@getollie/cli 0.0.4 → 0.2.0

package/library/management_systems-frontend_backend_platforms/frontend-deployment-dashboard-with-monitoring.json

@@ -1,68 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "index": 612,
-  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Make sure the code you generate is executable whenever possible. Build an automated deployment dashboard that displays deployment status, version history, build logs and other information for frontend projects, with support for manually triggering builds and monitoring automated deployment workflows.",
-  "checklist": [
-    {
-      "id": 0,
-      "title": "Is the deployment status monitoring system fully implemented?",
-      "description": "Review whether the code accurately implements real-time deployment status tracking through REST APIs or WebSocket connections, including pipeline stages (building, testing, deploying), progress indicators, and status change notifications. Score 0 if core status monitoring is not implemented, 5 if only basic status display is available, and 10 if comprehensive multi-stage status tracking with real-time updates is fully included.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 1,
-      "title": "Is the version history and build logs management implemented?",
-      "description": "Check whether the implementation includes complete version history tracking with commit information, deployment timestamps, and searchable/filterable build logs with syntax highlighting. Requires pagination for large datasets and log streaming capabilities. Deduct 5 points if log search functionality is missing, and 3 points if version comparison features are not handled. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 2,
-      "title": "Is the manual build trigger mechanism designed with proper workflow integration?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the manual trigger system includes parameter input validation, branch/tag selection, environment targeting, and proper authentication/authorization. Must integrate with CI/CD platforms (Jenkins, GitLab CI, GitHub Actions) with proper API error handling. Deduct 5 points if parameter validation is insufficient. Check whether rollback functionality is implemented for failed deployments. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 3,
-      "title": "Is the automated workflow monitoring and alerting system constructed?",
-      "description": "Check whether the code includes comprehensive workflow monitoring with webhook integration, failure detection, notification systems (email, Slack, etc.), and deployment metrics tracking. Deduct 5 points if automated alert configuration is not implemented, and 3 points if performance metrics collection is missing. Give 10 points if fully implemented with customizable alert rules.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 4,
-      "title": "Is the code robust?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as API timeouts, authentication failures, network interruptions, malformed CI/CD responses, etc.) and provide friendly error prompts or recovery mechanisms. Code with strong robustness should include retry logic, graceful degradation, and proper error boundaries, 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 deployment experience (e.g., 1. Visual deployment pipeline diagrams 2. Performance impact analysis between versions 3. Automated rollback triggers based on error rates 4. Integration with monitoring tools like Grafana). 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 API polling mechanisms coexisting) 2. Function modules unrelated to deployment management (e.g., built-in code editor) 3. Excessive UI animations that affect dashboard performance. Deduct 3 points for each redundancy found, and directly deduct 10 points if the core deployment functions are interfered with by redundant code.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 7,
-      "title": "Does the code have engineering quality?",
-      "description": "Review modular design (such as separating API services/state management/UI components), TypeScript usage, error handling patterns, and configuration management. Deduct 5 points if API credentials are hardcoded or environment configuration is missing; deduct 5 points if the code lacks proper async/await error handling; deduct 5 points if no build optimization or bundling strategy is implemented. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 8,
-      "title": "Does the interface vision meet professional dashboard design standards?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the dashboard design follows enterprise UI principles: 1) Information hierarchy with proper data visualization (charts, progress bars, status indicators) 2) Consistent spacing and grid system 3) Professional color coding for status states (green/red/yellow for success/error/pending). Deduct 3 points for each cluttered data presentation, 5 points for poor color contrast affecting readability, and 5 points for inconsistent component styling. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 9,
-      "title": "Is the real-time data interaction smooth and responsive?",
-      "description": "Judge whether the dashboard updates conform to real-time monitoring standards: 1) Status updates with minimal delay (≤ 2 seconds) 2) Smooth data refresh without UI flickering 3) Proper loading states and skeleton screens during data fetching 4) Efficient WebSocket or polling implementation. Deduct 5 points for each delayed status update, 3 points for UI jumping during refreshes, and 5 points for missing loading indicators on critical actions. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    }
-  ],
-  "class": "Management Systems-Frontend/Backend Platforms",
-  "difficulty": "hard"
-}

package/library/management_systems-frontend_backend_platforms/frontend-gas-management-system-solution.json

