@getollie/cli 0.0.5 → 0.2.0

package/library/management_systems-hardware_management/hardware-repair-management-system.json

@@ -1,68 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "index": 554,
-  "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. Develop a hardware repair management system where employees can submit hardware repair requests through a frontend interface, filling in hardware name, fault description, and application time. The system should display the status of all repair requests (pending, in progress, completed). Administrators (username: repairadmin, password: repair999) can assign repair personnel and update repair status.",
-  "checklist": [
-    {
-      "id": 0,
-      "title": "Is the basic hardware repair request submission functionality implemented?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the code implements a complete submission form with fields for hardware name, fault description, and application time. The form should include input validation (required fields, character limits, date format validation). Score 0 if the core submission functionality is missing, 5 if basic form is implemented without validation, and 10 if the form is complete with comprehensive validation and user feedback.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 1,
-      "title": "Is the repair request status display system implemented?",
-      "description": "Check if the application properly displays all repair requests with their statuses (pending, in progress, completed). Evaluate whether the status display includes visual indicators (color coding, icons), sorting/filtering capabilities, and real-time or periodic updates. Deduct 3 points if status transitions aren't visually clear, 4 points if filtering/sorting is absent, and 3 points if the display isn't responsive. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 2,
-      "title": "Is the administrator authentication system properly implemented?",
-      "description": "Verify if the system implements secure login for administrators with the specified credentials (username: repairadmin, password: repair999). Check for proper authentication mechanisms, session management, and protection against common security vulnerabilities (SQL injection, XSS, CSRF). Deduct 5 points if authentication is missing or insecure, 3 points if session management is weak, and 2 points if security best practices aren't followed. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 3,
-      "title": "Are the administrative functions for repair management implemented?",
-      "description": "Assess whether administrators can assign repair personnel and update repair statuses through a dedicated interface. Check if the admin dashboard provides a comprehensive view of all requests, assignment functionality, status update options, and potentially repair history/analytics. Deduct 4 points if assignment functionality is missing, 3 points if status updates aren't implemented, and 3 points if the admin view lacks necessary information density. 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 form validation failures, network interruptions, concurrent requests, permission violations, 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 notifications for status changes 2. Equipment categorization with image thumbnails 3. Repair history visualization/analytics 4. Automated follow-up scheduling). 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 status update mechanisms) 2. Function modules unrelated to repair management (e.g., a built-in weather widget) 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 backend/frontend, data/logic/presentation layers), unit test coverage, and build process automation. Deduct 5 points if global state pollution is found or design patterns are not used; deduct 5 points if the code duplication rate is too high (over 30%); deduct 5 points if the build process is not automated. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 8,
-      "title": "Does the interface vision meet professional design standards?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the overall design follows modern design principles: 1) Harmonious color matching (no more than 3 primary colors) 2) Proper layout spacing (element spacing follows the 8px multiple principle) 3) Professional form design (consistent field widths, clear hierarchy). Deduct 3 points for each crowded visual element, 5 points for a glaring color combination, and 5 points for chaotic form layouts. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 9,
-      "title": "Is the dynamic interaction smooth and seamless?",
-      "description": "Judge whether the dynamic effects conform to human perception characteristics: 1) Submit/update feedback delay ≤ 100ms 2) Status transition animations controlled between 300-500ms 3) Clear visual focus guidance for form fields and actions. Deduct 5 points for each operation without feedback, 3 points for jarring transitions between views, and 5 points for hard-to-find key function buttons. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    }
-  ],
-  "class": "Management Systems-Hardware Management",
-  "difficulty": "medium"
-}

package/library/management_systems-hardware_management/hmi-hydraulic-baler-7inch-800x480.json

