@getollie/cli 0.0.5 → 0.2.0

package/library/web_applications-education_learning/creative-writing-assistance-platform.json

@@ -1,68 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "index": 463,
-  "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. Given a software development requirement description, you are asked to generate project code based on the requirements. Strictly follow the rules to help users generate complete project code with simple and understandable comments, without outputting anything else.\n\n## Output Rules\n1. You will always generate complete, runnable project code; please ensure the project is fully executable\n2. Ensure all code files you output are complete, do not omit any code\n3. Carefully review and check all code before final output, evaluating its executability. If the code cannot execute or contains errors, it needs to be regenerated\n4. If the requirements involve external API access or user data (images, videos, audio, etc.), please provide simulated data\n\n## Project Requirements Description\nDesign a creative writing assistance platform to help users overcome writer's block. Provide a random writing prompt generator that includes elements such as characters, settings, conflicts, etc. Create a timed writing mode where users need to complete a certain word count within a specific time. Implement a library of writing templates that include structural guidance for different genres. Add a vocabulary recommendation feature that suggests relevant words based on the user's existing text. Provide simple text analysis tools displaying statistics such as frequency of common words, sentence length variations, etc. Support saving works and exporting to different formats.",
-  "checklist": [
-    {
-      "id": 0,
-      "title": "Is the random writing prompt generator fully implemented?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the code implements a robust prompt generator that includes diverse elements (characters, settings, conflicts, genres, etc.). Check if the prompts are random but coherent, with sufficient variety to prevent repetition. The generator should allow for customization of prompt types and complexity.0 points if missing completely, 5 points if only basic random selection without proper categories, 10 points for a complete implementation with diverse elements and combinations that feel natural and inspiring.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 1,
-      "title": "Is the timed writing mode functionality complete?",
-      "description": "Check if the code implements a timer system with configurable duration, word count targets, and proper progress tracking. Verify if it handles start/pause/resume states correctly, provides appropriate notifications (approaching deadline, completion), and accurately tracks writing metrics during the session.Deduct 3 points if timer controls are missing, 3 points if word count tracking is inaccurate, 4 points if progress visualization is absent. Full 10 points requires proper time management, word goal tracking, and user feedback systems.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 2,
-      "title": "Are writing templates properly implemented?",
-      "description": "Assess if the code includes a diverse library of writing templates for different genres (fiction, non-fiction, poetry, etc.) with clear structural guidance. Templates should be organized by category, include explanatory notes, and allow for customization.0 points if templates are missing, 5 points if only basic templates without proper structure or guidance, 10 points for comprehensive implementation with multiple genres, detailed structural guidance, and customization options.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 3,
-      "title": "Is the vocabulary recommendation feature effective?",
-      "description": "Evaluate the vocabulary suggestion algorithm that analyzes user text and recommends relevant words. Check if it considers context, offers synonyms/antonyms, suggests more vivid alternatives, and avoids repetitive suggestions. The feature should enhance the writing without disrupting flow.Deduct 5 points if recommendations are random rather than context-based, 3 points if the feature causes performance issues with longer texts, 3 points if the suggestions lack variety or relevance. 10 points for a smart, context-aware system with diverse, helpful recommendations.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 4,
-      "title": "Is the code robust?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as large text inputs, browser refreshes, connection issues, etc.) and provide friendly error prompts or recovery mechanisms. Check for proper form validation, data persistence during unexpected events, and graceful error handling.Code with strong robustness should effectively handle edge cases, giving 10 points. If robustness is average, give 5 points, and if no exceptions are handled, give 0 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 5,
-      "title": "Are there any innovative features that are eye-catching?",
-      "description": "Check whether the code includes surprise features that enhance the experience (e.g., 1. AI-assisted plot development suggestions 2. Mood-based writing environment customization 3. Collaborative writing functionality 4. Voice-to-text for hands-free ideation).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 text analysis algorithms doing the same thing) 2. Function modules unrelated to writing assistance (e.g., built-in games) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., excessive animations during typing).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 (separating UI/logic/data persistence), code organization, maintainability, and build process automation. Check for proper state management, component reusability, and consistent coding standards.Deduct 5 points if global state pollution is found or design patterns are not used; deduct 5 points if 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 that creates a conducive writing environment 2) Proper layout spacing with clear content hierarchy 3) Professional font system appropriate for reading and writing (readable fonts, proper contrast). Check if the interface minimizes distractions while writing.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 feedback when typing 2) Smooth transitions between writing modes 3) Non-intrusive notifications for timer events or suggestions. Evaluate if the platform feels responsive and intuitive during extended writing sessions.Deduct 5 points for each operation without feedback, 3 points for laggy text input or stuttering during scrolling, and 5 points if core writing functions (text editing, formatting) aren't immediately accessible. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    }
-  ],
-  "class": "Web Applications-Education/Learning",
-  "difficulty": "easy"
-}

