@getollie/cli 0.0.4 → 0.2.0

package/library/web_applications-education_learning/html-mid-term-review-questions-industrial-revolutions-scores-rankings.json

@@ -1,68 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "index": 1286,
-  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Be sure to ensure that the generated code is executable for demonstration. Create an HTML page that generates 50 review questions for a mid-term exam on the first and second Industrial Revolutions, with functionality to display scores and rankings.",
-  "checklist": [
-    {
-      "id": 0,
-      "title": "Is the question generation implemented completely?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the code successfully generates 50 distinct, historically accurate questions about the first and second Industrial Revolutions. Questions should cover diverse aspects (technological innovations, social impacts, key figures, etc.). Score 0 if fewer than 30 questions are generated, 5 if 30-49 questions with limited variety, and 10 if all 50 questions are generated with good historical depth and variety.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 1,
-      "title": "Is the question presentation interface well-designed?",
-      "description": "Check whether the questions are displayed in a clear, readable format with appropriate spacing and organization. Interface should include question numbering, multiple-choice options clearly distinguished, and navigation controls. Deduct 5 points if questions are displayed in a cluttered format, 3 points if question navigation is difficult, and 2 points if the text is poorly formatted or hard to read. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 2,
-      "title": "Is the answer submission and validation mechanism functional?",
-      "description": "Verify that the code correctly tracks user responses, validates answers against correct solutions, and prevents submission of incomplete tests. Examine if it handles edge cases like double submissions or changing answers. Deduct 5 points if validation logic has flaws, 3 points if there's no prevention of blank submissions, and 2 points if answer changes aren't properly tracked. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 3,
-      "title": "Are the scoring and ranking features properly implemented?",
-      "description": "Assess whether the code accurately calculates exam scores based on correct answers and displays them clearly. The ranking system should store and display multiple user results in order of performance. Deduct 5 points if score calculation contains errors, 3 points if the ranking display is incomplete or inaccurate, and 2 points if there's no persistence of ranking data between sessions. 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 incorrect input formats, browser compatibility issues, refreshing the page mid-exam, 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. Timer functionality to simulate exam conditions 2. Question difficulty classification 3. Progress visualization 4. Performance analytics showing strengths/weaknesses). 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 scoring systems coexisting) 2. Function modules unrelated to the exam (e.g., unrelated animations or media) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., heavy visual effects that slow loading). Deduct 3 points for each redundancy found, and directly deduct 10 points if the core functions are interfered with by redundant code.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 7,
-      "title": "Does the code have engineering quality?",
-      "description": "Review modular design (such as separating question data/UI rendering/scoring logic), code organization, and maintainability. Deduct 5 points if global variable pollution is found or proper design patterns are not used; deduct 5 points if the code duplication rate is too high (over 30%); deduct 5 points if there's no clear separation of concerns. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 8,
-      "title": "Does the interface vision meet professional design standards?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the overall design follows modern design principles: 1) Harmonious color matching (no more than 3 primary colors) 2) Proper layout spacing (element spacing follows the 8px multiple principle) 3) Professional 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) Question transition smoothness 2) Feedback when selecting answers 3) Clear visual indication of correct/incorrect answers. Deduct 5 points for each operation without feedback, 3 points for jarring transitions between questions, and 5 points for confusing user interface states (e.g., unclear if an answer was submitted). The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    }
-  ],
-  "class": "Web Applications-Education/Learning",
-  "difficulty": "easy"
-}

package/library/web_applications-education_learning/html-parse-math-formulas-marked-library.json

