@getollie/cli 0.0.5 → 0.2.0

package/library/multimedia_editing-audio_editing/web-based-sound-effects-library-with-preview-and-download.json

@@ -1,68 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "index": 613,
-  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Make sure the generated code is executable whenever possible. Create a web-based sound effects library where users can browse various preset sound effects (such as transition effects, ambient sounds), preview them, and download or apply selected effects to their own audio projects.",
-  "checklist": [
-    {
-      "id": 0,
-      "title": "Is the sound library core system fully implemented?",
-      "description": "Review whether the code accurately implements the sound library architecture, including categorization of sound effects, audio playback engine, and preview functionality. Score 0 if the core audio playback is not implemented, 5 if only basic playback is implemented without proper controls, and 10 if the system includes comprehensive playback with volume control, seeking, and visualization.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 1,
-      "title": "Is the sound effects browsing system efficiently designed?",
-      "description": "Check if the interface implements intuitive browsing capabilities with proper categorization (e.g., transitions, ambient, UI sounds), tagging system, search functionality, and filtering options. Deduct 3 points if search functionality is missing, 4 points if there's no categorization system, and 3 points if filtering options are absent. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 2,
-      "title": "Is the preview system well-implemented?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether users can preview sound effects before downloading, including visual waveform representation, playback controls (play/pause/stop), and the ability to loop sounds. Check if preview quality matches download quality. Deduct 5 points if waveform visualization is missing, 3 points if loop functionality is absent, and 2 points if preview quality is significantly lower. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 3,
-      "title": "Are download and project application features properly implemented?",
-      "description": "Check whether the code provides functionality to download individual or multiple sound effects in common formats (WAV, MP3) and the ability to apply selected effects to audio projects (e.g., timeline integration, batch processing). Deduct 3 points for each missing download format, 5 points if there's no batch download option, and 4 points if project application functionality is incomplete. 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 unsupported audio formats, browser audio limitations, simultaneous playback 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 audio effects/filters 2. Customizable sound mixer for layering effects 3. Audio fingerprinting for similar sound recommendation). Add 3 points for each practical innovative feature implemented (maximum 10 points).",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 6,
-      "title": "Are there any redundant features?",
-      "description": "Strictly check three types of redundancy: 1. Redundant implementation of similar functions (e.g., multiple audio players with overlapping capabilities) 2. Function modules unrelated to sound effects library (e.g., extensive video editing features) 3. Fancy effects that affect audio performance (e.g., excessive animations during playback). 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 audio processing/UI/data management 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) Audio playback starts within 100ms of click 2) Transition animations between library sections controlled between 300-500ms 3) Clear visual feedback during sound playback. Deduct 5 points for each operation without feedback, 3 points for laggy audio playback response, and 5 points for unintuitive audio control interfaces. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    }
-  ],
-  "class": "Multimedia Editing-Audio Editing",
-  "difficulty": "hard"
-}

package/library/multimedia_editing-audio_editing/web-microphone-audio-recorder-tool.json

@@ -1,68 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "index": 582,
-  "question": "You are a code expert, please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate, professional responses. Be sure to provide executable code in your examples. Implement a web tool that allows users to record local audio (such as microphone input), with features for recording, pausing, re-recording, and saving as an audio file.",
-  "checklist": [
-    {
-      "id": 0,
-      "title": "Is the audio recording functionality fully implemented?",
-      "description": "Review whether the code accurately implements the core MediaRecorder API with proper event handling for starting, stopping, and capturing audio data. Check if the microphone access permission is properly requested and errors are handled. Score 0 if recording functionality is missing, 5 if basic recording works with issues, and 10 for a complete implementation with proper state management.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 1,
-      "title": "Are all required recording control features implemented?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the code implements all specified features: recording, pausing, re-recording (discarding current recording and starting fresh), and saving as an audio file. Deduct 2.5 points for each missing feature. Check if the state transitions between these operations are handled correctly (e.g., can't pause before recording starts). The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 2,
-      "title": "Is the audio file saving functionality properly implemented?",
-      "description": "Check whether the tool allows users to save recorded audio in common formats (like MP3, WAV, or WebM) with appropriate file naming options. Verify that the implementation uses proper Blob handling and download mechanisms. Deduct 5 points if only one format is supported, 7 points if the download mechanism is flawed, and 10 points if saving functionality is missing completely.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 3,
-      "title": "Is there proper audio visualization feedback during recording?",
-      "description": "Assess whether the code includes visual feedback during recording (such as audio waveform, volume meter, or recording time display). Check if the AudioContext API is used for visualization. Deduct 5 points if there's no visual feedback, 3 points if the visualization is basic (just a recording indicator), and give full 10 points if there's real-time waveform or frequency visualization.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 4,
-      "title": "Is the code robust?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as microphone permission denial, unsupported browsers, device disconnection during recording, 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 effects/filters 2. Automatic transcription integration 3. Multiple recording track mixing). 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 save files) 2. Function modules unrelated to audio recording (e.g., irrelevant media players) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., excessive animations that impact recording quality). 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/recording logic/file handling), code organization, and error handling. 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 proper error handling or console debugging. 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) Clear visual state changes when recording starts/stops/pauses 3) Intuitive button placement and state indication. Deduct 5 points for each operation without feedback, 3 points for confusing state transitions, and 5 points for hard-to-find key function buttons. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    }
-  ],
-  "class": "Multimedia Editing-Audio Editing",
-  "difficulty": "easy"
-}

