@getollie/cli 0.0.5 → 0.2.0

package/library/management_systems-frontend_backend_platforms/webpage-queue-number-system.json

@@ -1,68 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "index": 1384,
-  "question": "You are a code expert, please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Pay attention to ensure the code you generate is executable for demonstration. Develop a queue number system webpage using HTML+JavaScript.",
-  "checklist": [
-    {
-      "id": 0,
-      "title": "Is the core queue management system fully implemented?",
-      "description": "Review whether the code accurately implements queue data structures and operations (enqueue, dequeue, display current/next number). Score 0 if the core queue logic is not implemented, 5 if basic queue operations exist but lack proper state management, and 10 if the complete queue lifecycle with appropriate events is handled.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 1,
-      "title": "Are the essential UI components for a queue system present?",
-      "description": "Check if the interface includes: current number display, next number button, new ticket generation, queue status indicator, and estimated wait time. Deduct 2 points for each missing essential component. The interface should clearly distinguish between customer view and service counter view. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 2,
-      "title": "Is the queue number generation and tracking mechanism implemented?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the system generates unique sequential numbers, maintains correct queue order, and properly handles number transitions. Deduct 3 points if uniqueness isn't guaranteed, 4 points if the queue order can be corrupted, and 3 points if there's no visual indication of state changes when numbers advance. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 3,
-      "title": "Is data persistence implemented for queue state?",
-      "description": "Check if the queue state persists across page refreshes (via localStorage, sessionStorage, or similar). Verify that queue history is maintained and that the system can recover from browser refreshes without losing state. Award 0 points if no persistence exists, 5 points for basic persistence, and 10 points for comprehensive state management with history.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 4,
-      "title": "Is the code robust?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as rapid clicking, out-of-sequence operations, browser storage limitations, 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. Audio announcements for next numbers 2. Visual estimation of waiting times 3. Priority queue handling for special cases 4. Real-time statistics dashboard). 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 reset the queue) 2. Function modules unrelated to queue management (e.g., a built-in calculator) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., excessive animations when numbers change). 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 queue logic/UI/storage layers), code organization, and maintainability. Deduct 5 points if global state pollution is found or design patterns are not used; deduct 5 points if the code duplication rate is too high (over 30%); deduct 5 points if there's no clear separation between business logic and presentation. 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 for number changes between 300-500ms 3) Clear visual focus on the current serving number. Deduct 5 points for each operation without feedback, 3 points for jarring transitions when updating queue numbers, and 5 points for confusing UI state during queue operations. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    }
-  ],
-  "class": "Management Systems-Frontend/Backend Platforms",
-  "difficulty": "easy"
-}

package/library/management_systems-frontend_backend_platforms/webpage-video-image-text-content-sharing.json