@@ -1,68 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "index": 1144,
-  "question": "You are a coding expert, please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Be sure to provide executable code in your demonstration. Write an HTML page that can parse mathematical formulas using the marked library.",
-  "checklist": [
-    {
-      "id": 0,
-      "title": "Is the basic HTML structure properly implemented?",
-      "description": "Check if the HTML page has proper DOCTYPE, head, body sections, responsive meta tags, and appropriate CSS styling. Verify if there's proper semantic structure (headers, main content, etc.). Deduct 3 points if doctype/meta tags are missing, 3 points for improper semantic structure, and 2 points for lack of responsive design considerations. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 1,
-      "title": "Is the marked library correctly integrated?",
-      "description": "Evaluate if the marked library is properly imported (via CDN or npm), initialized with appropriate configuration, and called correctly in the code. Check if the latest stable version is used and if there are fallback mechanisms. Deduct 5 points if the library is not properly loaded, 3 points if an outdated version is used without justification, and 2 points if there's no error handling for library loading failures. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 2,
-      "title": "Is mathematical formula parsing functionality implemented?",
-      "description": "Verify that the code integrates a math rendering library (like MathJax or KaTeX) alongside marked for formula rendering. Check if both inline formulas (e.g., $y=x^2$) and block formulas (e.g., $$\\int_0^\\infty e^{-x^2} dx = \\frac{\\sqrt{\\pi}}{2}$$) are supported. Deduct 5 points if only one formula type is supported, 8 points if formula rendering is broken/incomplete, and 10 points if math formula parsing is completely missing. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 3,
-      "title": "Is there a proper user interface for input and rendering?",
-      "description": "Assess if the page provides text input areas for entering markdown with math formulas and separate display areas for rendered output. Check if there's real-time preview or an explicit render button with proper event handling. Deduct 3 points for lack of clear input/output separation, 3 points for missing real-time/button-triggered rendering, and 4 points if the interface is not intuitive or lacks proper labels/instructions. 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 LaTeX syntax, script injection attempts, or rendering errors) and provide friendly error messages. 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. Formula syntax highlighting 2. Export to PDF/image options 3. Formula templates or quick insertion buttons 4. Dark/light mode toggle). Add 3 points for each practical innovative feature implemented (maximum 10 points).",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 6,
-      "title": "Are there any redundant features?",
-      "description": "Strictly check three types of redundancy: 1. Redundant implementation of similar functions (e.g., multiple markdown parsers running simultaneously) 2. Function modules unrelated to formula parsing (e.g., unnecessary media players) 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 parsing logic/view/event handlers), code organization, and maintainability. Deduct 5 points if global state pollution is found or if proper design patterns are not used; deduct 5 points if the code duplication rate is too high (over 30%); deduct 5 points if there are no comments for complex logic sections. 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) Rendering feedback delay ≤ 200ms 2) Transition animation duration controlled between 300-500ms 3) Clear visual feedback during formula processing. Deduct 5 points for each operation without feedback, 3 points for noticeable lag during real-time rendering, and 5 points for confusing or misleading interaction patterns. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    }
-  ],
-  "class": "Web Applications-Education/Learning",
-  "difficulty": "easy"
-}

package/library/web_applications-education_learning/html-webpage-gravity-falls.json

