@getollie/cli 0.0.5 → 0.2.0

package/library/utility_tools-daily_office_tasks/browser-screenshot-tool-with-editing.json

@@ -1,68 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "index": 631,
-  "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. Develop code for a screenshot tool that allows users to capture browser areas through simple button triggers, supporting three modes: selected area, current visible window, and entire webpage. Users should be able to perform simple edits on the screenshots (such as adding text, drawing boxes, marking with arrows). Finally, users should be able to save the screenshot as an image format and download it quickly.",
-  "checklist": [
-    {
-      "id": 0,
-      "title": "Is the screenshot capture functionality fully implemented?",
-      "description": "Review whether the code accurately implements all three required screenshot modes (selected area, current visible window, and entire webpage). Check if the selection mechanism for the 'selected area' mode allows for precise rectangular selections with visual feedback. Score 0 if no capture functionality works, 5 if only some modes are implemented, and 10 if all three modes work correctly with proper user feedback.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 1,
-      "title": "How well is the screenshot editing functionality implemented?",
-      "description": "Evaluate the implementation of the editing tools (text addition, rectangle drawing, and arrow marking). Check if the text tool supports font customization, if rectangle drawing allows for different colors/sizes, and if arrow markers can be properly positioned and oriented. Deduct 3 points if any required tool is missing, 2 points if a tool lacks essential customization options, and 5 points if the edit interface is not intuitive. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 2,
-      "title": "Is the image saving and downloading feature properly implemented?",
-      "description": "Check if the screenshot can be saved in common image formats (PNG/JPG) and if the download functionality works correctly. Verify that the download process initiates promptly, uses appropriate file naming conventions, and preserves image quality. Deduct 5 points if only one format is supported, 3 points if the download process is overly complicated, and 7 points if downloaded images show quality degradation. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 3,
-      "title": "How well does the tool handle browser compatibility and permissions?",
-      "description": "Assess whether the code properly handles browser permissions for screen capture and considers compatibility across major browsers. Check if appropriate fallbacks or guidance is provided when permissions are denied or features are unsupported. Deduct 5 points if the tool only works in one specific browser, 3 points if permission handling is inadequate, and 5 points if there's no error handling for unsupported scenarios. 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 permission denials, failed captures, memory constraints with large screenshots, etc.) and provide friendly error prompts or recovery mechanisms. Code with strong robustness should be able to effectively handle these edge cases, giving 10 points. If the robustness is average, give 5 points, and if no exceptions are handled, give 0 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 5,
-      "title": "Are there any innovative features that are eye-catching?",
-      "description": "Check whether the code includes surprise features that enhance the experience (e.g., 1. OCR text recognition in screenshots 2. Auto-blur detection for sensitive information 3. Cloud storage integration 4. One-click sharing options). 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 perform the same capture) 2. Function modules unrelated to screenshot capture and editing (e.g., built-in image gallery) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., unnecessary animations during capture). 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 capture/editing/storage 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 (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) Immediate visual feedback when initiating screenshot capture 2) Transition animations when switching between capture and edit modes (300-500ms) 3) Clear highlighting of active editing tools. Deduct 5 points for each operation without feedback, 3 points for laggy selection highlighting, and 5 points for hard-to-find editing controls. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    }
-  ],
-  "class": "Utility Tools-Daily Office Tasks",
-  "difficulty": "hard"
-}

package/library/utility_tools-daily_office_tasks/chrome-browser-sidebar-extension.json