package/library/multimedia_editing-image_editing/2d-product-drawings-sky-blue-background.json

@@ -1,68 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "index": 1597,
-  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Make sure the generated code is executable for demonstration purposes. I also need to insert 2D product drawings, import some images, and use a sky-blue tech style background. The company name is Sichuan Yagaozhi Intelligent Equipment Co., Ltd. Please rewrite a more detailed programming solution and implementation steps.",
-  "checklist": [
-    {
-      "id": 0,
-      "title": "Is the 2D product drawing functionality fully implemented?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the code includes a complete 2D drawing system with capabilities for lines, curves, dimensions, and annotations. The implementation should include zoom/pan controls, grid snapping, and proper coordinate system. Score 0 if no drawing functionality exists, 5 if basic shapes are supported but without proper editing tools, and 10 if a professional-level CAD-like drawing system is implemented.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 1,
-      "title": "Is the image import and manipulation functionality properly implemented?",
-      "description": "Check whether the code handles various image formats (JPG, PNG, SVG), includes proper error handling for failed imports, and offers basic image manipulation (resize, crop, rotate). Verify if the implementation includes proper memory management for large images and maintains image quality. Deduct 3 points if format support is limited, 4 points if manipulation tools are missing, and 3 points if there's no error handling for imports. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 2,
-      "title": "Is the sky-blue tech style background properly implemented?",
-      "description": "Assess whether the background implementation includes proper gradients or patterns that evoke a high-tech feel, with consistent sky-blue theming. Check if the background adapts to different screen sizes and resolutions without distortion. Verify if it includes subtle animations or patterns that enhance but don't distract from the main content. Deduct 5 points for static non-responsive backgrounds, 3 points for inconsistent theming, and 2 points for performance issues. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 3,
-      "title": "Is the company branding (Sichuan Yagaozhi Intelligent Equipment Co., Ltd.) properly integrated?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the company name and branding elements are consistently applied throughout the interface. Check for proper logo placement, consistent typography, appropriate prominence without overwhelming the interface, and localization support if needed. Deduct 3 points for inconsistent branding, 4 points for poor visibility/readability, and 3 points if branding interferes with functionality. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 4,
-      "title": "Is the code robust?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as invalid input data, network interruption, user operation errors, 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. Interactive 3D previews generated from 2D drawings 2. AI-assisted design recommendations 3. Collaborative real-time editing capabilities). Add 3 points for each practical innovative feature implemented (maximum 10 points).",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 6,
-      "title": "Are there any redundant features?",
-      "description": "Strictly check three types of redundancy: 1. Redundant implementation of similar functions (e.g., multiple drawing tools that do the same thing) 2. Function modules unrelated to the core requirements (e.g., unnecessary animations or widgets) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., excessive particle effects or transitions). 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 drawing logic/UI/data management 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 with the sky-blue tech theme (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": "Multimedia Editing-Image Editing",
-  "difficulty": "medium"
-}

package/library/multimedia_editing-image_editing/360-degree-panoramic-stitching-system.json