@@ -1,68 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "index": 1578,
-  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate, professional responses. Be careful to ensure the code you generate is executable for display. Create an HTML webpage about Gravity Falls.",
-  "checklist": [
-    {
-      "id": 0,
-      "title": "Is the Gravity Falls theme authentically represented?",
-      "description": "Review whether the webpage accurately captures the Gravity Falls aesthetic through proper use of the show's visual elements, color palette (forest greens, mystery blues, rustic browns), and thematic content. Check for inclusion of iconic elements like the Mystery Shack, Bill Cipher symbols, journal pages, or woodland mystery themes. Score 0 if generic content with no show connection, 5 if basic theme elements present, and 10 if fully immersive Gravity Falls atmosphere with authentic visual references.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 1,
-      "title": "Is the content structure comprehensive and well-organized?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the webpage includes comprehensive Gravity Falls content such as character profiles (Dipper, Mabel, Grunkle Stan, etc.), episode guides, mystery elements, or interactive features. Check for proper HTML semantic structure with appropriate headings, sections, and navigation. Deduct 3 points if content is superficial, 5 points if navigation is confusing or missing, and 3 points if semantic HTML structure is poor. Full score requires rich, well-structured content.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 2,
-      "title": "Are interactive elements and animations implemented effectively?",
-      "description": "Check whether the webpage includes engaging interactive features that enhance the Gravity Falls experience, such as hover effects on mystery symbols, clickable journal entries, character animations, or hidden easter eggs. Evaluate JavaScript implementation for smooth interactions. Deduct 5 points if interactions are buggy or non-functional, 3 points if animations are choppy, and 5 points if no interactive elements exist. Full score requires polished, theme-appropriate interactivity.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 3,
-      "title": "Is the multimedia integration properly implemented?",
-      "description": "Assess whether images, videos, audio, or other media elements are properly integrated and optimized. Check for appropriate alt text, proper file formats, responsive image handling, and loading performance. Verify that media enhances the Gravity Falls theme rather than generic placeholder content. Deduct 3 points for missing alt text, 5 points for poor loading performance, and 3 points for inappropriate or low-quality media. Full score requires optimized, thematic multimedia integration.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 4,
-      "title": "Is the code robust and error-free?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common issues such as missing images, JavaScript errors, responsive breakpoints, and browser compatibility. Code should include proper error handling, fallbacks for missing resources, and graceful degradation. Strong robustness earns 10 points. Average robustness with some error handling gets 5 points. No error handling or frequent crashes gets 0 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 5,
-      "title": "Are there innovative features that enhance user engagement?",
-      "description": "Check for creative features that go beyond basic webpage functionality, such as: 1) Interactive mystery-solving elements 2) Character voice clips or sound effects 3) Hidden cipher puzzles 4) Parallax scrolling effects 5) Interactive timeline or episode navigator. Add 3 points for each well-implemented innovative feature (maximum 10 points). Features must be functional and add genuine value to the user experience.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 6,
-      "title": "Are there any redundant or unnecessary features?",
-      "description": "Strictly check for three types of redundancy: 1) Duplicate functionality (multiple navigation systems) 2) Off-theme elements unrelated to Gravity Falls 3) Performance-heavy effects that don't serve the content (excessive animations, auto-playing videos). Deduct 3 points for each redundancy found. Deduct 10 points directly if redundant code significantly impacts core functionality or page performance.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 7,
-      "title": "Does the code demonstrate professional engineering quality?",
-      "description": "Review code organization, proper HTML/CSS/JavaScript structure, commenting, and maintainability. Check for separation of concerns (HTML structure, CSS styling, JavaScript behavior), proper file organization, and clean code practices. Deduct 5 points for inline styles or scripts mixing concerns; deduct 5 points for code duplication over 30%; deduct 5 points for poor naming conventions or lack of comments. Full score requires professional-grade code structure.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 8,
-      "title": "Does the visual design meet professional aesthetic standards?",
-      "description": "Evaluate overall design quality following modern web design principles: 1) Cohesive color scheme reflecting Gravity Falls palette (no more than 4 primary colors) 2) Proper typography hierarchy and readability (minimum 16px body text, 1.4+ line height) 3) Consistent spacing and alignment (preferably 8px grid system) 4) Professional layout composition. Deduct 3 points for each cluttered visual section, 5 points for poor color harmony, and 5 points for illegible text or chaotic layout.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 9,
-      "title": "Is the user experience smooth and intuitive?",
-      "description": "Judge whether interactions feel natural and responsive: 1) Page load time under 3 seconds 2) Smooth scrolling and transitions (300-500ms duration) 3) Clear visual feedback for interactive elements 4) Intuitive navigation flow 5) Mobile responsiveness. Deduct 5 points for each unresponsive interaction, 3 points for jarring transitions or layout shifts, and 5 points for poor mobile experience or difficult-to-find navigation elements.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    }
-  ],
-  "class": "Web Applications-Education/Learning",
-  "difficulty": "easy"
-}

package/library/web_applications-education_learning/html-website-configure-delta-game-weapons.json