@@ -1,68 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "index": 1134,
-  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate, professional responses. Be sure to ensure that the code you generate can be executed and displayed properly. Please help me write a browser extension that runs in the Chrome browser sidebar.",
-  "checklist": [
-    {
-      "id": 0,
-      "title": "Is the Chrome extension manifest and core architecture properly implemented?",
-      "description": "Review whether the code includes a properly configured manifest.json (v3 or v2) with correct permissions, service worker registration, and sidebar panel configuration. Check if the extension architecture follows Chrome's extension development standards including proper message passing between content scripts, background scripts, and popup/sidebar components. Score 0 if manifest is missing or invalid, 5 if basic structure exists but lacks proper permissions or service worker setup, and 10 if fully compliant with Chrome extension standards including proper API usage.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 1,
-      "title": "Is the sidebar panel functionality correctly integrated with Chrome's Side Panel API?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the extension properly utilizes Chrome's Side Panel API (chrome.sidePanel) for sidebar implementation, including proper panel registration, opening/closing mechanisms, and tab-specific or global panel behavior. Check if the sidebar can be properly activated through extension actions and maintains proper lifecycle management. Deduct 5 points if using deprecated methods or workarounds instead of official Side Panel API, and 3 points if panel state management is inconsistent. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 2,
-      "title": "Is cross-context communication and data persistence properly handled?",
-      "description": "Check whether the extension implements proper communication between different contexts (background, content script, sidebar panel) using chrome.runtime messaging or other appropriate APIs. Evaluate if data persistence is handled correctly using chrome.storage API with proper synchronization and error handling. Deduct 5 points if using unreliable communication methods (like DOM events for cross-context communication), and 3 points if storage operations lack proper error handling or data validation. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 3,
-      "title": "Is the extension's security model and permission handling implemented correctly?",
-      "description": "Review whether the extension follows Chrome's security best practices including Content Security Policy (CSP) compliance, minimal permission requests, and proper handling of user data. Check if the extension properly sandboxes potentially dangerous operations and validates all inputs. Deduct 5 points if requesting excessive permissions not used by the extension, and 5 points if CSP violations or XSS vulnerabilities are present. Give 10 points if security model is properly implemented with principle of least privilege.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 4,
-      "title": "Is the code robust?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as extension context invalidation, Chrome API failures, network interruptions, user permission denials, etc.) and provide friendly error prompts or recovery mechanisms. Code with strong robustness should effectively handle extension-specific edge cases like context menu conflicts and tab lifecycle issues, 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 extension includes surprise features that enhance user productivity or browsing experience (e.g., 1. Smart content extraction and organization 2. Cross-tab data synchronization 3. Integration with external APIs for enhanced functionality 4. Keyboard shortcuts and accessibility features). Add 3 points for each practical innovative feature implemented that goes beyond basic sidebar functionality (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 storage mechanisms coexisting) 2. Function modules unrelated to the extension's core purpose (e.g., built-in games or unnecessary widgets) 3. Performance-heavy features that slow down browser experience (e.g., constant DOM polling or excessive background processing). Deduct 3 points for each redundancy found, and directly deduct 10 points if core extension functionality is interfered with by redundant code.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 7,
-      "title": "Does the code have engineering quality?",
-      "description": "Review modular design (such as separating UI/logic/API layers), proper build process for extension packaging, and code organization following extension development best practices. Deduct 5 points if global namespace pollution is found or extension-specific patterns are not used; deduct 5 points if the code duplication rate is too high (over 30%); deduct 5 points if the build process doesn't properly handle extension packaging and asset optimization. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 8,
-      "title": "Does the interface vision meet professional design standards?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the sidebar UI follows modern design principles and Chrome's design guidelines: 1) Harmonious color matching that integrates well with Chrome's interface (no more than 3 primary colors) 2) Proper layout spacing that works in narrow sidebar context (element spacing follows the 8px multiple principle) 3) Professional typography system (body font size ≥ 14px, line height over 1.5 times) 4) Responsive design for different sidebar widths. Deduct 3 points for each crowded visual element, 5 points for colors that clash with Chrome's theme, and 5 points for poor mobile responsiveness in sidebar context. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 9,
-      "title": "Is the dynamic interaction smooth and seamless?",
-      "description": "Judge whether the sidebar interactions conform to browser extension UX standards: 1) Click feedback delay ≤ 100ms without blocking browser performance 2) Smooth transitions that don't interfere with main browser UI (300-500ms duration) 3) Clear visual focus guidance and keyboard navigation support 4) Proper loading states for async operations. Deduct 5 points for each operation without feedback, 3 points for animations that cause browser lag, and 5 points for poor accessibility or keyboard navigation support. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    }
-  ],
-  "class": "Utility Tools-Daily Office Tasks",
-  "difficulty": "medium"
-}

package/library/utility_tools-daily_office_tasks/classroom-student-selector-html-webpage.json