@@ -1,68 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "index": 277,
-  "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 front-end gas comprehensive management system solution using Vite, Vue 3, TypeScript, Pinia, Axios, Element Plus, OpenLayers, Tianditu (Chinese map service), and Tailwind CSS.",
-  "checklist": [
-    {
-      "id": 0,
-      "title": "Is the core gas management system functionality implemented?",
-      "description": "Review whether the code implements essential gas management features including gas source tracking, pipeline management, leak detection, and monitoring dashboards. Score 0 if core features are missing, 5 if basic features are implemented without integration, and 10 if all essential features are fully integrated with real-time data visualization.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 1,
-      "title": "Is the OpenLayers map integration with Tianditu properly implemented?",
-      "description": "Evaluate the integration of OpenLayers with Tianditu map service, including proper API key usage, coordinate system configuration (CGCS2000), layer management, and custom overlay implementation for gas infrastructure. Deduct 3 points if map initialization fails, 3 points for incorrect projection setup, and 4 points if custom gas infrastructure overlays are missing. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 2,
-      "title": "Is the Vue 3 + TypeScript implementation properly utilizing composition API and type safety?",
-      "description": "Check if the code leverages Vue 3's Composition API with proper TypeScript interfaces/types for all components, stores, and services. Score 0 if TypeScript is barely used, 5 if basic typing exists but with 'any' types, and 10 if comprehensive type definitions are present with proper interfaces for all data structures and strict typing throughout the application.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 3,
-      "title": "Is Pinia used effectively for state management with proper store design?",
-      "description": "Assess whether Pinia stores are properly organized following domain-driven design principles (e.g., separate stores for map state, gas sources, user info, etc.), include proper actions/getters, and implement persistence where needed. Deduct 3 points for global state pollution, 3 points for missing TypeScript interfaces, and 4 points if stores don't handle loading states or errors properly. 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 API failures, map loading errors, invalid user inputs, etc.) and provide friendly error prompts or recovery mechanisms. Code with strong robustness should include error boundaries, fallback UI components, and comprehensive input validation. Give 10 points for comprehensive error handling, 5 points for average implementation, and 0 points if exceptions are not handled.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 5,
-      "title": "Are there any innovative features that are eye-catching?",
-      "description": "Check whether the code includes surprise features that enhance the experience (e.g., 1. Real-time gas leak prediction algorithms 2. AR visualization for field technicians 3. Automated reporting with data visualization 4. Intelligent alerts with severity classification). 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 map instances for the same view) 2. Function modules unrelated to gas management (e.g., unnecessary social features) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., excessive animations on critical monitoring screens). Deduct 3 points for each redundancy found, and directly deduct 10 points if the core functions are interfered with by redundant code.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 7,
-      "title": "Does the code have engineering quality?",
-      "description": "Review modular design (such as separating API/services/components/stores), unit test coverage with Vitest or Jest, proper Vite configuration, and build process automation. Deduct 5 points if global state pollution is found; deduct 5 points if the code duplication rate is too high (over 30%); deduct 5 points if the build process is not optimized for production. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 8,
-      "title": "Does the interface vision meet professional design standards?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the Element Plus implementation and Tailwind CSS usage follow modern design principles: 1) Consistent theme customization (no default Element Plus theme mixed with custom styles) 2) Proper responsive layout using Tailwind's grid system 3) Professional data visualization components with appropriate color schemes for gas monitoring. Deduct 3 points for inconsistent component styling, 5 points for non-responsive layouts, and 5 points for poor data visualization design. 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) Map interactions respond within 100ms 2) Data filtering and searching provides immediate visual feedback 3) Critical alerts have appropriate animation attention mechanisms. Deduct 5 points for each operation without feedback, 3 points for laggy map interactions, and 5 points for missing loading states during data fetching operations. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    }
-  ],
-  "class": "Management Systems-Frontend/Backend Platforms",
-  "difficulty": "medium"
-}

package/library/management_systems-frontend_backend_platforms/frontend-login-system-with-registration-and-admin.json