@@ -1,68 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "index": 1119,
-  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Be sure to ensure that the code you generate is executable. Develop a web page that allows users to upload videos and images, edit text, and distribute content to other computers on the same local area network. Please list each step in detail and provide the script code required for each implementation step.",
-  "checklist": [
-    {
-      "id": 0,
-      "title": "Is the file upload system correctly implemented?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the code includes proper HTML5 file input controls with multiple file selection capabilities, file type validation (MIME type checking for images/videos), and progress indicators during upload. Check if client-side validation prevents exceeding maximum file sizes. Deduct 5 points if only basic file selection is implemented without validation, 3 points if progress indicators are missing, and 3 points if there's no handling for large files. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 1,
-      "title": "Is the media preview functionality properly implemented?",
-      "description": "Verify that uploaded images can be displayed with proper scaling/cropping options, and videos have functional preview with basic playback controls. Check if the implementation handles various image formats (JPEG, PNG, GIF, WebP) and video codecs (MP4, WebM). Deduct 3 points if preview is basic without editing capabilities, 5 points if video previews don't work across browsers, and 2 points if there's no thumbnail generation. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 2,
-      "title": "Is the text editing capability comprehensive?",
-      "description": "Assess whether the text editor includes rich text formatting (bold, italic, lists, headings), text styling options (font, size, color), and proper content layout controls. Verify that the editor handles text alongside uploaded media elements. Score 0 if only plain text input is available, 5 if basic formatting exists without media integration, and 10 if there's a complete WYSIWYG editor with media placement capabilities. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 3,
-      "title": "Is the local network content distribution mechanism implemented?",
-      "description": "Review the implementation of local network discovery and content sharing. Check if WebRTC, WebSockets or similar technologies are used for peer-to-peer communication, or if a lightweight server solution is implemented. Evaluate network discovery methods (like mDNS, SSDP or manual IP input). Deduct 5 points if only the server code exists without client discovery, 3 points if security measures are absent, and 3 points if distribution is one-way only without acknowledgment. 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 upload failures, network interruption, 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 experience (e.g., 1. Real-time collaborative editing 2. Automatic media optimization 3. Offline mode with synchronization when reconnected). 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 file upload methods coexisting) 2. Function modules unrelated to content sharing (e.g., a built-in game) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., excessive animations). Deduct 3 points for each redundancy found, and directly deduct 10 points if the core functions are interfered with by redundant code.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 7,
-      "title": "Does the code have engineering quality?",
-      "description": "Review modular design (such as separating UI/network/storage layers), unit test coverage, and build process automation. Deduct 5 points if global state pollution is found or design patterns are not used; deduct 5 points if the code duplication rate is too high (over 30%); deduct 5 points if the build process is not automated. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 8,
-      "title": "Does the interface vision meet professional design standards?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the overall design follows modern design 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/website-login-approval-data-query-pages.json

@@ -1,68 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "index": 822,
-  "question": "You are a coding expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Make sure that the code you generate is executable for demonstration. Design a website structure with a login page, an approval page, a data entry page, and a query page.",
-  "checklist": [
-    {
-      "id": 0,
-      "title": "Is the login page implementation complete and secure?",
-      "description": "Check whether the login page implements proper authentication mechanisms, including input validation, secure password handling (hashing), CSRF protection, and proper error messages. Score 0 if basic authentication is missing, 5 if it has basic validation but lacks security features, and 10 if it includes all security best practices including rate limiting and proper session management.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 1,
-      "title": "Is the approval page workflow properly implemented?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the approval page includes user role verification, approval hierarchy, status tracking, and notification systems. The code should handle different approval states (pending, approved, rejected) and maintain an audit trail. Score 0 if the approval logic is missing, 5 if basic approval functionality exists but lacks comprehensive workflow, and 10 if it includes complete workflow with notifications and history tracking.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 2,
-      "title": "Is the data entry page functional and user-friendly?",
-      "description": "Assess the data entry page for proper form validation (client and server-side), data sanitization, field constraints, and user feedback. The implementation should include handling for different input types and proper error messages. Deduct 5 points if client-side validation is missing, 3 points if there's no feedback on submission, and 2 points if complex inputs (like dates, numbers) aren't properly handled.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 3,
-      "title": "Is the query page search functionality comprehensive?",
-      "description": "Check if the query page implements efficient search algorithms, pagination, sorting capabilities, filters, and exports results in useful formats. Evaluate the search response time and result display. Score 0 if basic search is missing, 5 if it has basic search without advanced features, and 10 if it includes comprehensive search with optimization for large datasets and multiple export options.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 4,
-      "title": "Is the code robust?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as invalid inputs, server errors, network interruptions, 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. Dark mode toggle 2. Dashboard with usage analytics 3. Progressive Web App capabilities 4. Accessibility features). 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 systems coexisting) 2. Function modules unrelated to the core website requirements 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., excessive animations or large media files). 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 components, services/API calls, and state management), code 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 the build process is not automated or lacks proper configuration. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 8,
-      "title": "Does the interface vision meet professional design standards?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the overall design follows modern design principles: 1) Harmonious color matching (no more than 3 primary colors) 2) Proper layout spacing (element spacing follows the 8px multiple principle) 3) Professional font system (body font size ≥ 14px, line height over 1.5 times) 4) Consistent design language across all pages. Deduct 3 points for each crowded visual element, 5 points for a glaring color combination, and 5 points for chaotic text-image layout. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 9,
-      "title": "Is the dynamic interaction smooth and seamless?",
-      "description": "Judge whether the dynamic effects conform to human perception characteristics: 1) Click feedback delay ≤ 100ms 2) Transition animation duration controlled between 300-500ms 3) Clear visual focus guidance 4) Consistent navigation patterns across pages. Deduct 5 points for each operation without feedback, 3 points for visual after-images during page transitions, and 5 points for hard-to-find key function buttons. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    }
-  ],
-  "class": "Management Systems-Frontend/Backend Platforms",
-  "difficulty": "hard"
-}