@@ -1,68 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "index": 1190,
-  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Make sure that the code you provide is executable and presentable. Please help me create a classroom student selector program as a HTML webpage with an attractive interface.",
-  "checklist": [
-    {
-      "id": 0,
-      "title": "Is the core student selection functionality fully implemented?",
-      "description": "Review whether the code implements a complete student selection system that can randomly or systematically choose students from a class roster. Check for features like random selection, exclusion of previously selected students, and ability to mark student participation. Score 0 if selection functionality is missing, 5 if basic random selection exists, and 10 if advanced selection logic with history tracking is implemented.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 1,
-      "title": "Does the program support student data management?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the code allows adding, editing, and removing students from the roster. Check if it supports importing/exporting student data (CSV/JSON) and persists data using localStorage or other methods. Deduct 5 points if there's no data persistence, 3 points if student information editing is limited. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 2,
-      "title": "Is there a complete classroom interaction system?",
-      "description": "Check whether the program includes features that enhance classroom participation like tracking student performance, recording selection history, and providing statistics on student participation. Deduct 5 points if there's no participation tracking, 3 points if historical data isn't displayed visually. Give 10 points if a comprehensive interaction system is implemented.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 3,
-      "title": "Does the program have classroom-specific features?",
-      "description": "Assess whether the code includes classroom-relevant features such as timers for student responses, grouping functionality, seating chart integration, or other teacher assistance tools. Deduct 3 points for each missing key classroom feature. 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 empty student lists, duplicate names, 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. Animation when selecting students 2. Sound effects for selection 3. Customizable themes for different classroom environments). 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 select students) 2. Function modules unrelated to classroom selection (e.g., a built-in game unrelated to selection) 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 UI/logic/data management), code organization, and maintainability. Deduct 5 points if global variables are excessively 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 suitable for classroom environment (no distracting 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) Student selection animations are clear and informative 3) Responsive design works across device sizes. Deduct 5 points for each operation without feedback, 3 points for laggy animations during selection, and 5 points for hard-to-find key function buttons. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    }
-  ],
-  "class": "Utility Tools-Daily Office Tasks",
-  "difficulty": "easy"
-}

package/library/utility_tools-daily_office_tasks/code-editing-demo-arco-design-codemirror.json