@@ -1,68 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "index": 290,
-  "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 purposes. Use VSCode to help me create a frontend login system that includes user registration, user login, and administrator login.",
-  "checklist": [
-    {
-      "id": 0,
-      "title": "Is the user registration system properly implemented?",
-      "description": "Check if the registration form includes essential fields (username, email, password, confirm password), client-side validation (email format, password strength, matching passwords), feedback mechanisms for validation errors, and proper handling of form submission. Score 0 if registration functionality is missing, 5 if basic form exists but lacks validation, 10 if fully implemented with comprehensive validation.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 1,
-      "title": "Is the user login functionality complete?",
-      "description": "Evaluate if the login form includes necessary fields (username/email, password), implements authentication logic, provides proper error handling for failed login attempts, and includes 'remember me' and 'forgot password' options. Deduct 3 points if password masking/visibility toggle is missing, 3 points if login error messages are not user-friendly, 5 points if no session management is implemented. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 2,
-      "title": "Is the administrator login functionality properly distinguished?",
-      "description": "Assess whether the admin login is properly separated from regular user login, includes additional security measures (such as two-factor authentication or CAPTCHA), and provides appropriate access controls to admin functionalities. Deduct 5 points if admin and user logins are not clearly differentiated, 3 points if no additional security is implemented for admin access, 5 points if there's no proper access control validation. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 3,
-      "title": "Is the frontend-backend integration approach well-designed?",
-      "description": "Check if the code includes clear API endpoints for authentication operations, proper data transmission methods (forms/fetch/axios), response handling, and token-based authentication implementation. Deduct 3 points if API calls are not properly structured, 5 points if no token-based authentication is implemented, 3 points if error handling for API failures is 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 network errors, invalid inputs, session timeouts, 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. Progressive UI revealing complexity as needed 2. Social login integration 3. Passwordless login options 4. Biometric authentication support). 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 validation logics coexisting) 2. Function modules unrelated to authentication (e.g., unnecessary dashboard elements) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., excessive animations in login flow). 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 authentication logic/UI components/API services), code reusability, naming conventions, and proper comments. 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 separation of concerns. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 8,
-      "title": "Does the interface vision meet professional design standards?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the overall design follows modern design principles: 1) Harmonious color matching (no more than 3 primary colors) 2) Proper layout spacing (element spacing follows the 8px multiple principle) 3) Professional form design (consistent input sizes, aligned labels). Deduct 3 points for each misaligned form element, 5 points for inconsistent visual styling between forms, and 5 points for poor mobile responsiveness. 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 within 100ms 2) Smooth transitions between registration and login forms 3) Clear visual indicators of validation states. Deduct 5 points for forms without loading states during submission, 3 points for jarring transitions between authentication steps, and 5 points for validation feedback that appears with significant delay. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    }
-  ],
-  "class": "Management Systems-Frontend/Backend Platforms",
-  "difficulty": "medium"
-}

package/library/management_systems-frontend_backend_platforms/functional-prototype-from-interface-config.json