@@ -1,68 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "index": 1089,
-  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Be sure the code you generate is executable and demonstrable. Write a 360-degree panoramic stitching system.",
-  "checklist": [
-    {
-      "id": 0,
-      "title": "Is the panoramic image capture and stitching core functionality implemented?",
-      "description": "Examine whether the code implements essential panoramic stitching algorithms (feature detection, feature matching, homography estimation, and blending). Check if it handles proper feature detection (SIFT, SURF, ORB) and robust matching techniques (RANSAC). Score 0 if core stitching is missing, 5 if basic stitching is implemented but with visible seams, and 10 if the stitching produces seamless panoramas with proper cylindrical/spherical projection.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 1,
-      "title": "Is the 360-degree coverage properly handled?",
-      "description": "Verify that the system can stitch images into a complete 360-degree panorama, handling the wrapping at borders correctly. Check whether the code incorporates proper spherical or cylindrical projections to minimize distortion at poles. Deduct 5 points if the system can only handle partial panoramas, 3 points if border blending has noticeable artifacts, and 2 points if extreme viewing angles show warping issues. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 2,
-      "title": "Is there a robust image alignment and blending system?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the code implements advanced blending techniques (multi-band blending, gradient-domain blending) to handle exposure differences between images. Check if the alignment system can handle parallax errors and ghosting from moving objects. Deduct 5 points if seams are visible between images, 3 points if exposure compensation is missing, and 3 points if there's no handling for moving objects. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 3,
-      "title": "Is there an interactive viewing interface for the panoramas?",
-      "description": "Check if the system provides an interactive viewer (WebGL, Three.js, etc.) that allows users to navigate the 360-degree panorama with mouse/touch controls. Verify if the viewer implements proper perspective correction, smooth rotation, and zoom functionality. Deduct 5 points if navigation controls are missing, 3 points if the viewing experience is jerky/non-responsive, and 3 points if projection distortions aren't corrected during viewing. 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 low-feature images, extreme exposure differences, insufficient overlap between images, etc.) and provide friendly error prompts or recovery mechanisms. Check if there are validations for input images and graceful failure handling. 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-exposure compensation across images 2. Removal of moving objects from panoramas 3. HDR panorama support 4. Real-time stitching preview). 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 algorithms (e.g., multiple feature detectors running in parallel without purpose) 2. Function modules unrelated to panorama stitching (e.g., unnecessary image filters) 3. Computationally expensive processes that add little value (e.g., excessive resolution processing beyond viewing requirements). 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 image processing/visualization/user interaction layers), algorithm optimization, memory management for large panoramas, and multithreading usage. Deduct 5 points if global state pollution is found or design patterns are not used; deduct 5 points if the code lacks optimization for large images; deduct 5 points if there's no parallelization for computationally intensive tasks. 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 panorama viewing experience meets professional standards: 1) Responsive panning/zooming (≤ 60ms latency) 2) Smooth transitions between zoom levels 3) Intuitive navigation controls with visual feedback. Deduct 5 points for jerky panorama movement, 3 points for delayed response to user input, and 5 points for unintuitive navigation controls. Check if the panorama dynamically loads higher resolution tiles as needed without visible popping. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    }
-  ],
-  "class": "Multimedia Editing-Image Editing",
-  "difficulty": "hard"
-}

package/library/multimedia_editing-image_editing/batch-image-compression-tool.json