@@ -1,68 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "index": 1044,
-  "question": "You are a code expert. Please utilize your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Make sure that the code you generate is executable for demonstration. Create a code editing DEMO using arco-design and codemirror.",
-  "checklist": [
-    {
-      "id": 0,
-      "title": "Is the code editor implementation complete?",
-      "description": "Check whether the CodeMirror integration with Arco Design is properly implemented. Verify if core editor functionality such as syntax highlighting, line numbers, and basic editing features are working. Score 0 if CodeMirror is not properly initialized, 5 if only basic functionality is included, and 10 if advanced features like code folding, search/replace, and auto-indentation are also implemented.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 1,
-      "title": "Is theme integration with Arco Design properly implemented?",
-      "description": "Evaluate if the CodeMirror editor is properly styled to match Arco Design's theme system. Check if the editor respects theme switching (light/dark mode) and uses consistent colors and styles from Arco Design. Deduct 5 points if the editor looks out of place within the Arco Design environment, and 3 points if theme switching is not synchronized between the UI and editor. Full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 2,
-      "title": "Is the toolbar/control panel functionality comprehensive?",
-      "description": "Assess whether the code editor includes a well-designed toolbar with essential coding operations (e.g., language selection, formatting, undo/redo). Check if the toolbar uses Arco Design components (Button, Select, etc.) correctly. Deduct 3 points for each missing essential functionality, and 5 points if the toolbar is not implemented at all. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 3,
-      "title": "Is language support and syntax highlighting properly implemented?",
-      "description": "Check if the implementation supports multiple programming languages with proper syntax highlighting. The editor should support at least 3 common languages (e.g., JavaScript, HTML, CSS). Verify if language switching works correctly and if syntax highlighting updates accordingly. Deduct 3 points for each major language missing support, and 5 points if syntax highlighting fails. 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, large file loading, editor state corruption) 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 code linting/error checking 2. Code snippets library 3. Split-view editing or preview functionality). Add 3 points for each practical innovative feature implemented (maximum 10 points).",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 6,
-      "title": "Are there any redundant features?",
-      "description": "Strictly check three types of redundancy: 1. Redundant implementation of similar functions (e.g., multiple ways to perform the same operation) 2. Function modules unrelated to code editing (e.g., unrelated media players) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., excessive animations). Deduct 3 points for each redundancy found, and directly deduct 10 points if the core functions are interfered with by redundant code.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 7,
-      "title": "Does the code have engineering quality?",
-      "description": "Review modular design (such as separating editor logic/UI components/state management), component reusability, and code organization. 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 proper component composition principles are not followed. 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 Arco Design principles: 1) Consistent use of Arco Design components without mixing other UI libraries 2) Proper layout spacing following Arco's spacing system 3) Professional typography adhering to Arco's font hierarchy. Deduct 3 points for each inconsistently styled component, 5 points for layout that breaks Arco grid system, and 5 points for typography that doesn't follow Arco guidelines. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 9,
-      "title": "Is the dynamic interaction smooth and seamless?",
-      "description": "Judge whether the dynamic effects conform to human perception characteristics: 1) Editor responsiveness with input lag ≤ 50ms 2) Smooth transitions between editor states/modes with duration controlled between 150-300ms 3) Clear visual feedback for actions. Deduct 5 points for perceptible input lag, 3 points for janky transitions, and 5 points for actions without visual feedback. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    }
-  ],
-  "class": "Utility Tools-Daily Office Tasks",
-  "difficulty": "easy"
-}

package/library/utility_tools-daily_office_tasks/countdown-mini-program-html-output.json

@@ -1,68 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "index": 1677,
-  "question": "You are a coding expert, please utilize your professional knowledge to generate accurate, professional responses. Make sure the code you generate is executable when possible. Write a countdown mini program that outputs using HTML.",
-  "checklist": [
-    {
-      "id": 0,
-      "title": "Is the core countdown functionality properly implemented?",
-      "description": "Check whether the code accurately implements a countdown timer using JavaScript with proper time calculations and interval handling. Verify if the timer decreases at the correct rate (1 second intervals) and handles time properly. Score 0 if countdown functionality is missing, 5 if basic implementation with flaws, and 10 if it includes precise time tracking with proper interval management.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 1,
-      "title": "Does the countdown have proper start, pause, and reset controls?",
-      "description": "Evaluate if the code includes user controls to start, pause, and reset the countdown. Check if these controls work properly without glitches (e.g., rapid clicking causing timer anomalies). Score 0 if controls are missing, 5 if only partial controls are implemented, and 10 if all controls work flawlessly with proper event handling.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 2,
-      "title": "Is the countdown customizable by the user?",
-      "description": "Assess whether users can input or select their desired countdown duration. Check for input validation to prevent invalid time values (negative numbers, non-numeric inputs). Score 0 if customization is not possible, 5 if basic input exists but lacks validation, and 10 if there's comprehensive input handling with validation and user-friendly selection methods.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 3,
-      "title": "Does the countdown provide appropriate notifications when finished?",
-      "description": "Verify if the program provides clear visual and/or audible feedback when the countdown reaches zero. Check if the notification is noticeable but not intrusive. Score 0 if no completion notification exists, 5 if there's only basic text indication, and 10 if there are polished notifications (visual effects, sounds, or both) with an option to dismiss or acknowledge.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 4,
-      "title": "Is the code robust?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as rapid control clicking, browser tab switching, device sleep/wake cycles, etc.) and provide graceful degradation. Code with strong robustness should maintain accurate timing and state across these scenarios, giving 10 points. If the robustness is average, give 5 points, and if no error handling exists, 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 progress indicators like circular progress bars 2. Themes or appearance customization 3. Saved presets for common countdown durations). 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 timing functions 2. Function modules unrelated to countdown functionality 3. Fancy effects that affect performance or distract from core functionality. 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 code organization (separation of concerns between HTML, CSS, and JavaScript), variable naming conventions, and implementation efficiency. Deduct 5 points if global namespace pollution is found; deduct 5 points if there's significant code duplication; deduct 5 points if the code uses inefficient approaches (like excessive DOM manipulation in timing loops). The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 8,
-      "title": "Does the interface vision meet professional design standards?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the design follows modern design principles: 1) Clean and consistent color scheme 2) Proper layout with adequate spacing between elements 3) Typography that's easy to read with appropriate sizing hierarchy. Deduct 3 points for each poorly positioned element, 5 points for clashing colors or poor contrast, and 5 points for difficult-to-read text. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 9,
-      "title": "Is the dynamic interaction smooth and responsive?",
-      "description": "Judge whether the interface responds smoothly to user interactions: 1) Button clicks register immediately 2) Timer updates smoothly without visual jitter 3) Transitions between states (running, paused, reset) are clear and intuitive. Deduct 5 points if interactions have noticeable lag, 3 points for jerky animations or updates, and 5 points if the current timer state is not clearly indicated. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    }
-  ],
-  "class": "Utility Tools-Daily Office Tasks",
-  "difficulty": "easy"
-}