package/library/management_systems-frontend_backend_platforms/wechat-alipay-developer-platform.json

@@ -1,68 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "index": 1523,
-  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Be sure to ensure that any code you generate is executable for demonstration. What I need is something similar to the WeChat Pay developer platform or Alipay developer platform.",
-  "checklist": [
-    {
-      "id": 0,
-      "title": "Is the payment gateway API integration fully implemented?",
-      "description": "Review whether the code accurately implements standard payment gateway protocols (RESTful or SOAP), includes proper authentication mechanisms (OAuth 2.0, API keys, or digital signatures), and handles payment lifecycles (initiation, confirmation, refund). Score 0 if the core payment API integration is missing, 5 if only basic payment flow is implemented without security considerations, and 10 if all standard payment protocols with proper security measures are included.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 1,
-      "title": "Are the developer authentication and authorization mechanisms implemented?",
-      "description": "Check whether the platform includes a complete developer onboarding process, sandbox environment, API key management system, and permission control. Deduct 5 points if multi-environment support (development, testing, production) is missing, and 3 points if there's no mechanism for API usage monitoring and rate limiting. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 2,
-      "title": "Is the payment notification and callback system properly designed?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the system implements asynchronous notification mechanisms (webhooks), includes signature verification for callbacks, has retry logic for failed notifications, and provides a notification history dashboard. Deduct 5 points if notification verification is weak or missing, and 3 points if there's no retry mechanism for failed notifications. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 3,
-      "title": "Is the developer documentation and SDK implementation complete?",
-      "description": "Check whether the code includes comprehensive API documentation, interactive API explorers, code samples in multiple languages, and well-structured SDKs. Deduct 5 points if the documentation lacks practical examples, 3 points if there's no interactive testing capability, and 5 points if SDKs for major programming languages are missing. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 4,
-      "title": "Is the code robust?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as network timeouts, invalid parameters, duplicate transactions, etc.) and provide meaningful error codes with documentation. Code with strong robustness should implement idempotency for payment operations, transaction reconciliation mechanisms, and proper exception handling, 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 payment analytics dashboard 2. Fraud detection system with machine learning 3. Interactive transaction flow visualization 4. Multi-currency support with automatic exchange rates). 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 payment flows (e.g., multiple checkout processes coexisting) 2. Function modules unrelated to payment processing (e.g., a built-in social media feed) 3. Heavy UI elements that affect performance (e.g., unnecessary animations in transaction processing screens). Deduct 3 points for each redundancy found, and directly deduct 10 points if the core payment 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/business logic/data layers), unit test coverage especially for payment calculation logic, 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 developer portal design follows modern design principles: 1) Harmonious color matching that aligns with financial services (professional blues, whites, with accent colors) 2) Proper layout spacing for clear data visualization (8px grid system) 3) Professional typography system (readable monospace fonts for code samples, minimum 14px body text). Deduct 3 points for each crowded visual element, 5 points for inconsistent branding elements, and 5 points for poor information hierarchy. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 9,
-      "title": "Is the dynamic interaction smooth and seamless?",
-      "description": "Judge whether the developer platform interactions prioritize clarity and efficiency: 1) API response time indicators 2) Clear loading states for all asynchronous operations 3) Intuitive navigation between documentation, sandbox testing, and production monitoring. Deduct 5 points for operations lacking feedback, 3 points for confusing navigation patterns, and 5 points for critical functions (like API key generation) that lack confirmation dialogs. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    }
-  ],
-  "class": "Management Systems-Frontend/Backend Platforms",
-  "difficulty": "hard"
-}

package/library/management_systems-frontend_backend_platforms/wechat-expense-tracking-mini-program.json