@@ -1,68 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "index": 1796,
-  "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. Create a website using HTML that helps users independently configure cost-effective weapons in the Delta game.",
-  "checklist": [
-    {
-      "id": 0,
-      "title": "Is the weapon configuration system fully implemented?",
-      "description": "Review whether the code accurately implements weapon categories, attributes, and attachment systems through HTML/JavaScript. Check if it includes comprehensive weapon stats (damage, accuracy, range, etc.), attachment compatibility validation, and real-time stat calculation when configurations change. Score 0 if core weapon data structure is missing, 5 if only basic weapon display is implemented, and 10 if complete configuration system with all Delta game weapons and attachments is included.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 1,
-      "title": "Is the cost-effectiveness analysis algorithm implemented?",
-      "description": "Check whether the system includes intelligent cost-performance ratio calculations based on weapon price, performance metrics, and user preferences. Evaluate if it provides ranking algorithms, comparison matrices, and budget optimization suggestions. Deduct 5 points if price-performance calculation is overly simplistic, and 3 points if no comparative analysis between different configurations is provided. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 2,
-      "title": "Is the interactive configuration interface design user-friendly?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the configuration interface provides intuitive drag-and-drop functionality, real-time preview, and step-by-step guidance. Check if users can easily browse weapon categories, apply filters, and see immediate feedback on stat changes. Deduct 5 points if the configuration process requires more than 3 clicks for basic operations. Check whether save/load preset configurations are available. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 3,
-      "title": "Is the weapon data management system comprehensive?",
-      "description": "Check whether the code includes complete weapon database with accurate Delta game data, including all weapon classes, attachment compatibility matrices, and current market prices. Evaluate if data is structured efficiently and updates can be managed easily. Deduct 5 points if weapon data is incomplete or inaccurate, and 3 points if no data validation mechanism exists. Give 10 points if fully implemented with real-time data sync capability.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 4,
-      "title": "Is the code robust?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as invalid weapon combinations, missing data, user input errors, 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 user experience (e.g., 1. AI-powered weapon recommendations based on playstyle 2. Build sharing and community rating system 3. Performance simulation in different game scenarios 4. Price tracking and deal alerts). 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 filtering systems coexisting) 2. Function modules unrelated to weapon configuration (e.g., built-in chat system) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., excessive 3D animations). Deduct 3 points for each redundancy found, and directly deduct 10 points if the core configuration 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 layer/business logic/presentation layer), code organization, and maintainability. Deduct 5 points if global state pollution is found or no structured architecture is used; deduct 5 points if the code duplication rate is too high (over 30%); deduct 5 points if no error handling or logging mechanisms exist. 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 web design principles: 1) Harmonious color matching with gaming aesthetic (no more than 3 primary colors) 2) Proper layout spacing (element spacing follows the 8px multiple principle) 3) Professional typography system (body font size ≥ 14px, line height over 1.5 times) 4) Clear visual hierarchy for weapon categories and stats. Deduct 3 points for each crowded visual element, 5 points for a glaring color combination, and 5 points for chaotic 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) Configuration changes reflect immediately (≤ 100ms) 2) Transition animations between weapon views controlled between 300-500ms 3) Clear visual feedback for all interactive elements 4) Smooth scrolling and filtering operations. Deduct 5 points for each operation without visual feedback, 3 points for laggy animations during configuration changes, and 5 points for hard-to-find key configuration options. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    }
-  ],
-  "class": "Web Applications-Education/Learning",
-  "difficulty": "medium"
-}

package/library/web_applications-education_learning/hunan-sichuan-attractions-cuisine.json