package/library/utility_tools-daily_office_tasks/create-selector-for-discipline-json-data.json

@@ -1,68 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "index": 1624,
-  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Ensure that the code you generate is executable for demonstration purposes.\n{\n  \"SubjectCategories\": \"Economics\",\n  \"category\": [\n    {\n      \"type\": \"Economics\",\n      \"subject\":[\n        \"Economics\",\n        \"Economic Statistics\",\n        \"National Economic Management\",\n        \"Resource and Environmental Economics\",\n        \"Business Economics\",\n        \"Energy Economics\"\n      ]\n    },\n    {\n      \"type\": \"Public Finance\",\n      \"subject\":[\n        \"Public Finance\",\n        \"Taxation\"\n      ]\n    },\n    {\n      \"type\": \"Finance\",\n      \"subject\":[\n        \"Finance\",\n        \"Financial Engineering\",\n        \"Insurance\",\n        \"Investment\",\n        \"Financial Mathematics\",\n        \"Credit Management\",\n        \"Economics and Finance\"\n      ]\n    },\n    {\n      \"type\": \"Economics and Trade\",\n      \"subject\":[\n        \"International Economics and Trade\",\n        \"Trade Economics\"\n      ]\n    }\n  ]\n},\nThis is my discipline's JSON data, and I need to create a selector for it",
-  "checklist": [
-    {
-      "id": 0,
-      "title": "Is the hierarchical selector structure correctly implemented?",
-      "description": "Review whether the code accurately implements a multi-level selector based on the JSON data structure (SubjectCategories -> type -> subject), including proper data parsing, category-subject relationship mapping, and cascading selection logic. Score 0 if the hierarchical structure is not implemented, 5 if only basic two-level selection is implemented, and 10 if the complete three-level cascading selector with proper data binding is fully functional.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 1,
-      "title": "Is the dynamic data rendering and state management implemented?",
-      "description": "Check whether the selector dynamically renders options based on JSON data with proper state management for selection changes. Evaluate if the component updates child options when parent categories change, maintains selection state consistency, and handles data mutations correctly. Deduct 5 points if state synchronization is missing, and 3 points if data binding is incomplete. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 2,
-      "title": "Is comprehensive interaction functionality provided?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the selector includes essential features like search/filter functionality, multi-selection support, clear/reset options, and proper validation. Check if users can easily navigate through categories and find specific subjects. Deduct 5 points if search functionality is not implemented, and 3 points if selection validation is missing. Give 10 points if all interactive features are fully implemented.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 3,
-      "title": "Is the component architecture well-structured and reusable?",
-      "description": "Check whether the selector is designed as a reusable component with proper props/configuration options, clean separation of concerns, and ability to handle different JSON data structures. Evaluate if the component can be easily integrated into different contexts and supports customization. Deduct 5 points if the component is not modular, and 3 points if configuration options are limited. 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 malformed JSON data, empty categories, network errors, invalid selections, etc.) and provide friendly error prompts or fallback mechanisms. Code with strong robustness should gracefully handle edge cases like missing data properties or unexpected data types, 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 selector includes enhanced user experience features (e.g., 1. Auto-complete with fuzzy matching 2. Recently selected items memory 3. Keyboard navigation support 4. Export selected items functionality 5. Visual grouping with icons). 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 selection logic (e.g., multiple dropdown handlers) 2. Function modules unrelated to data selection (e.g., built-in data analytics) 3. Overly complex animations that affect selector performance. Deduct 3 points for each redundancy found, and directly deduct 10 points if core selection functionality is interfered with by redundant code.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 7,
-      "title": "Does the code have engineering quality?",
-      "description": "Review component modularity (separating data logic/view/event handling), proper naming conventions, and code organization. Deduct 5 points if global state pollution is found or proper component patterns are not used; deduct 5 points if code duplication rate is too high (over 30%); deduct 5 points if the component lacks proper documentation or type definitions. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 8,
-      "title": "Does the interface design meet professional standards?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the selector design follows modern UI principles: 1) Consistent visual hierarchy with proper typography 2) Adequate spacing and alignment (following 8px grid system) 3) Professional color scheme with sufficient contrast ratios 4) Clear visual states (hover, active, disabled, selected). Deduct 3 points for each poorly designed visual element, 5 points for accessibility issues, and 5 points for inconsistent styling patterns. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 9,
-      "title": "Is the interaction smooth and user-friendly?",
-      "description": "Judge whether the selector provides excellent user experience: 1) Immediate response to user actions (≤ 100ms) 2) Smooth dropdown animations (300-500ms duration) 3) Clear visual feedback for selections 4) Intuitive navigation flow 5) Proper focus management for accessibility. Deduct 5 points for each sluggish interaction, 3 points for confusing navigation patterns, and 5 points for poor keyboard accessibility. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    }
-  ],
-  "class": "Utility Tools-Daily Office Tasks",
-  "difficulty": "easy"
-}