@@ -1,68 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "index": 1372,
-  "question": "You are a code expert, please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Be sure to ensure that the generated code is executable for demonstration. Hello, I need to create an HMI for a hydraulic baler. Please make a demo for me. This HMI is a 7-inch resistive touchscreen with a resolution of 800*480.",
-  "checklist": [
-    {
-      "id": 0,
-      "title": "Is the HMI interface design optimized for a 7-inch resistive touchscreen?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the interface elements are appropriately sized for finger touch (minimum 40x40px touch targets) on a resistive screen, and if the layout properly utilizes the 800x480 resolution. Button spacing should be at least 10px to prevent mis-touches common with resistive screens. Deduct 5 points if touch targets are too small, 5 points if elements extend beyond screen boundaries, and 5 points if text is illegible at normal viewing distance for industrial equipment. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 1,
-      "title": "Are the hydraulic baler control functions fully implemented?",
-      "description": "Check if the HMI includes essential hydraulic baler controls such as start/stop buttons, pressure monitoring, bale density adjustment, emergency stop function, and cycle monitoring. Score 0 if core baler functions are missing, 5 if only basic controls are implemented, and 10 if comprehensive control including safety interlocks, pressure regulation, and operational modes (automatic/manual) are included. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 2,
-      "title": "Is real-time system monitoring and visualization implemented?",
-      "description": "Assess whether the interface displays critical real-time data like hydraulic pressure, cylinder position, motor status, and system temperature with appropriate gauges, indicators or trend graphs. Verify that visualization updates at appropriate intervals (≤500ms for critical parameters). Deduct 5 points if visualizations are static/non-updating, 3 points if update frequency is inadequate, and 5 points if key operational parameters are missing. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 3,
-      "title": "Are alarm management and error handling systems properly designed?",
-      "description": "Evaluate the implementation of alarm prioritization, visual/audible notifications for critical issues (pressure anomalies, motor overload, safety breaches), and troubleshooting guidance. Verify that errors are logged with timestamps and that the system provides clear recovery instructions. Deduct 5 points if alarms lack prioritization, 3 points if visual distinction between alarm levels is poor, and 5 points if no error logging mechanism exists. 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 sensor failures, communication interruptions, touch misalignments, rapid repeated presses) and provide appropriate error handling 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. User-customizable dashboard layout 2. Integrated maintenance scheduling 3. Multi-language support with automatic detection 4. Gesture controls for common actions). 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 access the same controls) 2. Function modules unrelated to baler operation (e.g., unnecessary entertainment features) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance on limited industrial hardware (e.g., complex 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/control logic/data processing layers), code maintainability for industrial settings, and efficient use of limited hardware resources. Deduct 5 points if global state pollution is found; deduct 5 points if the code is not optimized for the limited processing power of industrial HMIs; deduct 5 points if the code lacks proper documentation for maintenance technicians. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 8,
-      "title": "Does the interface vision meet industrial HMI design standards?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the design follows industrial HMI principles: 1) High contrast colors suitable for varying light conditions 2) Consistent status indicator placement 3) Use of industrial-standard iconography 4) Glare-resistant color schemes for shop floor environments. Deduct 3 points for poor contrast that affects readability, 5 points for non-standard symbols that could cause operator confusion, and 5 points for cluttered screens that hinder quick information scanning. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 9,
-      "title": "Is the dynamic interaction appropriate for industrial use?",
-      "description": "Judge whether the interactions are suitable for industrial environments: 1) Confirmation dialogs for critical operations 2) Touch feedback appropriate for gloved operation 3) Visible system status at all times. Deduct 5 points for lack of operation confirmation for critical functions, 3 points for touch targets requiring precise touching unsuitable for gloved hands, and 5 points for operations requiring more than 3 steps to access emergency functions. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    }
-  ],
-  "class": "Management Systems-Hardware Management",
-  "difficulty": "medium"
-}

package/library/management_systems-hardware_management/html-server-monitoring-dashboard.json