@@ -1,68 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "index": 1016,
-  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate, expert responses. Be sure the code you generate is executable when possible. Could you please help me create something about tourist attractions and cuisine in Hunan and Sichuan? Please provide me with the complete code.",
-  "checklist": [
-    {
-      "id": 0,
-      "title": "Is the tourist attraction information system comprehensively implemented?",
-      "description": "Review whether the code accurately implements tourist attraction data display through HTML/JavaScript, including attraction details, geographic location, opening hours, ticket prices, and user ratings. Check if interactive maps are integrated and whether attraction filtering/searching functionality is provided. Score 0 if core attraction display is not implemented, 5 if only basic information is shown, and 10 if comprehensive attraction management with interactive features is fully included.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 1,
-      "title": "Is the cuisine information and recommendation system fully developed?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the cuisine section includes detailed information about Hunan and Sichuan dishes, restaurants, cooking methods, and ingredients. Check if recipe details, restaurant locations, price ranges, and user reviews are implemented. Verify if cuisine categorization and recommendation algorithms are present. Deduct 5 points if recipe details are missing, and 3 points if restaurant information is incomplete. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 2,
-      "title": "Is the data structure design and content management system properly architected?",
-      "description": "Assess whether the data structure efficiently organizes tourist and cuisine information using appropriate data models (JSON/database schema). Check if content management allows for easy updates, additions, and modifications of attractions and restaurants. Evaluate if search indexing and data relationships are properly established. Deduct 5 points if data structure is poorly designed, and 3 points if content management is not scalable. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 3,
-      "title": "Are interactive features and user engagement mechanisms complete?",
-      "description": "Check whether the code includes user interaction features such as rating systems, comment sections, favorite lists, and trip planning tools. Evaluate if social sharing capabilities, photo galleries, and virtual tours are implemented. Verify if user preferences and personalized recommendations are supported. Deduct 5 points if basic interaction features are missing, and 3 points if user engagement tools are incomplete. 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 missing data, network interruption, invalid user input, image loading 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 user experience (e.g., 1. AR/VR virtual attraction tours 2. AI-powered personalized itinerary planning 3. Real-time weather integration 4. Multi-language support 5. Offline map 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 search mechanisms coexisting) 2. Function modules unrelated to tourism/cuisine (e.g., built-in games or music players) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., excessive animations or heavy graphics). Deduct 3 points for each redundancy found, and directly deduct 10 points if core functions are interfered with by redundant code.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 7,
-      "title": "Does the code have engineering quality?",
-      "description": "Review modular design (such as separating data layer/presentation layer/business logic), code organization, and maintainability. Deduct 5 points if global state pollution is found or design patterns are not used; deduct 5 points if the code duplication rate is too high (over 30%); deduct 3 points if the file structure is poorly organized. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 8,
-      "title": "Does the interface vision meet professional design standards?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the overall design follows modern design principles: 1) Harmonious color matching reflecting regional culture (no more than 3 primary colors) 2) Proper layout spacing (element spacing follows the 8px multiple principle) 3) Professional typography system (body font size ≥ 14px, line height over 1.5 times) 4) High-quality images with consistent aspect ratios. Deduct 3 points for each crowded visual element, 5 points for glaring color combinations, and 5 points for chaotic layout. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 9,
-      "title": "Is the dynamic interaction smooth and seamless?",
-      "description": "Judge whether the dynamic effects conform to human perception characteristics: 1) Click feedback delay ≤ 100ms 2) Transition animation duration controlled between 300-500ms 3) Clear visual focus guidance 4) Smooth scrolling and image loading 5) Responsive design across devices. Deduct 5 points for each operation without feedback, 3 points for visual artifacts during interactions, and 5 points for hard-to-find navigation elements. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    }
-  ],
-  "class": "Web Applications-Education/Learning",
-  "difficulty": "medium"
-}

package/library/web_applications-education_learning/interactive-audio-visual-learning-tool-sound-clips-images.json