package/library/utility_tools-daily_office_tasks/create-tool-collect-consolidate-weekly-reports.json

@@ -1,68 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "index": 1167,
-  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and specialized responses. Make sure that the code you generate is executable and ready for demonstration. Help me create a small internal tool that can collect weekly reports submitted by everyone and compile them into a final consolidated document.",
-  "checklist": [
-    {
-      "id": 0,
-      "title": "Is the report collection system's core functionality implemented?",
-      "description": "Review whether the code implements the essential features for report collection: form submission, data validation, and storage mechanism. Check if the system allows users to submit reports with necessary fields (name, date, content, etc.). Score 0 if collection functionality is missing, 5 if basic submission works but lacks validation, 10 if complete with proper validation and error handling.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 1,
-      "title": "Is the report consolidation feature properly implemented?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can effectively aggregate individual reports into a consolidated document. Check if it sorts by department/date, removes duplicates, and maintains proper formatting. Deduct 5 points if consolidation is manual rather than automated, 3 points if formatting is inconsistent. Full score requires intelligent merging with categorization capabilities.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 2,
-      "title": "Is the data persistence mechanism appropriate?",
-      "description": "Check whether the tool implements suitable data storage for reports (database, file system, etc.). Assess if it includes backup functionality and can handle concurrent access. Deduct 5 points if data is only stored in memory without persistence, 3 points if there's no backup mechanism. Give 10 points for complete implementation with transaction support and data integrity checks.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 3,
-      "title": "Is the user authentication and permission system implemented?",
-      "description": "Review whether the tool implements user roles (e.g., submitters, reviewers, administrators) with appropriate access controls. Check if it provides different views/capabilities based on user roles. Score 0 if authentication is missing, 5 if basic login exists but lacks proper role-based permissions, 10 if complete with secure session management and fine-grained access control.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 4,
-      "title": "Is the code robust?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as invalid input data, server errors, concurrent submissions, 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. Automated report summarization using NLP 2. Interactive charts/visualizations of report metrics 3. Customizable templates for different departments). 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 save mechanisms coexisting) 2. Function modules unrelated to report collection (e.g., a built-in calendar unrelated to deadlines) 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/business/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 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 interactions, and 5 points for hard-to-find key function buttons. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    }
-  ],
-  "class": "Utility Tools-Daily Office Tasks",
-  "difficulty": "easy"
-}