@@ -1,68 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "index": 1311,
-  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Be sure to ensure the generated code is executable for display. Help me generate a functional prototype according to the interface configuration content.\n\nFirst, select a menu for page configuration. Step one is to choose a layout template to determine the page layout and which specific components to include (components include: left tree, query area, tab area, button area, list area). Step two is to configure the basic information of the menu, such as whether to enable workflow. Step three is to configure the UI of each component - when there is a left tree, configure the left tree first; when there is a tab area, configure the tabs first. Tables and buttons under different tabs may vary. Step four is to implement rule connections - each component supports connecting rules.",
-  "checklist": [
-    {
-      "id": 0,
-      "title": "Is the menu page configuration system fully implemented?",
-      "description": "Review whether the code accurately implements the four-step configuration process: layout template selection, basic menu information setup, component UI configuration, and rule connections. Check if all specified components (left tree, query area, tab area, button area, list area) are properly rendered and configurable. Score 0 if core configuration logic is missing, 5 if only basic template selection is implemented, and 10 if all configuration steps are fully functional with proper state management.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 1,
-      "title": "Is the dynamic component rendering and layout system implemented?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the layout template system can dynamically render different component combinations based on user selection. Check if the component positioning, sizing, and responsive behavior work correctly across different templates. Verify that component visibility and arrangement update in real-time during configuration. Deduct 5 points if layout breaks with certain component combinations, and 3 points if responsive behavior is inconsistent. Full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 2,
-      "title": "Is the component configuration management properly designed?",
-      "description": "Check whether each component (left tree, query area, tab area, button area, list area) has a comprehensive configuration interface with proper validation. Evaluate if the hierarchical configuration logic (left tree first, then tabs, then tables/buttons under tabs) is correctly implemented with dependency management. Deduct 5 points if configuration data structure is poorly designed, and 3 points if component dependencies are not properly handled. Full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 3,
-      "title": "Is the rule connection system architected and workflow integration provided?",
-      "description": "Assess whether the rule connection mechanism allows meaningful relationships between components with proper validation and conflict resolution. Check if workflow enablement affects the available rule types and component behaviors. Evaluate if rule connections persist correctly and can be visualized/edited. Deduct 5 points if rule validation is missing, and 3 points if workflow integration is superficial. Give 10 points if fully implemented with visual rule mapping.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 4,
-      "title": "Is the code robust?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as invalid configuration data, component loading failures, rule conflicts, etc.) and provide friendly error prompts or recovery mechanisms. Code with strong robustness should be able to effectively handle these edge cases, giving 10 points. If the robustness is average, give 5 points, and if no exceptions are handled, give 0 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 5,
-      "title": "Are there any innovative features that are eye-catching?",
-      "description": "Check whether the code includes surprise features that enhance the configuration experience (e.g., 1. Visual drag-and-drop layout designer 2. Real-time preview with mock data 3. Configuration templates with import/export 4. Undo/redo configuration history). 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 configuration functions (e.g., multiple component property panels) 2. Function modules unrelated to page configuration (e.g., built-in data analysis tools) 3. Fancy effects that affect configuration performance (e.g., heavy animations during component rendering). Deduct 3 points for each redundancy found, and directly deduct 10 points if 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 configuration logic/component rendering/state management), component reusability, 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 configuration data serialization is not properly implemented. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 8,
-      "title": "Does the interface vision meet professional design standards?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the configuration interface follows modern design principles: 1) Harmonious color matching with clear visual hierarchy 2) Proper layout spacing following grid systems 3) Professional typography with clear form labels and help text 4) Consistent iconography and button styles. Deduct 3 points for each crowded configuration panel, 5 points for confusing visual hierarchy, and 5 points for inconsistent UI components. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 9,
-      "title": "Is the configuration interaction smooth and intuitive?",
-      "description": "Judge whether the configuration workflow is intuitive and efficient: 1) Step-by-step guidance with clear progress indication 2) Immediate visual feedback for configuration changes 3) Smooth transitions between configuration steps 4) Context-sensitive help and validation messages. Deduct 5 points for each configuration step without proper feedback, 3 points for confusing navigation between steps, and 5 points for unintuitive component configuration interfaces. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    }
-  ],
-  "class": "Management Systems-Frontend/Backend Platforms",
-  "difficulty": "hard"
-}