@@ -1,68 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "index": 540,
-  "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. Build an interactive audio-visual learning tool where users can click different buttons to trigger various sound clips and related images. Design preset learning themes (such as animal sounds, musical instrument sounds, etc.) that users can switch between by clicking.",
-  "checklist": [
-    {
-      "id": 0,
-      "title": "Is the audio playback system fully implemented?",
-      "description": "Review whether the code accurately implements audio playback through HTML5 Audio API or Web Audio API, including audio preloading, play/pause controls, volume management, and cross-browser compatibility. Check if audio formats are optimized (MP3/OGG/WAV support) and if audio loading states are handled properly. Score 0 if audio cannot play, 5 if basic playback works but lacks controls, and 10 if full audio management is implemented with error handling.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 1,
-      "title": "Is the theme switching mechanism properly designed?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the theme switching system allows seamless transitions between different learning categories (animals, instruments, etc.) with proper data structure organization. Check if themes are loaded dynamically or statically, whether switching preserves user state, and if theme data is well-structured (JSON/object format). Deduct 5 points if theme switching causes page refresh, 3 points if audio/images don't update correctly during switches. Full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 2,
-      "title": "Is the interactive button system responsive and accessible?",
-      "description": "Check whether buttons provide immediate visual/audio feedback, support keyboard navigation, and include proper ARIA labels for accessibility. Evaluate if button states (normal/hover/active/disabled) are clearly defined and if touch/mouse events are handled correctly across devices. Deduct 5 points if buttons lack visual feedback, 3 points if keyboard accessibility is missing, 2 points if touch events don't work on mobile devices. Full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 3,
-      "title": "Is the multimedia synchronization and loading optimization implemented?",
-      "description": "Assess whether audio and image resources are properly synchronized, preloaded efficiently, and cached for performance. Check if loading indicators are shown during resource fetching, if fallback mechanisms exist for failed loads, and if resources are optimized for web delivery. Deduct 5 points if resources aren't preloaded causing delays, 3 points if no loading states are shown, 2 points if large files aren't optimized. 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 audio loading failures, unsupported formats, network interruptions, user rapid clicking, etc.) and provide friendly error prompts or recovery mechanisms. Code with strong robustness should gracefully handle browser compatibility issues, resource loading errors, and user interaction 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 learning experience (e.g., 1. Visual waveform display during audio playback 2. Progress tracking and learning statistics 3. Interactive quiz mode 4. Audio recording and playback comparison 5. Gamification elements like achievements). 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 audio players coexisting) 2. Function modules unrelated to audio-visual learning (e.g., built-in calculator or weather widget) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., excessive animations during audio playback). Deduct 3 points for each redundancy found, and directly deduct 10 points if the core learning 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 audio management/UI components/theme data), code organization, and maintainability. Check for proper event handling, memory leak prevention (audio object cleanup), and performance optimization. Deduct 5 points if global state pollution is found or no design patterns are used; deduct 5 points if code duplication rate is too high (over 30%); deduct 5 points if audio resources aren't properly disposed. 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 educational UI principles: 1) Child-friendly color scheme and contrast ratios 2) Clear visual hierarchy with proper spacing (8px grid system) 3) Intuitive iconography and button design 4) Readable typography (minimum 16px for educational content). Deduct 3 points for each crowded visual element, 5 points for poor color accessibility, and 5 points for confusing navigation layout. Screenshots should show clean, professional educational interface. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 9,
-      "title": "Is the dynamic interaction smooth and seamless?",
-      "description": "Judge whether the interactive experience meets educational software standards: 1) Button click to audio playback delay ≤ 50ms 2) Smooth theme transitions without jarring effects 3) Visual feedback synchronization with audio 4) Responsive design across devices 5) No audio overlap or cutting issues. Deduct 5 points for each laggy interaction, 3 points for audio timing issues, and 5 points for poor mobile touch responsiveness. Screenshots should demonstrate smooth, professional interactions. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    }
-  ],
-  "class": "Web Applications-Education/Learning",
-  "difficulty": "easy"
-}

package/library/web_applications-education_learning/interactive-geometric-proof-system.json