@@ -1,68 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "index": 931,
-  "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. Generate basic code for a WeChat expense tracking mini-program, including a bill recording page and category selection functionality.",
-  "checklist": [
-    {
-      "id": 0,
-      "title": "Is the bill recording functionality fully implemented?",
-      "description": "Check if the code implements a complete bill recording system with amount input, date selection, category selection, and note/remarks field. Evaluate whether form validation is properly implemented (e.g., non-empty amount, valid date format). Score 0 if core recording functionality is missing, 5 if basic input is implemented but lacks validation, and 10 if all recording features are properly implemented with appropriate validation.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 1,
-      "title": "Is the category selection feature properly implemented?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the category system includes both income and expense categories with appropriate subcategories (at least 5 expense categories and 3 income categories). Check if the UI provides visual indicators for different categories (icons) and allows for easy selection. Deduct 3 points if categories are hardcoded without customization options, 5 points if the category selection UI is cumbersome, and 3 points if category icons/visual indicators are missing. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 2,
-      "title": "Is local data persistence implemented for bills?",
-      "description": "Check if the mini-program properly utilizes WeChat's storage APIs (wx.setStorage/wx.getStorage) or cloud database to save and retrieve bill data. Evaluate whether the code handles storage exceptions and implements data backup. Deduct 5 points if bills aren't persisted between app restarts, 3 points if there's no error handling for storage operations, and 3 points if there's no data migration strategy. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 3,
-      "title": "Does the mini-program implement basic bill statistics/visualization?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the code includes basic statistical features such as daily/monthly/yearly expense summaries, category-based spending breakdowns, or simple charts (pie charts, bar graphs). Deduct 5 points if no statistics are implemented, 3 points if only text-based summaries exist without visualizations, and 2 points if the statistics lack filtering options. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 4,
-      "title": "Is the code robust?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as invalid inputs, network interruption when syncing, storage limits, 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. Voice input for quick expense recording 2. OCR receipt scanning 3. Budget alerts/notifications 4. Expense sharing with contacts). 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 type of expense) 2. Function modules unrelated to expense tracking (e.g., a built-in game) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., excessive animations that slow down the UI). 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/business logic/data layers), consistent naming conventions, and reusable components. Deduct 5 points if global state is poorly managed; deduct 5 points if the code duplication rate is too high (over 30%); deduct 5 points if there's no component isolation between pages. 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 WeChat mini-program design principles: 1) Consistent with WeChat's visual language (font, spacing, colors) 2) Clean and minimal UI with appropriate whitespace 3) Proper use of WeChat UI components rather than custom implementations. Deduct 3 points for each UI element that doesn't match WeChat's style guidelines, 5 points for cluttered screens with poor information hierarchy, and 5 points for non-standard input controls. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 9,
-      "title": "Is the dynamic interaction smooth and seamless?",
-      "description": "Judge whether the page transitions and interactions follow WeChat mini-program conventions: 1) Quick response to taps (≤ 100ms) 2) Smooth transitions between pages 3) Appropriate loading indicators for async operations. Deduct 5 points for each operation without feedback, 3 points for jittery animations or transitions, and 5 points for non-intuitive navigation patterns. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    }
-  ],
-  "class": "Management Systems-Frontend/Backend Platforms",
-  "difficulty": "easy"
-}

package/library/management_systems-frontend_backend_platforms/wechat-mini-program-furniture-configurator.json