@@ -1,68 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "index": 755,
-  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Make sure the generated code is executable. HTML page is required to display the following information: IP address, deployed services (e.g., Gateway*1, Worker ID*2), CPU utilization, and memory utilization.",
-  "checklist": [
-    {
-      "id": 0,
-      "title": "Is the IP address information correctly implemented?",
-      "description": "Check if the code properly fetches and displays the server's IP address information. It should use reliable methods like server-side APIs or JavaScript's fetch to retrieve this data. Score 0 if IP address is hardcoded or missing, 5 if it's implemented but without validation or formatting, and 10 if properly implemented with IPv4/IPv6 support and proper formatting.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 1,
-      "title": "Are the deployed services (Gateway, Worker ID) properly displayed?",
-      "description": "Verify that the code properly retrieves and displays the Gateway and Worker ID information. Check whether it uses appropriate server-side data sources or API endpoints. Deduct 5 points if service information is hardcoded, 3 points if only partial service information is shown. Full score requires dynamic service discovery with proper error handling when services are unavailable.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 2,
-      "title": "Is CPU utilization monitoring implemented correctly?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the code includes accurate CPU utilization monitoring with appropriate data retrieval methods (server-side metrics API or JavaScript performance APIs). Check for real-time updates (using WebSockets or polling). Deduct 5 points if utilization data is simulated, 3 points if updates are too infrequent (>10s), and 3 points if there's no historical trending. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 3,
-      "title": "Is memory utilization monitoring implemented correctly?",
-      "description": "Check if the code properly retrieves and displays memory utilization data with appropriate units (MB/GB), percentage indicators, and visualization. Deduct 5 points if memory metrics are simulated, 3 points if there's no distinction between different memory types (heap/non-heap or used/available), and 3 points if there's no warning mechanism for high memory usage. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 4,
-      "title": "Is the code robust?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as network errors, API failures, missing 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. Auto-refresh with configurable intervals 2. Visual alerts for abnormal metrics 3. Interactive graphs showing historical data). Add 3 points for each practical innovative feature implemented (maximum 10 points).",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 6,
-      "title": "Are there any redundant features?",
-      "description": "Strictly check three types of redundancy: 1. Redundant implementation of similar functions (e.g., multiple ways to fetch the same metrics) 2. Function modules unrelated to system monitoring (e.g., unnecessary UI elements) 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 data retrieval/processing/visualization layers), error handling patterns, and code 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 separation between data retrieval and presentation layers. 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) Data refresh doesn't interrupt user interaction 2) Loading states shown during data retrieval 3) Smooth transitions when data changes. Deduct 5 points for each refresh that disrupts user experience, 3 points for missing loading indicators, and 5 points for jarring data transitions. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    }
-  ],
-  "class": "Management Systems-Hardware Management",
-  "difficulty": "medium"
-}

package/library/management_systems-hardware_management/kubernetes-monitoring-dashboard-features.json