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

@@ -1,68 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "index": 223,
-  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Make sure the code you provide is executable for demonstration. How can I create a desktop application interface for \"Yuan Bao\" (Gold Ingot) using Fyne?",
-  "checklist": [
-    {
-      "id": 0,
-      "title": "Is the Fyne framework correctly implemented for the Gold Ingot application?",
-      "description": "Check whether the code correctly imports and initializes the Fyne framework, including proper application lifecycle management (App creation, window setup, and execution). Verify that the application entry point is properly structured with appropriate error handling. Score 0 if Fyne is not properly initialized, 5 if basic initialization exists but with flaws, and 10 if the implementation follows Fyne best practices including proper context management.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 1,
-      "title": "Is the Gold Ingot visualization properly implemented?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the code includes a proper visual representation of a traditional Chinese Gold Ingot (Yuan Bao). Check if the visualization uses appropriate Fyne canvas elements (Rectangle, Circle, Text) or custom rendering. Deduct 5 points if the shape is too simplistic, 3 points if proper scaling is missing, and 5 points if the traditional gold color scheme (golden yellow with appropriate shading) is absent. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 2,
-      "title": "Are appropriate layout containers used for UI organization?",
-      "description": "Review whether the code uses proper Fyne layout containers (VBox, HBox, GridLayout, etc.) to organize UI elements in a logical way. Check if responsive design principles are applied to handle window resizing. Deduct 5 points if fixed positioning is used instead of layouts, 3 points if elements overlap incorrectly, and 5 points if the layout doesn't adapt to different screen sizes. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 3,
-      "title": "Is proper interaction with the Gold Ingot implemented?",
-      "description": "Check whether the code implements meaningful interactions with the Gold Ingot visualization (e.g., clicking, dragging, or animation effects). Verify that event handlers are properly registered and contain appropriate logic. Score 0 if no interaction is implemented, 5 if basic interaction exists but lacks feedback, and 10 if interactions are intuitive with visual/audio feedback and proper state management.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 4,
-      "title": "Is the code robust?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as resource loading failures, unexpected user inputs, window resizing edge cases, etc.) and provide friendly error prompts or recovery mechanisms. Code with strong robustness should be able to effectively handle these edge cases, giving 10 points. If the robustness is average, give 5 points, and if no exceptions are handled, give 0 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 5,
-      "title": "Are there any innovative features that are eye-catching?",
-      "description": "Check whether the code includes surprise features that enhance the experience (e.g., 1. Gold Ingot animation effects on interaction 2. Traditional Chinese background elements or themes 3. Custom widgets extending Fyne's capabilities). Add 3 points for each practical innovative feature implemented (maximum 10 points).",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 6,
-      "title": "Are there any redundant features?",
-      "description": "Strictly check three types of redundancy: 1. Redundant implementation of similar functions (e.g., multiple ways to achieve the same visual effect) 2. Function modules unrelated to the Gold Ingot application (e.g., unnecessary system integrations) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., excessive animations causing lag). Deduct 3 points for each redundancy found, and directly deduct 10 points if the core functions are interfered with by redundant code.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 7,
-      "title": "Does the code have engineering quality?",
-      "description": "Review modular design (such as separating UI/logic/resource management), code organization, and maintainability. Deduct 5 points if global state pollution is found or clean architecture principles are not followed; deduct 5 points if the code duplication rate is too high (over 30%); deduct 5 points if resource management is inefficient. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 8,
-      "title": "Does the interface vision meet professional design standards?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the overall design follows modern design principles: 1) Harmonious color matching (gold with complementary colors) 2) Proper layout spacing (element spacing follows consistent principles) 3) Professional theme application (appropriate use of Fyne themes or custom theme implementation). Deduct 3 points for each visual inconsistency, 5 points for poor color contrast affecting readability, and 5 points for disregarding platform design guidelines. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 9,
-      "title": "Is the dynamic interaction smooth and seamless?",
-      "description": "Judge whether the dynamic effects conform to human perception characteristics: 1) UI response delay ≤ 100ms 2) Transition animation duration controlled between 200-400ms 3) Clear visual feedback for user actions. Deduct 5 points for each operation without feedback, 3 points for jerky animations, and 5 points for inconsistent interaction patterns. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    }
-  ],
-  "class": "Management Systems-Frontend/Backend Platforms",
-  "difficulty": "easy"
-}