@@ -1,68 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "index": 682,
-  "question": "You are a code expert, please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Make sure the generated code is executable for demonstration.\n\n======== ROLE ========\nYou are an experienced code expert. You are provided with a software development requirement description and asked to generate project code based on these requirements. Strictly follow the rules to help users generate complete project code with simple, easy-to-understand comments. Don't output anything else.\n\n======== OUTPUT RULES ========\n1. Always generate complete, runnable project code and ensure the project is fully executable\n2. Ensure all code files you output are complete, don't omit any code\n3. Carefully review and check all code before final output to evaluate its executability. If the code cannot be executed or contains errors, regenerate it\n4. If the requirements involve external API access or using user data (images, videos, audio, etc.), please provide simulated data\n\n======== PROJECT REQUIREMENTS ========\nImplement a batch image compression tool. Users can upload multiple images and select a compression quality percentage. The tool needs to compress the images and provide a packaged download function.",
-  "checklist": [
-    {
-      "id": 0,
-      "title": "Is the batch image upload functionality fully implemented?",
-      "description": "Review whether the code accurately implements multiple file selection through HTML file input with 'multiple' attribute, includes proper file type validation (JPEG, PNG, WebP, etc.), and handles file size limitations. Check if drag-and-drop upload is supported and if upload progress indicators are provided. Score 0 if basic multi-file upload is not working, 5 if only basic upload without validation is implemented, and 10 if all upload features including drag-and-drop and progress tracking are fully functional.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 1,
-      "title": "Is the image compression algorithm properly implemented?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the compression logic uses Canvas API or similar technology to resize and compress images with configurable quality settings. Check if the tool maintains aspect ratios, supports different output formats, and provides real-time compression preview. Deduct 5 points if compression quality control is not implemented, 3 points if aspect ratio is not preserved, and 2 points if no compression preview is available. Full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 2,
-      "title": "Is the batch processing mechanism efficiently designed?",
-      "description": "Check whether the batch processing uses Web Workers or similar asynchronous processing to prevent UI blocking, includes progress tracking for individual files and overall batch progress, and handles concurrent processing limits. Evaluate if error handling for individual file failures doesn't stop the entire batch. Deduct 5 points if processing blocks the UI, 3 points if no progress indication is provided, and 2 points if one file failure stops all processing.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 3,
-      "title": "Is the packaged download functionality complete?",
-      "description": "Verify whether the code implements ZIP file generation using JSZip or similar library, provides download triggers with proper file naming, and includes compression statistics (original vs compressed sizes). Check if the download handles large file batches without memory issues. Deduct 5 points if ZIP packaging is not implemented, 3 points if download fails for large batches, and 2 points if no compression statistics are provided. 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 corrupted image files, unsupported formats, memory limitations, network interruptions, and browser compatibility issues) and provide friendly error prompts or recovery mechanisms. Code with strong robustness should gracefully handle edge cases like extremely large files or invalid image data, 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 file size comparison charts 2. Batch rename functionality with custom patterns 3. Image format conversion options 4. EXIF data preservation settings 5. Compression quality preview with before/after comparison). 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 compression algorithms doing the same job) 2. Function modules unrelated to image compression (e.g., built-in image editor with complex filters) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., heavy animations during compression). Deduct 3 points for each redundancy found, and directly deduct 10 points if the core compression 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 file handling/compression logic/UI layers), proper error handling, and code organization. Deduct 5 points if global state pollution is found or no separation of concerns; deduct 5 points if the code duplication rate is too high (over 30%); deduct 5 points if no proper file cleanup or memory management is implemented. 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) Clear visual hierarchy for upload area, settings, and download sections. Deduct 3 points for each crowded visual element, 5 points for a glaring color combination, and 5 points for chaotic layout of compression controls. 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) File upload feedback delay ≤ 100ms 2) Compression progress animations are smooth and informative 3) Quality slider provides real-time preview updates 4) Clear visual focus guidance during batch processing. Deduct 5 points for each operation without feedback, 3 points for laggy progress indicators, and 5 points if compression quality changes don't provide immediate visual feedback. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    }
-  ],
-  "class": "Multimedia Editing-Image Editing",
-  "difficulty": "medium"
-}

package/library/multimedia_editing-image_editing/canvas-javascript-image-editor-with-zoom.json