@@ -1,68 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "index": 371,
-  "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 for demonstration. Tech stack: React + Ant Design + AntV\n\n1. Cluster status monitoring - Implement dynamic topology diagrams using AntV G6 to display Kubernetes node relationships. Support fault propagation analysis. Utilize ECharts to visualize memory/CPU/GPU utilization rates with alert capabilities when thresholds are exceeded.\n\n2. Support cross-time period data overlay comparison - Develop functionality that allows users to compare monitoring metrics across different time periods by overlaying multiple datasets on the same visualization, enabling trend analysis and anomaly detection.\n\n3. Develop alert rule configuration forms - Implement dynamic form rendering that adapts based on selected parameters. Support complex condition configuration with nested logical operators, threshold settings, and multi-metric correlation rules.\n\n4. Implement monitoring data filtering panel - Create an advanced filtering system with date selectors and multi-dimensional condition combination queries that allow users to precisely locate the data they need across various metrics and node categories.\n\n5. Real-time monitoring dashboard - Design and implement a comprehensive dashboard with auto-refreshing widgets, customizable layouts, and drill-down capabilities that allow users to navigate from high-level cluster views to detailed node-specific metrics.",
-  "checklist": [
-    {
-      "id": 0,
-      "title": "Is the dynamic topology diagram using AntV G6 fully implemented?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the code properly implements a K8s cluster topology visualization with G6, including: 1) Correct node representation (master nodes, worker nodes, pods) with appropriate shapes and colors 2) Edge connections showing relationships/dependencies 3) Interactive node selection and highlighting of related components 4) Fault propagation visualization with path tracing. Score 0 if only basic nodes are displayed without relationships, 5 if static topology is shown, and 10 if full interactive topology with fault propagation analysis is implemented.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 1,
-      "title": "Are the ECharts visualizations for resource utilization implemented with alert capabilities?",
-      "description": "Check whether the code includes proper implementation of CPU/memory/GPU utilization charts with: 1) Real-time data updates 2) Configurable thresholds with visual indicators 3) Alert triggering mechanism when thresholds are exceeded 4) Historical data comparison. Deduct 3 points if charts are static without real-time updates, 3 points if thresholds cannot be configured, and 4 points if alert notifications are not implemented. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 2,
-      "title": "Is the cross-time period data overlay comparison functionality properly implemented?",
-      "description": "Assess whether the code enables effective comparison of metrics across different time periods by: 1) Supporting multiple dataset overlays on the same chart 2) Providing clear visual differentiation between time periods 3) Implementing interactive time range selection 4) Including statistical analysis tools for comparing periods. Deduct 5 points if only basic overlay is implemented without proper legends/differentiation, 3 points if time selection is limited, and 2 points if statistical comparison is missing. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 3,
-      "title": "Is the dynamic alert rule configuration form properly implemented?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the code implements a fully dynamic form that: 1) Changes fields based on selected parameters 2) Supports complex nested logical operators (AND/OR/NOT) 3) Allows threshold configuration with various comparison operators 4) Enables multi-metric correlation rules. Score 0 if only basic form inputs exist, 5 if dynamic fields are implemented but without complex conditions, and 10 if full logical nesting and multi-metric correlation is supported.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 4,
-      "title": "Is the code robust?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as API failures, data loading errors, malformed responses, etc.) and provide friendly error prompts or recovery mechanisms. Check for proper error boundaries, loading states, and fallback UI components. Code with strong robustness should be able to effectively handle these edge cases, giving 10 points. If the robustness is average, give 5 points, and if no exceptions are handled, give 0 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 5,
-      "title": "Are there any innovative features that are eye-catching?",
-      "description": "Check whether the code includes surprise features that enhance the experience (e.g., 1. AI-powered anomaly detection 2. Natural language query interface for metrics 3. Automated root cause analysis for failures 4. Context-aware recommendations for fixing issues). 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 visualization components (e.g., multiple chart libraries doing the same thing) 2. Function modules unrelated to monitoring (e.g., unnecessary administrative tools) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., excessive animations that reduce dashboard responsiveness). 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 fetching/processing/visualization layers), component reusability, state management, and build process automation. Deduct 5 points if global state pollution is found or proper React patterns are not used; deduct 5 points if the code duplication rate is too high (over 30%); deduct 5 points if there's no proper error handling or performance optimization. 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 Ant Design principles: 1) Consistent use of Ant Design components without customization that breaks the design system 2) Proper layout with appropriate spacing (following 8px grid system) 3) Professional information hierarchy (primary/secondary information properly distinguished). Deduct 3 points for each misaligned element, 5 points for inconsistent component styling, and 5 points for chaotic dashboard layout. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 9,
-      "title": "Is the dashboard experience responsive and user-friendly?",
-      "description": "Judge whether the monitoring dashboard implements: 1) Auto-refresh functionality with configurable intervals 2) Customizable widget layouts that persist user preferences 3) Smooth drill-down navigation from overview to details 4) Responsive design that works across device sizes. Deduct 5 points if auto-refresh is missing, 3 points if layouts cannot be customized, 3 points if drill-down navigation is clunky, and 3 points if the design is not responsive. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    }
-  ],
-  "class": "Management Systems-Hardware Management",
-  "difficulty": "medium"
-}

package/library/management_systems-hardware_management/lcd-display-temperature-light-curves.json