package/library/web_applications-education_learning/daily-wellness-app-with-card-unlocking-interface.json

@@ -1,68 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "index": 872,
-  "question": "You are a code expert, please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Be careful to ensure that the code you generate is executable for display. I want ready to generate a design for a daily water drinking, exercise, and customized app interface, where users can unlock official cards within the interface, similar to Duolingo and Candy Crush's path-unlocking interface. How should I write a prompt for ready to generate the style I want?",
-  "checklist": [
-    {
-      "id": 0,
-      "title": "Does the prompt effectively describe the daily tracking functionality requirements?",
-      "description": "Check whether the prompt clearly specifies the core tracking features needed (water intake, exercise tracking, custom habit tracking). Evaluate if it includes specific metrics for each tracking type (e.g., ml/oz of water, minutes/calories for exercise, frequency/completion for custom habits). Deduct 5 points if tracking parameters are vague, 5 points if notification/reminder requirements are missing. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 1,
-      "title": "Is the card unlocking progression system adequately defined in the prompt?",
-      "description": "Review if the prompt clearly explains the desired card unlocking mechanics, progression path structure, and achievement criteria. Check for specific references to Duolingo/Candy Crush mechanics as benchmarks. Score 0 if progression mechanics are entirely absent, 5 if only basic unlocking is mentioned, and 10 if the prompt includes detailed specifications for milestone achievements, conditional unlocking logic, and progression visualization requirements.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 2,
-      "title": "Does the prompt specify visual style requirements and UI/UX guidelines?",
-      "description": "Evaluate if the prompt includes clear direction on desired aesthetic (e.g., flat design, skeuomorphic, minimalist), color scheme preferences, and specific UI component styling. Check if it references specific apps for visual benchmarking beyond just functionality. Deduct 5 points if visual style direction is completely missing, 3 points if only vague style references are included. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 3,
-      "title": "Are gamification elements and reward systems clearly articulated?",
-      "description": "Check if the prompt specifies desired gamification elements beyond card unlocking (e.g., points systems, badges, streaks, levels). Evaluate whether it defines how rewards should motivate users and integrate with the tracking features. Deduct 5 points if gamification elements are mentioned without connection to core functionality, 3 points if reward progression isn't specified. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 4,
-      "title": "Is the code robust?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the prompt requests code that can handle common abnormal situations (such as data input errors, network disconnections, accessibility considerations) and provide friendly error prompts or recovery mechanisms. Check if it asks for code that can effectively handle edge cases and device variations. Score 10 points for comprehensive robustness requirements, 5 points for average consideration, and 0 points if robustness is not mentioned.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 5,
-      "title": "Are there any innovative features that are eye-catching?",
-      "description": "Check whether the prompt requests innovative features that enhance the experience (e.g., 1. AR water visualization 2. Social challenges/competitions 3. Smart goal recommendations based on user data). Add 3 points for each practical innovative feature requested (maximum 10 points).",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 6,
-      "title": "Are there any redundant features?",
-      "description": "Strictly check three types of redundancy in the prompt: 1. Overlapping tracking mechanisms 2. Feature requests unrelated to health/habit tracking 3. Complex visualizations that could hinder basic functionality. Deduct 3 points for each redundancy found, and directly deduct 10 points if the core functions are overshadowed by unnecessary feature requests.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 7,
-      "title": "Does the prompt request code with engineering quality?",
-      "description": "Review if the prompt specifically asks for modular design, code organization standards, or architectural patterns. Check if it requests test coverage requirements or build process automation. Deduct 5 points if no code quality requirements are mentioned, 5 points if the prompt doesn't specify component reusability, 5 points if it doesn't address performance considerations. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 8,
-      "title": "Does the prompt specify interface vision meeting professional design standards?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the prompt requests designs following modern design principles: 1) Harmonious color matching 2) Proper layout spacing 3) Professional font system and typography. Deduct 3 points if accessibility requirements are not mentioned, 5 points if responsive design requirements are missing, and 5 points if there's no request for consistent visual language. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 9,
-      "title": "Does the prompt request smooth and seamless dynamic interaction?",
-      "description": "Judge whether the prompt specifies requirements for dynamic effects that conform to human perception: 1) Responsive feedback 2) Appropriate animation durations 3) Clear visual guidance. Deduct 5 points if the prompt doesn't mention interaction feedback requirements, 3 points if transition animations aren't addressed, and 5 points if it doesn't specify intuitive navigation requirements. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    }
-  ],
-  "class": "Web Applications-Education/Learning",
-  "difficulty": "easy"
-}