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

@@ -1,68 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "index": 1008,
-  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Pay attention to ensure that the code you generate is executable and can be displayed. Regenerate the following for the General Manager:\n\nGeneral Manager:\n- View and manage personnel records\n- View and manage customer information\n- View and manage order details\n- View and manage production plans\n- View and manage material inventory\n- Review system information",
-  "checklist": [
-    {
-      "id": 0,
-      "title": "Is the personnel management system fully implemented?",
-      "description": "Review whether the code accurately implements CRUD operations for personnel records, including employee information display, search filtering, role-based access control, and audit logging. Score 0 if the core functionality is missing, 5 if only basic operations are implemented, and 10 if comprehensive personnel management features (including performance tracking, organizational chart visualization, and approval workflows) are included.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 1,
-      "title": "Is the customer information management system properly designed?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the customer management module includes contact details, purchase history, segmentation, and relationship management features. Check if the system implements data validation, duplicate detection, and privacy compliance measures. Deduct 3 points for missing search/filter functionality, 3 points for inadequate data validation, and 4 points for lack of customer segmentation features. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 2,
-      "title": "Is the order management functionality comprehensively implemented?",
-      "description": "Check whether the order management system includes order creation, status tracking, invoice generation, and history visualization. Evaluate if it supports filtering by date ranges, customers, and status. Deduct 3 points if there's no order analytics dashboard, 3 points if there's no order status workflow visualization, and 4 points if there's no integration between orders and customer profiles. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 3,
-      "title": "Are the production planning and inventory management features fully functional?",
-      "description": "Review the implementation of production scheduling, material requirements planning, and inventory tracking systems. Check for visualizations like Gantt charts for production timelines and alert mechanisms for low inventory. Deduct 3 points for missing timeline visualizations, 3 points for lack of automatic inventory adjustment from orders, and 4 points if there's no forecasting capability based on historical data. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 4,
-      "title": "Is the code robust?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as invalid input, network interruption, concurrent access conflicts, etc.) and provide friendly error prompts or recovery mechanisms. Code with strong robustness should be able to effectively handle these edge cases, giving 10 points. If the robustness is average, give 5 points, and if no exceptions are handled, give 0 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 5,
-      "title": "Are there any innovative features that are eye-catching?",
-      "description": "Check whether the code includes surprise features that enhance the experience (e.g., 1. Real-time business analytics dashboard 2. Customizable reporting engine 3. AI-driven forecasting for sales and inventory). Add 3 points for each practical innovative feature implemented (maximum 10 points).",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 6,
-      "title": "Are there any redundant features?",
-      "description": "Strictly check three types of redundancy: 1. Redundant implementation of similar functions (e.g., multiple data retrieval methods doing the same thing) 2. Function modules unrelated to management tasks (e.g., unnecessary social features) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., excessive animations or visualizations that slow down the interface). Deduct 3 points for each redundancy found, and directly deduct 10 points if the core functions are interfered with by redundant code.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 7,
-      "title": "Does the code have engineering quality?",
-      "description": "Review modular design (such as separating business logic/UI/data access layers), unit test coverage, and build process automation. Deduct 5 points if global state pollution is found or design patterns are not used; deduct 5 points if the code duplication rate is too high (over 30%); deduct 5 points if the build process is not automated. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 8,
-      "title": "Does the interface vision meet professional design standards?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the overall design follows modern design principles: 1) Harmonious color matching suitable for a business application (professional, not flashy) 2) Proper layout spacing with consistent dashboard grid systems 3) Professional typography with clear hierarchy (titles, subtitles, body text, captions). Deduct 3 points for each cluttered screen, 5 points for inconsistent design language across modules, and 5 points for poor information hierarchy. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 9,
-      "title": "Is the dynamic interaction smooth and responsive for management workflows?",
-      "description": "Judge whether the interface responds appropriately to executive-level user needs: 1) Quick access to high-level KPIs and metrics 2) Efficient drill-down capabilities from summary to detail views 3) Responsive design that works well on both desktop and tablet devices. Deduct 5 points for slow-loading dashboards (>2 seconds), 3 points for cumbersome multi-step workflows that could be simplified, and 5 points for lack of contextual help or onboarding for complex features. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    }
-  ],
-  "class": "Management Systems-Frontend/Backend Platforms",
-  "difficulty": "hard"
-}