@@ -1,68 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "index": 304,
-  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate, professional responses. Make sure the generated code is executable for demonstration. I am now able to obtain temperature and light intensity information through temperature and light sensors, and I want to display the collected data curves on an LCD screen. The temperature curve and its coordinates should be displayed in blue, while the light intensity curve and its coordinates should be displayed in yellow. When temperature/light intensity values rise, the corresponding curve should show an upward trend, and when they decrease, the curve should show a downward trend. The UI graph should have time information on the x-axis and temperature/light intensity information on the y-axis. Additionally, as time progresses, the curve should scroll when it exceeds the screen's boundaries.",
-  "checklist": [
-    {
-      "id": 0,
-      "title": "Is the sensor data acquisition and processing system properly implemented?",
-      "description": "Check whether the code implements interfaces for both temperature and light sensors, including proper initialization, periodic sampling, and data preprocessing (filtering/normalization). Score 0 if data acquisition is missing, 5 if only basic reading is implemented without error handling, and 10 if the system includes comprehensive data validation, error handling, and adaptive sampling rates.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 1,
-      "title": "Does the code correctly implement dual-parameter visualization with appropriate color coding?",
-      "description": "Verify that temperature data is visualized with a blue curve and light intensity with a yellow curve as specified. Review whether the code includes proper color definitions (#0000FF for blue, #FFFF00 for yellow), consistent line styling, and clear visual differentiation between the two data sets. Deduct 5 points if colors are inconsistent or wrong, and 3 points if the visual distinction between curves is poor. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 2,
-      "title": "Is the coordinate system correctly implemented with proper scaling and units?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the visualization includes properly labeled x-axis (time) and y-axis (temperature/light intensity), with appropriate units (°C/lux and time units), grid lines, and dynamic scaling that adapts to the data range. Check if both axes have proper tick marks and values. Deduct 5 points if units are missing, 3 points if the grid is improperly scaled, and 5 points if automatic rescaling for different ranges is absent. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 3,
-      "title": "Is the scrolling mechanism for time-series data properly implemented?",
-      "description": "Assess whether the code implements smooth horizontal scrolling when data exceeds screen boundaries, with proper buffering of historical data and optimized rendering to prevent flickering. Check for consistent scroll speed and proper refresh rate management. Deduct 5 points if scrolling is jerky, 3 points if old data is simply discarded rather than scrolled, and 5 points if the scrolling doesn't adapt to different data acquisition rates. 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 sensor disconnection, out-of-range readings, LCD rendering 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. Touch screen interaction for zooming/panning 2. Min/max/average value indicators 3. Automatic anomaly detection highlighting). 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 data processing paths (e.g., multiple filtering algorithms running in parallel) 2. Visualization elements unrelated to the temperature and light data (e.g., unnecessary decorative elements) 3. Performance-intensive effects that may slow down real-time display (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 sensor data acquisition/processing/visualization layers), use of appropriate design patterns, memory management for resource-constrained LCD environments, and optimization for embedded systems. 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 memory management is inefficient for embedded systems. 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 data visualization principles: 1) Contrast ratio between graph elements and background (at least 4.5:1 for accessibility) 2) Proper axis labeling and legend placement 3) Professional typography (readable font size even on small LCD, appropriate spacing). Deduct 3 points for each crowded visual element, 5 points for poor contrast that affects readability, and 5 points for ambiguous data representation. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 9,
-      "title": "Is the dynamic interaction smooth and seamless?",
-      "description": "Judge whether the visualization performance meets real-time requirements: 1) Render delay ≤ 100ms after new sensor data 2) Smooth curve transitions without jagged artifacts 3) Consistent frame rate even with rapid data changes. Deduct 5 points for visible render lag, 3 points for jerky scrolling animation, and 5 points for dropped frames during continuous operation. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    }
-  ],
-  "class": "Management Systems-Hardware Management",
-  "difficulty": "hard"
-}

package/library/management_systems-hardware_management/network-device-monitoring-system.json