@@ -1,68 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "index": 418,
-  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Try to ensure that the generated code is executable for demonstration. I am refining my master's thesis, which mainly focuses on: exploring user needs through multiple dimensions and designing responses accordingly. The primary method involves analyzing user interview records and online review data using text data analysis to understand users' basic requirements for customized furniture, and on this basis, conducting research on both structural and aesthetic aspects of customized furniture configuration design. For the structural module configuration of customized furniture, association rule mining algorithms are used to deeply extract component association rules from the company's historical sales records, thereby building a rule base for customized furniture component configuration and forming customized furniture configuration modules categorized by functionality. For the aesthetic configuration design of customized furniture, eye-tracking experiments are conducted to study users' intuitive search mechanisms when observing customized furniture in both single-element stimuli and composite scene stimuli, and to classify users according to their subjective style preferences and objective visual preferences. Finally, combining the results of structural and aesthetic configuration design research, a recommendation system for customized furniture configuration design is built based on a rule engine. Currently, I have reached the system-building stage and plan to present it as a WeChat Mini Program. I have already registered with APPAid. As I have no coding background, I need specific and detailed implementation guidance from the beginning. My current plan for the Mini Program consists of eight steps: 1. User selects the required cabinet function, including wardrobe, entrance cabinet, sideboard, bookcase, storage cabinet, and display cabinet. 2. User selects the number of cabinet units needed: 1, 2, 3, or 4 units. 3. User selects the structural form for each unit, which are pre-established 3D models. 4. Multiple units are combined to display the result. 5. User selects preferred styles, with options including natural, bright, minimalist, vintage, warm, comfortable, and modern, and can select two. 6. Based on the selected styles, recommend colors or textures for the cabinet and map them to the 3D model. 7. Display the result with 3D rotation interaction capability. 8. If unsatisfied, allow further customization of colors and textures.",
-  "checklist": [
-    {
-      "id": 0,
-      "title": "Is the cabinet function selection module fully implemented?",
-      "description": "Review whether the code accurately implements the cabinet function selection system (wardrobe, entrance cabinet, sideboard, bookcase, storage cabinet, and display cabinet) with clear visual differentiation and proper descriptions. Check if the selection mechanism includes proper state management and validation.Score 0 if the cabinet function selection is not implemented, 5 if only basic selection without descriptions or visual previews is implemented, and 10 if comprehensive selection with visual previews, descriptions, and smooth transitions is included.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 1,
-      "title": "Is the unit number and structural form selection fully functional?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the code properly implements the unit number selection (1-4 units) and structural form selection for each unit with appropriate validation. Check if pre-established 3D models are properly loaded and displayed for different structural forms, and whether the selection interface is intuitive.Score 0 if the unit selection is missing, 5 if basic selection is implemented but lacks visual feedback or has rendering issues, and 10 if the selection process is smooth with proper validation, visual feedback, and efficient 3D model loading.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 2,
-      "title": "Is the multi-unit combination display system properly implemented?",
-      "description": "Check whether the code correctly implements the combination of multiple unit selections into a cohesive display. Verify that the 3D models are properly aligned, scaled, and rendered together, and that the combined view maintains proper perspective and lighting consistency.Score 0 if multi-unit combination is not implemented, 5 if basic combination is implemented but with alignment/scaling issues or rendering artifacts, and 10 if seamless combination with proper alignment, consistent lighting, and optimized rendering is achieved.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 3,
-      "title": "Is the style selection and texture mapping system functional?",
-      "description": "Review whether the code implements the style selection system (natural, bright, minimalist, vintage, warm, comfortable, modern) with proper multi-selection capability (2 styles max). Check if the recommendation engine correctly maps selected styles to appropriate colors/textures and applies them to the 3D models with proper material rendering.Score 0 if style selection and texture mapping are not implemented, 5 if basic selection exists but recommendation or texture mapping is flawed, and 10 if comprehensive style selection with accurate recommendations and high-quality texture mapping is included.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 4,
-      "title": "Is the code robust?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as network interruptions during 3D model loading, invalid user selections, WebGL context loss, device compatibility issues) 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. AR room preview of the furniture 2. User-friendly measurement guidance 3. Social sharing capabilities with personalized configurations 4. Cost estimation based on selected components).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 style selection methods coexisting) 2. Function modules unrelated to furniture customization (e.g., a built-in game) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., unnecessary particle 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 3D rendering/business logic/UI layers), asset loading optimization, and WeChat Mini Program best practices adherence. Examine 3D model optimization techniques and rendering performance.Deduct 3 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 4 points if 3D assets are not optimized for mobile rendering. 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 aligned with furniture design aesthetics 2) Proper layout spacing following WeChat Mini Program design guidelines 3) Professional font system suitable for furniture customization context.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 3D interaction smooth and responsive?",
-      "description": "Judge whether the 3D model rotation and customization interactions conform to user expectations: 1) Rotation gestures respond within 50ms 2) Texture/color changes render within 200ms 3) Clear visual feedback during all interactions 4) Proper optimization for mobile devices.Deduct 3 points for each interaction without proper feedback, 5 points for noticeable frame rate drops during interaction, and 5 points for unintuitive 3D manipulation controls. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    }
-  ],
-  "class": "Management Systems-Frontend/Backend Platforms",
-  "difficulty": "hard"
-}