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

@@ -1,68 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "index": 1382,
-  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Make sure the code you generate is executable whenever possible. Could you help me write a gym membership management system?",
-  "checklist": [
-    {
-      "id": 0,
-      "title": "Is the core membership management functionality fully implemented?",
-      "description": "Check if the system includes essential member CRUD operations (Create, Read, Update, Delete), membership type definitions, and expiration handling. Score 0 if these core functions are missing, 5 if only basic operations are implemented without validation, and 10 if the system includes comprehensive membership management with proper data validation and business rules.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 1,
-      "title": "Is the payment and billing system properly implemented?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the code includes payment processing, recurring billing, invoice generation, and payment history tracking. Check for integration with payment gateways or simulation of payment workflows. Deduct 5 points if there's no payment history tracking, and 3 points if recurring billing is not handled. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 2,
-      "title": "Are gym access control and attendance tracking features included?",
-      "description": "Review whether the system implements check-in/check-out functionality, attendance reports, access restrictions based on membership status, and capacity management. Deduct 5 points if there's no visual representation of attendance data, and 3 points if membership validation at check-in is inadequate. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 3,
-      "title": "Is the class/trainer scheduling system functional?",
-      "description": "Assess if the code includes class/session scheduling, trainer assignment, member registration for classes, and conflict prevention. Check for calendar visualization, availability checking, and notification mechanisms. Deduct 3 points if there's no conflict detection, and 5 points if there's no visual calendar interface. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 4,
-      "title": "Is the code robust?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as invalid inputs, database connection failures, concurrent operations, etc.) and provide friendly error prompts or recovery mechanisms. Code with strong robustness should be able to effectively handle these edge cases, giving 10 points. If the robustness is average, give 5 points, and if no exceptions are handled, give 0 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 5,
-      "title": "Are there any innovative features that are eye-catching?",
-      "description": "Check whether the code includes surprise features that enhance the experience (e.g., 1. Fitness progress tracking 2. Membership usage analytics 3. Automated member retention tools). Add 3 points for each practical innovative feature implemented (maximum 10 points).",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 6,
-      "title": "Are there any redundant features?",
-      "description": "Strictly check three types of redundancy: 1. Redundant implementation of similar functions (e.g., multiple ways to manage the same data) 2. Function modules unrelated to gym management (e.g., a built-in game) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., unnecessary animations). Deduct 3 points for each redundancy found, and directly deduct 10 points if the core functions are interfered with by redundant code.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 7,
-      "title": "Does the code have engineering quality?",
-      "description": "Review modular design (such as separating business logic/view/data access layers), unit test coverage, and build process automation. Deduct 5 points if global state pollution is found or design patterns are not used; deduct 5 points if the code duplication rate is too high (over 30%); deduct 5 points if the build process is not automated. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 8,
-      "title": "Does the interface vision meet professional design standards?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the overall design follows modern design principles: 1) Harmonious color matching (no more than 3 primary colors) 2) Proper layout spacing (element spacing follows the 8px multiple principle) 3) Professional font system (body font size ≥ 14px, line height over 1.5 times). Deduct 3 points for each crowded visual element, 5 points for a glaring color combination, and 5 points for chaotic text-image layout. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 9,
-      "title": "Is the dynamic interaction smooth and seamless?",
-      "description": "Judge whether the dynamic effects conform to human perception characteristics: 1) Click feedback delay ≤ 100ms 2) Transition animation duration controlled between 300-500ms 3) Clear visual focus guidance. Deduct 5 points for each operation without feedback, 3 points for visual after-images during fast sliding, and 5 points for hard-to-find key function buttons. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    }
-  ],
-  "class": "Management Systems-Frontend/Backend Platforms",
-  "difficulty": "hard"
-}