package/library/web_applications-education_learning/dynamic-weather-forecast-website.json

@@ -1,68 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "index": 511,
-  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate, expert responses. Ensure that the generated code is executable when possible. Implement a dynamic weather forecast website where users can input a city name to view real-time weather information. The page display should include weather icons, temperature, humidity, and other data, with the background automatically changing according to weather conditions. Support day and night modes, allow users to switch between viewing weather forecasts for the next five days, and present the data in chart format.",
-  "checklist": [
-    {
-      "id": 0,
-      "title": "Is the core city search and weather data retrieval function implemented?",
-      "description": "Review whether the code implements a functional city search system that correctly queries weather data from a reliable API (like OpenWeatherMap, WeatherAPI, etc.). Check for proper error handling for invalid cities, API failures, and rate limiting. Score 0 if no search functionality exists, 5 if basic search works but lacks error handling, and 10 if comprehensive search with all error cases is handled.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 1,
-      "title": "Is the real-time weather data display complete and accurate?",
-      "description": "Evaluate if the implementation displays all required weather data points (temperature, humidity, weather icons, etc.) and whether the data updates dynamically. Check if the icons properly represent different weather conditions. Deduct 3 points if temperature units aren't toggleable (°C/°F), 2 points if humidity data is missing, and 5 points if weather icons don't properly match conditions. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 2,
-      "title": "Is the 5-day forecast feature fully implemented?",
-      "description": "Check if the code properly retrieves and displays forecast data for the next five days. Verify that the UI provides clear navigation between current weather and forecast views. Evaluate if the forecast data is comprehensive (temperature ranges, precipitation probability, etc.). Deduct 5 points if the forecast data is incomplete, 3 points if navigation between views is confusing, and 5 points if the forecast lacks visual differentiation from current weather data. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 3,
-      "title": "Is the chart-based data visualization properly implemented?",
-      "description": "Assess whether the code uses appropriate chart libraries (Chart.js, D3.js, etc.) to visualize weather trends. Check if charts are responsive, interactive, and present data in an intuitive format. Verify that temperature, humidity, and other metrics are properly represented with appropriate scales. Deduct 3 points for non-interactive charts, 5 points for charts that don't resize responsively, and 5 points if data visualization is confusing or misleading. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 4,
-      "title": "Is the code robust?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as API failures, network interruption, user input 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. Weather alerts/notifications 2. Location-based automatic detection 3. Weather history comparison 4. Animation effects for different weather conditions). 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 API calls for the same data 2. Function modules unrelated to weather forecasting 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 API service/UI components/data processing), use of modern front-end practices (like component-based architecture), 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 (weather-appropriate and visually pleasing) 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 background changes based on weather conditions are smooth and appropriate, and if the day/night mode transitions are well-implemented. Check if 1) Weather condition transitions are visually appealing 2) Day/night mode toggle is intuitive and changes all relevant elements 3) Response time for city search is ≤ 500ms with visual loading indicators. Deduct 5 points for jarring background transitions, 3 points if day/night mode is incomplete, and 5 points if interactions feel sluggish. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    }
-  ],
-  "class": "Web Applications-Education/Learning",
-  "difficulty": "medium"
-}

package/library/web_applications-education_learning/dynamic-web-page-oxidation-reduction-reactions.json