@@ -1,68 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "index": 654,
-  "question": "You are a code expert, please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Make sure the generated code is executable when possible. ======== ROLE ========\nYou are an experienced code expert. You are provided with a software development requirement description and asked to generate project code based on these requirements. Strictly follow the rules to help users generate complete project code with simple and easy-to-understand comments, without outputting anything else.\n\n======== OUTPUT RULES ========\n1. Always generate complete, executable project code, ensuring the project is fully functional\n2. Ensure all code files you output are complete, do not omit any code\n3. Carefully review and check all code before final output, evaluating its executability. If the code cannot be executed or contains errors, regenerate it\n4. If the requirements involve external API access or user data (images, videos, audio, etc.), provide simulated data\n\n======== PROJECT REQUIREMENTS ========\nBuild an interactive geometric proof system where users can draw geometric figures on a canvas and add known conditions (such as angle values, equal sides, etc.). The system automatically generates a proof step tree based on the input conditions. Users can click on each step to view detailed derivation explanations. Provide a \"Verify\" button to check if the proof process is complete.",
-  "checklist": [
-    {
-      "id": 0,
-      "title": "Is the interactive canvas drawing functionality fully implemented?",
-      "description": "Review whether the code implements a responsive canvas drawing system that allows users to create accurate geometric shapes (points, lines, circles, polygons). Check for snap-to-grid functionality, object selection, and manipulation tools. Score 0 if drawing functionality is missing, 5 if basic shapes are supported but lack precision tools, and 10 if the system includes advanced features like constraint-based drawing.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 1,
-      "title": "Are geometric condition inputs properly implemented?",
-      "description": "Evaluate the implementation of UI components that allow users to add geometric conditions (angle measures, side lengths, parallel/perpendicular relationships, etc.). Check if the code validates input conditions for consistency and provides clear visual indicators for applied conditions. Deduct 5 points if only basic conditions are supported, 3 points if condition validation is missing, and 3 points if visual indicators are unclear. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 2,
-      "title": "Is the proof step tree generation algorithm implemented correctly?",
-      "description": "Analyze the algorithm that generates the proof step tree based on geometric axioms and theorems. Check for logical completeness, handling of multiple possible proof paths, and proper implementation of geometric reasoning. Score 0 if the algorithm is missing, 5 if it only supports basic proofs with limited theorem application, and 10 if it can handle complex proofs with multiple theorem applications and branching logic.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 3,
-      "title": "Is the interactive proof exploration functionality implemented?",
-      "description": "Check if users can click on proof steps to view detailed explanations and visualizations. Evaluate whether the code highlights relevant elements in the geometric figure when a step is selected, and whether step explanations include the theorems applied and logical justifications. Deduct 5 points if step highlighting is missing, and 3 points if explanations lack detail or theorem references. 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 geometric constructions, contradictory conditions, incomplete proofs, 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. Animation of proof steps 2. Alternative proof path suggestions 3. Theorem library with visual examples). 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 add the same condition) 2. Function modules unrelated to geometric proofs (e.g., unnecessary tools or decorations) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., excessive animations or visual effects). 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 geometric model/rendering/proof logic 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 drawing operations, and 5 points for hard-to-find key function buttons. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    }
-  ],
-  "class": "Web Applications-Education/Learning",
-  "difficulty": "hard"
-}

package/library/web_applications-education_learning/interactive-html-page-classroom-group-scoring.json