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

@@ -1,68 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "index": 855,
-  "question": "You are a code expert, please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Make sure the code you produce is executable and demonstrable. Write a hair salon membership management system that includes recharging functions, entryway, and regular membership management system features.",
-  "checklist": [
-    {
-      "id": 0,
-      "title": "Is the membership management core system fully implemented?",
-      "description": "Review whether the code implements essential membership management features including member registration, profile management, membership levels, and status tracking. Score 0 if the core system is not implemented, 5 if only basic member data storage is available, and 10 if comprehensive membership lifecycle management (registration, upgrades, expiration handling) is present.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 1,
-      "title": "Is the recharging function complete and secure?",
-      "description": "Evaluate if the recharging system includes multiple payment methods, transaction records, balance history, secure payment processing with validation, and proper receipt generation. Deduct 5 points if transaction logging is missing, 3 points if payment validation is weak, and 2 points if no receipt system exists. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 2,
-      "title": "Is the entryway/check-in system properly implemented?",
-      "description": "Check if the system includes member check-in functionality, visitor tracking, appointment verification, and integration with the main system. Deduct 3 points if no real-time validation of membership status occurs at check-in, 3 points if visitor tracking is absent, and 4 points if the entryway system doesn't integrate with the appointment system. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 3,
-      "title": "Are salon-specific features and service management implemented?",
-      "description": "Verify whether the system includes salon-specific features such as service catalog, stylist scheduling, appointment booking, service history tracking, and product sales integration. Score 0 if salon operations are not implemented, 5 if only basic appointment booking exists, and 10 if comprehensive salon management features are included.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 4,
-      "title": "Is the code robust?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as invalid input data, payment failures, duplicate check-ins, concurrent transactions, etc.) and provide friendly error prompts or recovery mechanisms. Code with strong robustness should be able to effectively handle these edge cases, giving 10 points. If the robustness is average, give 5 points, and if no exceptions are handled, give 0 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 5,
-      "title": "Are there any innovative features that are eye-catching?",
-      "description": "Check whether the code includes surprise features that enhance the experience (e.g., 1. Intelligent appointment recommendations based on history 2. Personalized discount system 3. Client retention analytics 4. Integrated loyalty program with point redemption). Add 2.5 points for each practical innovative feature implemented (maximum 10 points).",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 6,
-      "title": "Are there any redundant features?",
-      "description": "Strictly check three types of redundancy: 1. Redundant implementation of similar functions (e.g., multiple user authentication systems) 2. Function modules unrelated to salon management (e.g., general social networking features) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., excessive animations in core transaction flows). Deduct 3 points for each redundancy found, and directly deduct 10 points if the core functions are interfered with by redundant code.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 7,
-      "title": "Does the code have engineering quality?",
-      "description": "Review modular design (such as separating business logic/view/data access layers), unit test coverage, and security best practices. Deduct 5 points if global state pollution is found or design patterns are not used; deduct 3 points if the code duplication rate is too high (over 30%); deduct 2 points if input sanitization is inadequate. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 8,
-      "title": "Does the interface vision meet professional design standards?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the overall design follows modern design principles: 1) Harmonious color matching (preferably using salon-appropriate colors) 2) Proper layout spacing (element spacing follows the 8px multiple principle) 3) Professional font system (body font size ≥ 14px, line height over 1.5 times) 4) Clear dashboard views with key metrics. Deduct 3 points for each crowded visual element, 5 points for a glaring color combination, and 5 points for chaotic text-image layout. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 9,
-      "title": "Is the dynamic interaction smooth and seamless?",
-      "description": "Judge whether the dynamic effects conform to human perception characteristics: 1) Check-in/payment processing feedback delay ≤ 100ms 2) Transition animation duration controlled between 300-500ms 3) Clear visual focus guidance for new customers vs. staff interfaces. Deduct 5 points for each operation without feedback, 3 points for visual after-images during fast navigation, and 5 points for hard-to-find key function buttons. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    }
-  ],
-  "class": "Management Systems-Frontend/Backend Platforms",
-  "difficulty": "medium"
-}