@@ -1,68 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "index": 938,
-  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Make sure the generated code is executable and can be demonstrated. Write an image editor using canvas + JavaScript, providing the following features:\n\n1. A button to open PNG, BMP, and JPG images\n\n2. The canvas size is temporarily fixed at 800x800. When an image is loaded, the initial display state shows only the 800x800 portion starting from the top-left corner (0,0) of the image. For images smaller than 800x800, the canvas displays a gray background in areas where the image doesn't reach. For images larger than 800x800, the canvas provides sliders to help users navigate to different positions within the image.\n\n3. Image zoom in/out functionality: When an image is successfully loaded, users can zoom in/out using the mouse wheel. During zooming, the canvas size remains fixed at 800x800, but the portion of the image displayed in the canvas area changes. If zoomed in, ensure that the maximum zoom limit displays one pixel of the image as 3x3 pixels on the canvas.",
-  "checklist": [
-    {
-      "id": 0,
-      "title": "Is the image loading functionality properly implemented?",
-      "description": "Review whether the code correctly implements file input for PNG, BMP, and JPG formats, handles file loading events, and properly displays the image on canvas. Check if file type validation is performed and appropriate error handling exists for unsupported formats or corrupted files.0 points if image loading fails completely, 5 points if basic loading works but lacks error handling, 10 points if all formats load correctly with proper error messages.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 1,
-      "title": "Is the canvas initialization and image rendering implemented correctly?",
-      "description": "Verify that the canvas is properly initialized with 800x800 dimensions, the context is correctly set up, and the initial image rendering displays the top-left (0,0) portion correctly. Check if gray background is properly rendered for images smaller than canvas dimensions.Deduct 5 points if canvas initialization is incorrect, 3 points if the initial rendering position is wrong, and 3 points if small images don't show proper gray background. Full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 2,
-      "title": "Are the sliders for large images implemented and functioning properly?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether horizontal and vertical sliders appear for images larger than 800x800, and if they correctly control the viewport position on the image. Check if sliders are proportionally sized based on the image-to-canvas ratio and if scrolling is smooth and responsive.Deduct 4 points if sliders don't appear for large images, 3 points if slider positioning is inaccurate, and 3 points if scrolling performance is poor. Full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 3,
-      "title": "Is the zoom functionality working correctly with mouse wheel events?",
-      "description": "Check if mouse wheel events are properly captured and translated to zoom operations on the image. Verify that zooming maintains the point under the cursor as the focal point, respects the maximum zoom limit (1px of image = 3x3px on canvas), and preserves image quality during zoom operations.0 points if zooming doesn't work, 5 points if basic zooming works but without focal point preservation, 10 points if zooming is fully implemented with all requirements met.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 4,
-      "title": "Is the code robust?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the code handles edge cases such as very large images, unsupported file types, rapid zoom operations, and browser compatibility issues. Check if there's proper error handling for failed image loading, browser canvas limitations, and memory management for large images.Give 10 points for strong robustness handling all edge cases, 5 points for average robustness with some edge cases handled, and 0 points if no error handling exists.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 5,
-      "title": "Are there any innovative features that are eye-catching?",
-      "description": "Check for additional useful features beyond requirements, such as: 1. Image rotation tools 2. Basic filters (brightness/contrast/saturation) 3. Crop functionality 4. Undo/redo capability 5. Image export in different formats/sizes.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 for three types of redundancy: 1. Redundant canvas redraws that affect performance 2. Unnecessary event listeners or duplicate zoom/pan code paths 3. Overly complex implementations that could be simplified. Check if any code interferes with core image editing functionality.Deduct 3 points for each redundancy found, and directly deduct 10 points if core functions are interfered with by redundant code.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 7,
-      "title": "Does the code have engineering quality?",
-      "description": "Review modular organization (separation of concerns between image loading, rendering, UI controls), code reusability, proper variable/function naming, and maintainability. Check for memory leaks when loading multiple large images.Deduct 5 points for global state pollution or lack of design patterns, 5 points for code duplication rate over 30%, 5 points if memory management is poor. Full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 8,
-      "title": "Does the interface vision meet professional design standards?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the UI follows modern design principles: 1) Clean, minimal control panel layout 2) Proper spacing between controls 3) Consistent button styling and visual feedback 4) Clear visual indicators for zoom level and canvas boundaries.Deduct 3 points for each crowded visual element, 5 points for inconsistent control styling, and 5 points for poor visual feedback during operations. Full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 9,
-      "title": "Is the dynamic interaction smooth and seamless?",
-      "description": "Judge whether image rendering and manipulation have acceptable performance: 1) Smooth zooming without visible lag 2) Responsive slider movement for large images 3) Immediate visual feedback when loading images 4) No freezing during image operations.Deduct 5 points for each operation with noticeable lag, 3 points for visual artifacts during zooming/panning, and 5 points for sluggish response on larger images. Full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    }
-  ],
-  "class": "Multimedia Editing-Image Editing",
-  "difficulty": "easy"
-}

package/library/multimedia_editing-image_editing/drawing-board-ios-notes-paperjs-vue3.json

