index": 1778,
-  "question": "You are a code expert, please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Be sure to provide executable code whenever possible. Help me create a webpage about a secret mailbox.",
-  "checklist": [
-    {
-      "id": 0,
-      "title": "Is the secret mailbox core functionality fully implemented?",
-      "description": "Check if the code implements the fundamental secret mailbox features including message encryption, secure storage, and retrieval mechanisms. Score 0 if encryption is missing, 5 if only basic encryption without proper key management is implemented, and 10 if end-to-end encryption with secure key exchange is fully implemented.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 1,
-      "title": "Is the user authentication system secure and robust?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the authentication system uses industry standards (e.g., OAuth, JWT) with proper session management, password hashing (bcrypt/Argon2), and protection against common attacks (CSRF, XSS). Deduct 5 points if password storage is insecure, 3 points if 2FA is missing, and 3 points if there's no account recovery mechanism.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 2,
-      "title": "Are privacy and security measures thoroughly implemented?",
-      "description": "Check if the code includes message expiration features, self-destructing messages, encryption at rest, secure transport (HTTPS), and protection against metadata leakage. Deduct 3 points for each missing critical security feature. The implementation should ensure forward secrecy and deniability where appropriate.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 3,
-      "title": "Is the message composition and delivery system fully functional?",
-      "description": "Review whether the message system allows rich content (text formatting, attachments), scheduled deliveries, read receipts (with privacy options), and recipient verification. Score 3 points for basic messaging, 7 points for comprehensive features, and 10 points for a complete system with error handling and delivery confirmation.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 4,
-      "title": "Is the code robust?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as network interruption, invalid inputs, 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. Steganography to hide messages within images 2. Decoy messages/mailboxes under duress 3. Location-based or time-based access restrictions). 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 encryption methods without clear purpose) 2. Function modules unrelated to secure messaging (e.g., unnecessary social features) 3. Fancy effects that compromise security or 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 (such as separating security logic/UI/networking 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, preferably with dark mode for privacy) 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 with security-oriented interaction patterns. Deduct 5 points for each operation without feedback, 3 points for visual after-images during fast sliding, and 5 points for hard-to-find key function buttons. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    }
-  ],
-  "class": "Web Applications-Communication",
-  "difficulty": "hard"
-}

package/library/web_applications-communication/send-well-wishes-child-birth.json

@@ -1,68 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "index": 252,
-  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Be sure to provide executable code for demonstration. Create a front-end program that simulates sending well-wishes to ZKT and ZYX for having a child soon.",
-  "checklist": [
-    {
-      "id": 0,
-      "title": "Is the well-wishes sending simulation core functionality fully implemented?",
-      "description": "Review whether the code accurately implements the well-wishes sending mechanism through HTML/JavaScript, including input validation for blessing messages, character handling for ZKT and ZYX names, and message formatting/display logic. Score 0 if the core blessing interaction is not implemented, 5 if only basic message input is implemented, and 10 if comprehensive blessing categories, personalized messages, and recipient-specific customization are fully included.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 1,
-      "title": "Are interactive blessing elements and visual feedback mechanisms implemented?",
-      "description": "Check whether the implementation includes interactive elements such as blessing card selection, animated message sending effects, and visual confirmation feedback. Evaluate if there are multiple blessing templates, customizable message styles, and engaging visual elements like floating hearts, confetti, or blessing animations. Deduct 5 points if visual feedback is missing, and 3 points if interaction responsiveness is poor. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 2,
-      "title": "Is a comprehensive blessing message management system designed?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the system includes blessing message categorization (e.g., traditional, modern, humorous), message history tracking, and the ability to generate/display multiple blessing formats. Check if there's a mechanism to store and retrieve sent blessings, preview functionality, and options for different blessing occasions. Deduct 5 points if message persistence is not implemented, and 3 points if categorization system is missing. Give 10 points if fully implemented.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 3,
-      "title": "Is the complete blessing experience workflow constructed?",
-      "description": "Check whether the code includes a complete user journey from blessing creation to delivery simulation, including recipient selection (ZKT/ZYX), message customization, sending animation, and confirmation display. Evaluate if there's a blessing gallery, sharing options, and celebration effects. Deduct 5 points if the workflow is incomplete, and 3 points if user guidance is unclear. Give 10 points if the entire experience is seamlessly integrated.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 4,
-      "title": "Is the code robust?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as empty input, special characters in messages, browser compatibility issues, etc.) and provide friendly error prompts or recovery mechanisms. Code with strong robustness should be able to effectively handle these edge cases, giving 10 points. If the robustness is average, give 5 points, and if no exceptions are handled, give 0 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 5,
-      "title": "Are there any innovative features that are eye-catching?",
-      "description": "Check whether the code includes surprise features that enhance the blessing experience (e.g., 1. AI-generated personalized blessing poems 2. Interactive blessing card designer 3. Animated blessing delivery simulation with sound effects 4. Social sharing with custom blessing images). Add 3 points for each practical innovative feature implemented (maximum 10 points).",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 6,
-      "title": "Are there any redundant features?",
-      "description": "Strictly check three types of redundancy: 1. Redundant implementation of similar blessing functions (e.g., multiple message input methods coexisting unnecessarily) 2. Function modules unrelated to blessing simulation (e.g., built-in games or unrelated utilities) 3. Overly complex animations that detract from the main purpose. Deduct 3 points for each redundancy found, and directly deduct 10 points if the core blessing 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 blessing logic/UI components/data management), code organization, and maintainability. Deduct 5 points if global state pollution is found or proper component structure is not used; deduct 5 points if the code duplication rate is too high (over 30%); deduct 5 points if the code lacks proper commenting and documentation. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 8,
-      "title": "Does the interface vision meet professional design standards?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the overall design follows modern design principles for a blessing/celebration theme: 1) Harmonious and warm color palette suitable for congratulations (no more than 3 primary colors) 2) Proper layout spacing with clear visual hierarchy (element spacing follows the 8px multiple principle) 3) Professional typography system (body font size ≥ 14px, line height over 1.5 times). Deduct 3 points for each crowded visual element, 5 points for inappropriate color combinations for the occasion, and 5 points for chaotic layout. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 9,
-      "title": "Is the dynamic interaction smooth and celebration-appropriate?",
-      "description": "Judge whether the dynamic effects conform to the celebratory nature and human perception: 1) Click feedback delay ≤ 100ms 2) Blessing animation duration appropriate for the content (300-800ms for celebration effects) 3) Clear visual focus and delightful micro-interactions. Deduct 5 points for each operation without proper feedback, 3 points for jarring or inappropriate animations, and 5 points if the overall interaction doesn't convey the joyful blessing sentiment. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    }
-  ],
-  "class": "Web Applications-Communication",
-  "difficulty": "easy"
-}