@@ -1,68 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "index": 597,
-  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Network Device Monitoring System\n\nYou are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Make sure the generated code is executable for demonstration.\n\nDevelop a network device monitoring system that can monitor the status of network devices such as routers and switches within the company. The system needs to implement administrator login (username: admin, password: 123456), allow adding devices (device name, IP address, model, location), view real-time device status (online/offline), and set alarm thresholds. The system should have a dashboard page that graphically displays the network topology structure, identifies device status with different colors, and supports clicking on devices to view details.",
-  "checklist": [
-    {
-      "id": 0,
-      "title": "Is the administrator login system fully implemented?",
-      "description": "Review whether the login mechanism includes proper authentication, session management, and security measures. The system must validate credentials (admin/123456), implement timeout mechanisms, and protect against common attacks. Score 0 if authentication is missing, 5 if basic login works without security measures, and 10 if fully implemented with proper security considerations.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 1,
-      "title": "Is the device management functionality complete?",
-      "description": "Check whether the system allows adding, editing, and removing network devices with all required parameters (device name, IP address, model, location). Verify that the implementation includes data validation, duplicate checking, and proper storage mechanisms. Deduct 3 points if any required field is missing, 3 points if validation is inadequate, and 4 points if CRUD operations are incomplete. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 2,
-      "title": "Is real-time device status monitoring implemented effectively?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the system actually implements real-time monitoring of device status (online/offline) using appropriate protocols (ICMP, SNMP, etc.). Check for polling mechanisms, timeout handling, and status change notifications. Score 0 if no actual monitoring occurs, 5 if basic polling exists but lacks reliability features, and 10 if fully implemented with proper error handling and real-time updates.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 3,
-      "title": "Is the alarm threshold configuration system properly designed?",
-      "description": "Review the alarm threshold configuration system for completeness. It should allow setting thresholds for multiple metrics (response time, packet loss, bandwidth utilization, etc.), support notification mechanisms, and provide alert history. Deduct 3 points if threshold types are limited, 3 points if notification options are missing, and 4 points if the system lacks alert history or management. 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, device unavailability, invalid inputs, 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. Predictive failure analysis 2. Automated network mapping 3. Performance trend visualization). 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 status checking mechanisms) 2. Function modules unrelated to network monitoring (e.g., a weather widget) 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 monitoring logic/view/data layers), unit test coverage, and build process automation. Deduct 5 points if global state pollution is found or design patterns are not used; deduct 5 points if the code duplication rate is too high (over 30%); deduct 5 points if the build process is not automated. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 8,
-      "title": "Does the network topology visualization meet professional standards?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the topology visualization follows professional design principles: 1) Interactive graph rendering with appropriate layout algorithms 2) Clear visual differentiation of device types and statuses 3) Responsive scaling and navigation features. Deduct 3 points for static/non-interactive visualization, 4 points for poor visual hierarchy, and 3 points for inability to handle complex topologies. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 9,
-      "title": "Is the dashboard UI and interaction design effective?",
-      "description": "Judge whether the dashboard design meets professional standards: 1) Logical information hierarchy with key metrics prominently displayed 2) Appropriate use of color coding for status indication 3) Intuitive device selection and detail viewing. Deduct 3 points for cluttered layouts, 3 points for ineffective color usage, and 4 points for poor interactive elements that hinder usability. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    }
-  ],
-  "class": "Management Systems-Hardware Management",
-  "difficulty": "hard"
-}

package/library/management_systems-hardware_management/perlant-1510a-robotic-arm-visualization-software.json

@@ -1,68 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "index": 1171,
-  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Be sure to ensure that the generated code is executable for demonstration purposes. Based on Zhihui Jun's robotic arm software as a blueprint, please help me write a visualization software suitable for the Perlant 1510a robotic arm.",
-  "checklist": [
-    {
-      "id": 0,
-      "title": "Is the robotic arm visualization model accurately implemented?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the 3D model of the Perlant 1510a robotic arm is correctly implemented with proper joint hierarchies, proportions, and movement limitations. Check if the model includes all necessary parts (base, links, joints, end effector) with appropriate degrees of freedom. Score 0 if no model is implemented, 5 if a basic model is present but with inaccuracies, and 10 if the model accurately represents the Perlant 1510a specifications.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 1,
-      "title": "Is the inverse kinematics system properly implemented?",
-      "description": "Verify the implementation of the inverse kinematics algorithm for controlling the robotic arm. Check if the code handles singularities, joint limits, and unreachable positions. The algorithm should efficiently calculate joint angles for a given end effector position. Deduct 5 points if the IK solver has accuracy issues, 3 points if edge cases are not handled, and 5 points if performance is poor for real-time visualization. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 2,
-      "title": "Is the trajectory planning and simulation feature complete?",
-      "description": "Assess whether the software includes trajectory planning capabilities that generate smooth paths between points while respecting velocity and acceleration limits. Check if the simulation can display movement in real-time or at adjustable speeds. Verify that the visualization shows the arm's position at each step of a planned movement sequence. Deduct 5 points if trajectory planning is basic without acceleration profiles, and 8 points if only point-to-point movement without path planning is implemented. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 3,
-      "title": "Is there a comprehensive control interface for manual manipulation?",
-      "description": "Evaluate the user interface for manually controlling the robotic arm, including joint-by-joint control and end effector positioning. Check for visualization feedback when commands are executed, and whether the interface allows for incremental movements and precise positioning. Deduct 3 points if the interface is not intuitive, 5 points if it lacks visual feedback, and 7 points if it doesn't support both joint space and task space 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 out-of-bounds movements, impossible arm configurations, communication errors with hardware, 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. Collision detection and avoidance 2. Path recording and playback with optimization 3. Real-time performance metrics for arm movements 4. Digital twin capabilities with hardware synchronization). 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 trajectory planners with overlapping functionality) 2. Function modules unrelated to robotic arm control (e.g., unnecessary data visualization tools) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., excessive particle effects or unrealistic lighting). 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 kinematics/visualization/control logic), 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 with industrial design sensibilities 2) Proper layout spacing with clear separation between control panels and visualization area 3) Professional technical visual elements (grid lines, measurement indicators, coordinate axes). Deduct 3 points for each crowded visual element, 5 points for poorly contrasting colors that hinder visibility, and 5 points for chaotic panel layout. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 9,
-      "title": "Is the 3D rendering and interaction smooth and responsive?",
-      "description": "Judge whether the 3D visualization performs efficiently: 1) Camera controls respond within 100ms 2) Arm movement animations update at minimum 30fps 3) UI controls provide immediate visual feedback. Deduct 5 points for laggy rendering during arm movement, 3 points for jerky camera controls, and 5 points for poor perspective that makes spatial relationships difficult to understand. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    }
-  ],
-  "class": "Management Systems-Hardware Management",
-  "difficulty": "hard"
-}