package/library/management_systems-frontend_backend_platforms/wechat-mini-program-library-management-system.json

@@ -1,68 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "index": 1329,
-  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Be careful to ensure that the code you generate is executable and can be demonstrated. Create a WeChat Mini Program that functions as a library management system.",
-  "checklist": [
-    {
-      "id": 0,
-      "title": "Is the core library management functionality fully implemented?",
-      "description": "Review whether the code implements essential library functions including book cataloging, user management, borrowing/returning processes, and search functionality. Score 0 if core functionality is missing, 5 if only basic operations are implemented, and 10 if the system includes advanced features like reservation, fine calculation, and due date notifications.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 1,
-      "title": "Is the Mini Program architecture properly structured for WeChat environment?",
-      "description": "Check whether the code follows WeChat Mini Program architecture conventions with appropriate page structure (WXML, WXSS, JS, JSON files), correct App and Page lifecycle management, and proper use of WeChat APIs. Deduct 5 points if the project structure doesn't follow WeChat standards, 3 points if lifecycle events are improperly handled. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 2,
-      "title": "Is the data persistence and synchronization mechanism properly implemented?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the code utilizes appropriate storage methods (cloud database, local storage, caching) for different data requirements. Verify if data synchronization between local and cloud is correctly implemented with conflict resolution strategies. Deduct 5 points if offline capability is missing, 3 points if data validation is inadequate. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 3,
-      "title": "Is the WeChat user authentication and authorization properly integrated?",
-      "description": "Assess implementation of WeChat login, OpenID usage, and proper permission handling for user information access. Check if the application handles different user roles (admin, librarian, regular user) correctly. Deduct 5 points for insecure authentication, 3 points for missing role-based access control. 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 interruption, invalid input, missing book information, etc.) and provide friendly error prompts or recovery mechanisms. Code with strong robustness should be able to effectively handle these edge cases, giving 10 points. If the robustness is average, give 5 points, and if no exceptions are handled, give 0 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 5,
-      "title": "Are there any innovative features that are eye-catching?",
-      "description": "Check whether the code includes surprise features that enhance the experience (e.g., 1. Book recommendation based on borrowing history 2. Barcode/QR code scanning for quick checkout 3. Social sharing of reading lists). 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 user profile systems coexisting) 2. Function modules unrelated to library management (e.g., a built-in game) 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/service/UI layers), component reusability, and code maintainability. Deduct 5 points if global state is poorly managed; deduct 5 points if the code duplication rate is too high (over 30%); deduct 5 points if naming conventions are inconsistent or unclear. 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 WeChat design language and principles: 1) Consistent with WeChat UI components and style 2) Proper layout spacing and information hierarchy 3) Professional typography with appropriate font sizes. Deduct 3 points for inconsistent UI elements, 5 points for cluttered information layout, and 5 points for poor readability. 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 WeChat Mini Program standards and user expectations: 1) Responsive touch feedback 2) Smooth page transitions and loading states 3) Clear visual indicators for system status. Deduct 5 points for laggy interactions, 3 points for missing loading indicators during data fetching, and 5 points for confusing navigation patterns. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    }
-  ],
-  "class": "Management Systems-Frontend/Backend Platforms",
-  "difficulty": "medium"
-}

package/library/management_systems-frontend_backend_platforms/wechat-mini-program-property-management-frontend.json