@@ -1,68 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "index": 1634,
-  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Be sure to provide executable code whenever possible. Implement a drawing board similar to the iOS Notes app functionality using Paper.js with Vue 3.",
-  "checklist": [
-    {
-      "id": 0,
-      "title": "Is the basic drawing functionality properly implemented with Paper.js?",
-      "description": "Check whether the code correctly integrates Paper.js with Vue 3, implements proper canvas initialization, and provides fundamental drawing capabilities (pencil tool). Score 0 if Paper.js is not properly initialized, 5 if only basic drawing is implemented without proper event handling, and 10 if the implementation includes proper path creation, stroke management, and tool selection with appropriate event binding.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 1,
-      "title": "Are essential drawing tools and features implemented?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the implementation includes essential drawing tools similar to iOS Notes: pencil with various thicknesses, eraser, selection tool, color picker with a palette matching iOS aesthetics. Deduct 2 points for each missing essential tool. Additionally, check for basic operations like undo/redo functionality (deduct 3 points if missing). The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 2,
-      "title": "Is the Vue 3 integration properly structured?",
-      "description": "Assess whether the code follows Vue 3 best practices: using Composition API correctly, proper lifecycle hooks management for canvas initialization/cleanup, and component-based architecture for tools and UI elements. Check if reactivity is properly handled for drawing state. Deduct 3 points if using Options API inappropriately, 3 points if Paper.js instances aren't properly managed in the component lifecycle, and 5 points if the implementation doesn't leverage Vue's reactivity system properly. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 3,
-      "title": "Does the implementation include iOS Notes-specific features?",
-      "description": "Verify that the implementation contains iOS Notes-specific features such as: pressure sensitivity support (if applicable), palm rejection simulation, seamless canvas panning/zooming, automatic stroke smoothing, and responsive design adapting to different screen sizes. Award 2 points for each feature properly implemented, with a maximum of 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 4,
-      "title": "Is the code robust?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as window resizing, browser compatibility issues, touch/mouse input differences, memory management for large drawings) and provide friendly error handling. Code with strong robustness should gracefully 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. Shape recognition for converting rough sketches to perfect shapes, 2. Smart selection tool that recognizes drawing objects, 3. Background templates/grids, 4. Multi-layer support, 5. Export to multiple formats). Add 2 points for each practical innovative feature implemented (maximum 10 points).",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 6,
-      "title": "Are there any redundant features?",
-      "description": "Strictly check three types of redundancy: 1. Redundant implementation of similar functions (e.g., multiple drawing engines coexisting) 2. Function modules unrelated to drawing (e.g., a built-in image gallery not tied to drawing) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., excessive animations that impact drawing 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 drawing logic/UI/state management), unit test coverage, and build process configuration. 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 lacks optimization for canvas performance. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 8,
-      "title": "Does the interface vision meet iOS Notes app design standards?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the overall design follows iOS Notes app aesthetic principles: 1) Minimalist UI with appropriate white space 2) iOS-style color palette and icons 3) Proper tool placement matching iOS conventions (bottom or top toolbar) 4) Consistent typography matching iOS standards. Deduct 3 points for each significant deviation from iOS design language, 5 points for cluttered or non-intuitive interfaces. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 9,
-      "title": "Is the drawing experience smooth and responsive?",
-      "description": "Judge whether the drawing experience matches the fluid nature of iOS Notes: 1) No visible lag between input and drawing (≤ 16ms delay) 2) Smooth line rendering without jitter 3) Proper handling of rapid drawing movements 4) Efficient canvas rendering even with complex drawings. Deduct 3 points for each noticeable performance issue, 5 points for significant input lag, and 5 points if the drawing experience degrades with moderately complex sketches. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    }
-  ],
-  "class": "Multimedia Editing-Image Editing",
-  "difficulty": "medium"
-}

package/library/multimedia_editing-image_editing/frontend-batch-image-annotation-tool.json