package/library/management_systems-hardware_management/printer-management-interface-with-admin-features.json

@@ -1,68 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "index": 594,
-  "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 when possible. Implement a printer management interface where users can view a list of currently connected printers, including printer names, models, and remaining paper quantity; administrators can add new printers, delete printers, or set a default printer.",
-  "checklist": [
-    {
-      "id": 0,
-      "title": "Is the printer list display functionality fully implemented?",
-      "description": "Review if the code accurately displays all connected printers with their names, models, and remaining paper quantity. The display should be responsive and sortable. Score 0 if the core display logic is missing, 5 if only basic listing is implemented without sorting/filtering capabilities, and 10 if the interface includes advanced features like search, sorting, and pagination.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 1,
-      "title": "Are the administrator functions (add, delete, set default) properly implemented?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the code includes proper form validation for adding new printers (required fields, format validation), confirmation dialogs for deletion, and visual indication of the default printer. Deduct 3 points if form validation is missing, 3 points if there's no confirmation for destructive actions, and 3 points if the default printer setting doesn't have immediate visual feedback. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 2,
-      "title": "Is there proper authentication and authorization control?",
-      "description": "Check if the code implements role-based access control that strictly separates administrator functions from regular user views. Evaluate whether proper authentication checks are in place before executing privileged operations. Deduct 5 points if admin functions are accessible to all users, and 5 points if there's no session validation or token-based security. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 3,
-      "title": "Is the printer status monitoring and refresh mechanism implemented?",
-      "description": "Assess whether the code includes real-time or polling updates for printer status (particularly paper quantity). Check if there's a proper refresh mechanism (manual refresh button and/or automatic updates). Deduct 5 points if status updates require page reload, and 5 points if there's no visual indication when printer status changes. 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 when fetching printer data, validation failures, disconnected printers, etc.) and provide friendly error prompts or recovery mechanisms. Code with strong robustness should be able to effectively handle these edge cases, giving 10 points. If the robustness is average, give 5 points, and if no exceptions are handled, give 0 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 5,
-      "title": "Are there any innovative features that are eye-catching?",
-      "description": "Check whether the code includes surprise features that enhance the experience (e.g., 1. Visual printer ink/toner levels 2. Print queue visualization 3. Printer usage 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 set default printers) 2. Function modules unrelated to printer management (e.g., a built-in calculator) 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 data/service/view layers), 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 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 for admin operations. Deduct 5 points for each operation without feedback, 3 points for sluggish transitions when adding/removing printers, and 5 points for hard-to-find key function buttons. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    }
-  ],
-  "class": "Management Systems-Hardware Management",
-  "difficulty": "easy"
-}