package/library/utility_tools-daily_office_tasks/create-webpage-hyperlinks-to-run-programs.json

@@ -1,68 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "index": 1643,
-  "question": "You are a coding expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Make sure that any code you generate is executable and can be demonstrated. I have downloaded some commonly used software for computers and I want to create a webpage that contains hyperlinks to these programs, allowing them to run when clicked. Please help me write the code for this.",
-  "checklist": [
-    {
-      "id": 0,
-      "title": "Is a proper HTML structure implemented for the hyperlinks webpage?",
-      "description": "Review whether the code includes essential HTML5 document structure (DOCTYPE, html, head, body tags), proper metadata (title, charset), and organized content sections. Check if semantic HTML elements are used appropriately (nav, main, section, footer). Score 0 if missing basic structure, 5 if basic structure exists but lacks semantic elements, and 10 if fully implemented with proper organization.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 1,
-      "title": "Are the hyperlinks correctly implemented to launch local applications?",
-      "description": "Verify if the code properly implements protocol handlers (like file:, mailto:) or custom URI schemes for launching local applications. Check for proper usage of href attributes in anchor tags with absolute paths. Deduct 5 points if links use relative paths that would break in production, and 3 points if there's no error handling for unavailable applications. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 2,
-      "title": "Is there proper security implementation and user warnings?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the code includes security considerations like warning users before launching external applications, explaining potential risks, and implementing confirmation dialogs. Check if the code addresses browser security restrictions for launching local files. Deduct 5 points if there are no user confirmations and 5 points if security risks aren't explained. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 3,
-      "title": "Is there a fallback mechanism for browsers with different security policies?",
-      "description": "Check whether the code provides alternative methods for browsers that restrict launching local applications, such as download instructions, detailed manual launch steps, or detection of browser compatibility. Deduct 5 points if no alternatives are provided, and 3 points if the detection logic 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 missing applications, browser restrictions, user permission denials, 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. Application icons or thumbnails 2. Search/filter functionality for applications 3. Grouping applications by category or frequency of use). 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 launch the same application) 2. Function modules unrelated to application launching (e.g., unnecessary media players) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., heavy animations when hovering over links). Deduct 3 points for each redundancy found, and directly deduct 10 points if the core functions are interfered with by redundant code.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 7,
-      "title": "Does the code have engineering quality?",
-      "description": "Review modular design (such as separating UI/logic/data layers), code organization, and maintainability. Deduct 5 points if global namespace 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 consideration for maintaining and updating the application list. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 8,
-      "title": "Does the interface vision meet professional design standards?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the overall design follows modern design principles: 1) Harmonious color matching (no more than 3 primary colors) 2) Proper layout spacing (element spacing follows the 8px multiple principle) 3) Professional font system (body font size ≥ 14px, line height over 1.5 times). Deduct 3 points for each crowded visual element, 5 points for a glaring color combination, and 5 points for chaotic text-image layout. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 9,
-      "title": "Is the dynamic interaction smooth and seamless?",
-      "description": "Judge whether the dynamic effects conform to human perception characteristics: 1) Click feedback delay ≤ 100ms 2) Transition animation duration controlled between 300-500ms 3) Clear visual focus guidance. Deduct 5 points for each operation without feedback, 3 points for visual after-images during fast interaction, and 5 points for hard-to-find key function buttons. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    }
-  ],
-  "class": "Utility Tools-Daily Office Tasks",
-  "difficulty": "easy"
-}