@@ -1,68 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "index": 586,
-  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Try to ensure the generated code is executable for demonstration.\n\n======== ROLE ========\nYou are an experienced code expert. I am providing you with a software development requirement description and asking you to generate project code based on these requirements. Strictly follow the rules to help users generate complete project code with simple and easy-to-understand comments. Don't output anything else.\n\n======== OUTPUT RULES ========\n1. Always generate complete, runnable project code. Please ensure the project is fully executable\n2. Ensure all code files you output are complete, don't omit any code\n3. Carefully review and check all code before final output, evaluating its executability. If the code cannot be executed or contains errors, it needs to be regenerated\n4. If the requirements involve external API access or need to use user data (images, videos, audio, etc.), please provide simulated data\n\n======== PROJECT REQUIREMENTS ========\nWrite code to create a frontend project for batch image annotation. Users upload multiple images and can add text annotations to each image on the frontend interface. The annotation position can be customized. After completing the annotations, users can batch download the annotated images.",
-  "checklist": [
-    {
-      "id": 0,
-      "title": "Is the image upload functionality properly implemented?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the code provides a robust mechanism for selecting and uploading multiple images. Check if it handles various image formats (JPG, PNG, GIF, etc.), validates file types and sizes, and provides appropriate feedback during the upload process. The implementation should include drag-and-drop support and a traditional file browser option.0 points if image upload is not implemented; 5 points if basic upload is implemented but lacks validation or multi-file support; 10 points for complete implementation with proper validation, progress indicators, and error handling.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 1,
-      "title": "Is the image annotation feature fully functional?",
-      "description": "Check if the code allows users to add text annotations at custom positions on the images. Examine whether the annotation interface is intuitive, allows positioning via click or drag, and supports customization of text properties (font, size, color). Verify that annotations persist when switching between images and can be edited or deleted after creation.0 points if annotation functionality is missing; 5 points if basic text placement is implemented but lacks customization options; 10 points for a complete annotation system with positioning, styling options, and edit capabilities.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 2,
-      "title": "Is the batch processing capability implemented effectively?",
-      "description": "Assess whether the code supports efficient handling of multiple images. Check for a gallery or carousel view that allows users to navigate between uploaded images, maintain annotations separately for each image, and process all images as a batch when downloading. Look for optimization techniques that handle large numbers of images without performance degradation.0 points if only single image processing is supported; 5 points if batch viewing is implemented but lacks efficient navigation or separate annotation storage; 10 points for complete batch processing with optimization for large sets.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 3,
-      "title": "Is the batch download functionality properly implemented?",
-      "description": "Examine whether users can download all annotated images with a single action. Check if the code correctly merges annotations with original images, preserves image quality, and provides options for output format. Verify that the download process includes proper progress indication and handles potential errors gracefully.0 points if download functionality is missing; 5 points if download works but only for individual images or with quality loss; 10 points for complete batch download with preserved quality and format options.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 4,
-      "title": "Is the code robust?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations such as browser compatibility issues, large file uploads, unsupported image formats, or memory constraints. Check for appropriate error handling, fallback mechanisms, and user-friendly error messages.0 points if no exception handling exists; 5 points if basic error catching is implemented but lacks recovery mechanisms; 10 points for comprehensive error handling with graceful degradation and helpful user feedback.",
-      "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-adjustment of text color based on background brightness 2. Templates for common annotation patterns 3. Image enhancement tools 4. AI-assisted annotation positioning).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 image processing libraries doing the same thing) 2. Function modules unrelated to image annotation (e.g., unnecessary social sharing features) 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 annotation logic/image processing/UI components), code reusability, and appropriate use of design patterns. Check for proper state management, clean component hierarchy, and well-structured data flow.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 of concerns. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 8,
-      "title": "Does the interface vision meet professional design standards?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the overall design follows modern design principles: 1) Harmonious color matching (no more than 3 primary colors) 2) Proper layout spacing (element spacing follows the 8px multiple principle) 3) Professional font system (body font size ≥ 14px, line height over 1.5 times). Check if the interface remains clean and focused on the primary task of image annotation.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) Responsive annotation placement with immediate visual feedback 2) Smooth transitions when switching between images 3) Intuitive drag-and-drop functionality for positioning annotations. Check if the interface remains responsive even when working with multiple high-resolution images.Deduct 5 points for each operation without feedback, 3 points for laggy performance during annotation placement, and 5 points for confusing navigation between images. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    }
-  ],
-  "class": "Multimedia Editing-Image Editing",
-  "difficulty": "medium"
-}