@@ -1,68 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "index": 949,
-  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate, professional responses. Make sure the code you create is executable for demonstration purposes. Design a dynamic web page that demonstrates oxidation-reduction reactions.",
-  "checklist": [
-    {
-      "id": 0,
-      "title": "Is the oxidation-reduction reaction simulation correctly implemented?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the code accurately models electron transfer mechanisms between chemical species. Check if oxidation numbers change properly and if the simulation follows standard redox principles. Score 0 if core redox concepts are missing, 5 if only basic electron transfer is shown, and 10 if multiple complex redox reactions with proper balancing are included.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 1,
-      "title": "Are chemical equations balanced and scientifically accurate?",
-      "description": "Check if the chemical equations maintain proper mass and charge balance across the reaction. Verify that oxidation states are correctly calculated and displayed. Deduct 5 points if equations are unbalanced, and 3 points if oxidation state calculations contain errors. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 2,
-      "title": "Is the visualization of electron transfer clear and educational?",
-      "description": "Assess whether the visualization clearly shows electron movement between atoms/molecules using appropriate animations. The visualization should help users understand which species is oxidized and which is reduced. Deduct 5 points if electron flow isn't visibly tracked, 3 points if the oxidizing/reducing agents aren't clearly identified. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 3,
-      "title": "Does the page include interactive controls for user experimentation?",
-      "description": "Evaluate if users can interact with the simulation by changing reactants, concentrations, or conditions to see different redox outcomes. Check if the interface allows users to test hypotheses and observe cause-effect relationships. Award 10 points for comprehensive interactive features, 5 for basic controls, and 0 if no interactivity exists.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 4,
-      "title": "Is the code robust?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the code handles edge cases such as invalid chemical inputs, extreme concentration values, or unexpected user interactions. Test if the simulation degrades gracefully under unexpected conditions. Code with strong robustness should provide helpful error messages and prevent simulation crashes, 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 educational experience (e.g., 1. Real-time energy level visualization 2. Molecular orbital representation 3. Interactive periodic table integration). 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 chemical calculations 2. Function modules unrelated to redox reactions (e.g., unrelated simulations) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance without educational value. Deduct 3 points for each redundancy found, and directly deduct 10 points if the core educational 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 chemical logic/view/calculation 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 scientific visualization principles: 1) Color schemes that effectively distinguish chemical species 2) Clear spatial representation of molecular structures 3) Professional labeling of elements and compounds (correct formulas, subscripts, etc.). Deduct 3 points for each crowded visual element, 5 points for misleading chemical representations, and 5 points for incorrect scientific notation. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 9,
-      "title": "Is the dynamic interaction smooth and educational?",
-      "description": "Judge whether the animations and transitions enhance conceptual understanding: 1) Reaction speed appropriate for observation (not too fast/slow) 2) Clear visual distinction between oxidation and reduction processes 3) Meaningful color changes or visual cues that reinforce chemical concepts. Deduct 5 points for confusing animations that misrepresent chemical processes, 3 points for unclear reaction steps, and 5 points for transitions that distract from the educational content. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    }
-  ],
-  "class": "Web Applications-Education/Learning",
-  "difficulty": "medium"
-}

package/library/web_applications-education_learning/elementary-chinese-recitation-program.json