package/library/web_applications-communication/simple-forum-website-no-database.json

@@ -1,68 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "index": 946,
-  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Make sure the code you generate is executable for demonstration. Actually, WebSocket might be a bit challenging, so let's do this instead: Imagine a forum with multiple users where each user can post messages. Please design a simple website without using a database.",
-  "checklist": [
-    {
-      "id": 0,
-      "title": "Is the forum post creation and display system fully implemented?",
-      "description": "Review whether the code accurately implements a basic forum structure with post creation, display, and management through HTML/JavaScript. Check if posts have essential attributes (author, timestamp, content, title). Score 0 if the core functionality is missing, 5 if only basic post display is implemented, and 10 if full post creation, display, and management are included.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 1,
-      "title": "Is the multi-user functionality implemented?",
-      "description": "Check whether the implementation includes user registration/login mechanisms, user-specific content displays, and proper session management (using localStorage/sessionStorage in absence of a database). Verify if users can be distinguished and their posts are properly attributed. Score 0 if no user management exists, 5 if basic username identification is implemented, and 10 if complete user profiles and session management are present.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 2,
-      "title": "Is the data persistence approach well-designed without using a database?",
-      "description": "Evaluate how the code handles data persistence using client-side storage (localStorage/sessionStorage/IndexedDB). Check for proper data structuring, handling of storage limits, and potential data loss prevention. Deduct 5 points if no data persistence exists, 3 points if data can be lost on browser refresh. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 3,
-      "title": "Is the forum interaction model complete?",
-      "description": "Check whether core forum functionalities are implemented: post creation/editing/deletion, sorting/filtering of posts, comment threading (if applicable), and notification of new posts. Deduct 3 points for each missing core functionality, and 5 points if the interaction flow is cumbersome or unintuitive. Give 10 points if fully implemented.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 4,
-      "title": "Is the code robust?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common edge cases (empty posts, very long content, special characters in inputs, concurrent users making changes, storage limit exceeded, etc.) and provide friendly error handling. 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. Rich text editing 2. Post tagging system 3. Real-time content preview 4. Responsive design for mobile). 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 post creation methods) 2. Function modules unrelated to forum functionality (e.g., a built-in calculator) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., excessive animations). Deduct 3 points for each redundancy found, and directly deduct 10 points if the core functions are interfered with by redundant code.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 7,
-      "title": "Does the code have engineering quality?",
-      "description": "Review modular design (separation of UI/data/event handling layers), 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 there's no error handling or logging mechanism. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 8,
-      "title": "Does the interface vision meet professional design standards?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the overall design follows modern design principles: 1) Harmonious color matching (no more than 3 primary colors) 2) Proper layout spacing (element spacing follows the 8px multiple principle) 3) Professional font system (body font size ≥ 14px, line height over 1.5 times). Deduct 3 points for each crowded visual element, 5 points for a glaring color combination, and 5 points for chaotic text-image layout. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 9,
-      "title": "Is the dynamic interaction smooth and 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 indication for post creation success/failure. Deduct 5 points for each operation without feedback, 3 points for jarring transitions between forum sections, and 5 points for hard-to-find key function buttons. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    }
-  ],
-  "class": "Web Applications-Communication",
-  "difficulty": "easy"
-}