@@ -1,68 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "index": 920,
-  "question": "You are a code expert, please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate, professional responses. Pay attention to ensuring that the generated code is executable for demonstration. Please provide code for the frontend page design of a property management system based on WeChat Mini Program.",
-  "checklist": [
-    {
-      "id": 0,
-      "title": "Is the Mini Program structure complete with necessary configuration files?",
-      "description": "Review whether the code includes the essential WeChat Mini Program configuration files (app.json, app.wxss, app.js, project.config.json) with proper global settings. Check if page registration is correctly implemented in app.json with appropriate window configuration. Deduct 5 points if global configuration is missing, 3 points for incomplete page registration. Score 10 points if all configurations are properly implemented with optimization for property management scenarios.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 1,
-      "title": "Are the core property management features implemented?",
-      "description": "Evaluate if the code implements essential property management features: property listing/details, payment management, maintenance requests, announcements, and user profile management. Score 0 if core features are missing, 5 points if only basic features exist, and 10 points if all essential features with proper CRUD operations are implemented. Check for proper API integration points even if backend implementations are not included.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 2,
-      "title": "Is the WeChat Mini Program component utilization appropriate?",
-      "description": "Check whether the code effectively utilizes built-in WeChat components (wx-swiper, wx-tab, wx-form, etc.) instead of reinventing with custom implementations. Validate proper usage of component lifecycle hooks and data binding. Deduct 3 points for each major feature implemented without appropriate WeChat components, and 5 points if custom implementations negatively impact performance. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 3,
-      "title": "Is the WeChat authorization and user login flow correctly implemented?",
-      "description": "Assess if the code includes proper WeChat authorization flow using wx.login(), handles session management, and implements secure storage of user credentials. Check for proper error handling during login failures and session expiration. Deduct 5 points if authorization is missing, 3 points if error handling is incomplete. Give 10 points if the implementation follows WeChat's best practices including silent login and refreshing mechanisms.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 4,
-      "title": "Is the code robust?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as network failures, API errors, invalid input data, 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. OCR-based meter reading submission 2. AI-based maintenance issue identification 3. WeChat payment integration with automatic receipt generation). Add 3 points for each practical innovative feature implemented (maximum 10 points).",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 6,
-      "title": "Are there any redundant features?",
-      "description": "Strictly check three types of redundancy: 1. Redundant implementation of similar functions (e.g., multiple notification systems) 2. Function modules unrelated to property management (e.g., built-in games) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., excessive animations on property listings). 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 components, logic, and API services), component reusability, and appropriate file organization following WeChat Mini Program conventions. Deduct 5 points if global state management is chaotic; deduct 5 points if the code duplication rate is too high (over 30%); deduct 5 points if custom components lack proper encapsulation and documentation. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 8,
-      "title": "Does the interface vision meet professional design standards?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the overall design follows WeChat Mini Program design principles: 1) Consistent with WeChat's visual language and component styles 2) Proper layout spacing and responsive design for different device sizes 3) Professional typography system consistent with WeChat standards. Deduct 3 points for each inconsistent visual element, 5 points for non-standard component styling, and 5 points for layouts that break on different screen sizes. 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 WeChat Mini Program performance standards: 1) Page transitions complete within 300ms 2) List rendering optimized with recycleView for property listings 3) Lazy loading for image-heavy pages. Deduct 5 points for janky scrolling, 3 points for unoptimized list rendering causing frame drops, and 5 points for blocking operations in the UI thread. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    }
-  ],
-  "class": "Management Systems-Frontend/Backend Platforms",
-  "difficulty": "easy"
-}