@@ -1,68 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "index": 343,
-  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Be sure to make the generated code executable for demonstration. Help me create an interactive HTML page for classroom group scoring. I will provide a student list, and teachers can directly award points to groups or individual students during class, with all points summed into group totals. The page should also include a random student selection function. The interface should be clean and visually appealing. Please generate the code.",
-  "checklist": [
-    {
-      "id": 0,
-      "title": "Is the student data management system properly implemented?",
-      "description": "Check whether the code provides a complete student and group data structure with proper initialization, validation, and management functions. The system should allow adding/editing students and groups, and properly validate inputs (no duplicate IDs, proper name formatting, etc.). Score 0 if the core data structure is not implemented, 5 if basic student/group data is managed without validation, and 10 if it includes complete data management with validation and error handling.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 1,
-      "title": "Is the point awarding functionality completely implemented?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the code allows teachers to award points to both individual students and groups with proper validation. Points awarded must be properly calculated and reflected in real-time in both individual and group totals. Check for features like point history tracking, ability to modify/remove incorrect point entries, and customizable point increments. Deduct 5 points if individual/group scoring is missing, 3 points if real-time updates are not implemented, and 2 points if there's no validation for point values (e.g., negative points, non-numeric inputs).",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 2,
-      "title": "Is the random student selection feature effectively implemented?",
-      "description": "Assess the random selection algorithm for fairness and functionality. The feature should allow selecting random students with options for filtering (e.g., by group, by participation history). Check if the system visually highlights the selected student and provides options to exclude previously selected students. Deduct 3 points if the randomization is predictable/biased, 3 points if there's no visual indication of selection, and 4 points if filtering options are missing.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 3,
-      "title": "Is the visualization of group scoring and statistics properly implemented?",
-      "description": "Review whether the code includes clear visual representation of point totals for both groups and individuals. Look for features like sorting capabilities, visual indicators for highest/lowest scores, progress bars or charts showing comparative performance, and filtering options. Deduct 3 points for missing group comparisons, 3 points if individual contributions within groups aren't visible, and 4 points if there are no visual indicators beyond plain numbers.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 4,
-      "title": "Is the code robust?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as empty student lists, incorrect data formats, browser refresh, accidental user errors) and provide friendly error prompts or recovery mechanisms. Code with strong robustness should include form validation, data persistence across sessions, and graceful error handling. Give 10 points for comprehensive error handling and recovery, 5 points for basic validation only, and 0 points if errors crash the application.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 5,
-      "title": "Are there any innovative features that are eye-catching?",
-      "description": "Check whether the code includes surprise features that enhance the classroom experience (e.g., 1. Animated celebrations when awarding points 2. Sound effects for random selection 3. Achievement badges for groups reaching certain thresholds 4. Dark/light mode toggle 5. Exportable reports of class participation). 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 ways to award points that conflict) 2. Function modules unrelated to classroom scoring (e.g., a built-in game unrelated to the main purpose) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., excessive animations that slow down the interface). Deduct 3 points for each redundancy found, and directly deduct 10 points if the core functions are interfered with by redundant code.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 7,
-      "title": "Does the code have engineering quality?",
-      "description": "Review modular design (such as separating data/view/controller layers), code organization, and maintainability. Check for proper use of JavaScript patterns, CSS organization, and HTML semantics. Deduct 3 points if global variables are overused or if there's no separation of concerns; deduct 3 points if the code duplication rate is high; deduct 4 points if there are no comments or documentation. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 8,
-      "title": "Does the interface vision meet professional design standards?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the overall design follows modern design principles: 1) Harmonious color matching suitable for classroom use (avoiding overly distracting colors) 2) Proper layout spacing with clear hierarchy 3) Professional font system with good readability (especially important for classroom visibility). Deduct 3 points for cluttered interface elements, 3 points for poor color contrast affecting readability, and 4 points for inconsistent design elements across the application. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 9,
-      "title": "Is the dynamic interaction smooth and intuitive for classroom use?",
-      "description": "Judge whether the interface is optimized for quick teacher interaction during class: 1) Quick access to common functions without deep menu navigation 2) Responsive controls that work on various devices (for mobile classroom use) 3) Clear visual feedback when points are awarded. Deduct 3 points if awarding points requires more than 2 clicks, 3 points if the interface isn't responsive for different screen sizes, and 4 points if there's no immediate visual feedback when actions are performed. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    }
-  ],
-  "class": "Web Applications-Education/Learning",
-  "difficulty": "easy"
-}