@@ -1,68 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "index": 866,
-  "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 is executable. Help me create a program for elementary school Chinese language recitation practice.",
-  "checklist": [
-    {
-      "id": 0,
-      "title": "Is the core Chinese recitation functionality implemented?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the code implements the primary functionality for Chinese text recitation practice, including text display, reading aloud capability, and user input validation. Score 0 if the core mechanism is missing, 5 if only basic text display is implemented, and 10 if it includes comprehensive recitation features with pronunciation guidance.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 1,
-      "title": "Is there an appropriate difficulty progression system?",
-      "description": "Check if the program includes different difficulty levels suitable for elementary school students of various grades (e.g., simpler characters for lower grades, more complex texts for higher grades). Evaluate whether the system can adaptively adjust difficulty based on student performance. Score 0 if no progression system exists, 5 if basic levels are included, and 10 if a comprehensive adaptive difficulty system is implemented.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 2,
-      "title": "Does the program include a comprehensive vocabulary management system?",
-      "description": "Assess whether the code implements proper vocabulary management, including categorization of characters/words by difficulty, pinyin notation, and frequency of appearance in elementary curriculum. Deduct 5 points if vocabulary is not age-appropriate, 3 points if pinyin is missing or incorrect, and 3 points if there's no organization by topics or lessons. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 3,
-      "title": "Is there an effective feedback and scoring mechanism?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the program provides clear feedback on student performance, tracking progress over time and highlighting areas for improvement. Check if there's a scoring system that rewards correct recitation and provides constructive feedback for mistakes. Score 0 if feedback is absent, 5 if basic scoring exists, and 10 if comprehensive performance analytics are included.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 4,
-      "title": "Is the code robust?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as invalid user inputs, unexpected pronunciation attempts, system resource limitations) 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 learning experience (e.g., 1. Animated character stroke order demonstrations 2. Gamification elements like achievement badges 3. Voice recognition for pronunciation correction). 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 text-to-speech engines running simultaneously) 2. Function modules unrelated to Chinese language learning (e.g., a built-in calculator) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., excessive animations that distract from learning). 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 learning content/view/assessment components), 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 child-friendly design standards?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the design is appropriate for elementary school students: 1) Child-friendly color scheme with adequate contrast 2) Age-appropriate visual elements and typography (larger font size ≥ 16px, clear character display) 3) Intuitive layout with consistent navigation elements. Deduct 3 points for each hard-to-read text element, 5 points for visually overwhelming interfaces, and 5 points for unintuitive controls that would confuse children. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 9,
-      "title": "Is the learning interaction engaging and age-appropriate?",
-      "description": "Judge whether the interaction design is suitable for elementary school students: 1) Clear instructions with audio cues 2) Appropriate reward mechanisms for correct recitations 3) Patience-oriented interaction flow with proper timing for young learners. Deduct 5 points if instructions are unclear, 3 points for lack of positive reinforcement, and 5 points for interactions requiring fine motor skills beyond the target age group. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    }
-  ],
-  "class": "Web Applications-Education/Learning",
-  "difficulty": "medium"
-}

package/library/web_applications-education_learning/elementary-english-text-learning-coze-tool.json

@@ -1,68 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "index": 1607,
-  "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. How should I create a tool for elementary school English text learning using Coze?",
-  "checklist": [
-    {
-      "id": 0,
-      "title": "Is the elementary English learning tool conceptually well-defined?",
-      "description": "Review whether the solution clearly defines the core learning objectives for elementary English (vocabulary, reading comprehension, phonics, etc.). Evaluate if the content is age-appropriate and follows pedagogical principles for language acquisition. Score 0 if no clear learning objectives are defined, 5 if basic objectives exist but lack depth, and 10 if comprehensive learning goals with progression paths are established.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 1,
-      "title": "Is the Coze bot configuration fully implemented?",
-      "description": "Check whether the code includes complete Coze bot setup instructions, including persona definition, knowledge base configuration, and prompt engineering. Deduct 5 points if the bot configuration lacks educational scaffolding, and 3 points if the bot doesn't include error handling for child interactions. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 2,
-      "title": "Are interactive learning modules designed for the tool?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the solution implements engaging interactive components (quizzes, flashcards, story completion exercises, etc.) using Coze's capabilities. Check if the modules include proper feedback mechanisms for young learners. Deduct 5 points if interactivity is limited to basic Q&A, 3 points if feedback is generic rather than personalized. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 3,
-      "title": "Is there an appropriate difficulty progression system?",
-      "description": "Assess whether the tool includes a system for adapting content difficulty based on learner progress (vocabulary complexity increases, sentence structure advancement, etc.). Examine if there's logic for tracking student progress and adjusting content accordingly. Deduct 5 points if there's no adaptation mechanism, 3 points if progression lacks smoothness. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 4,
-      "title": "Is the code robust?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common issues in educational technology (such as unclear student inputs, repetitive questions, off-topic interactions, etc.) and provide appropriate guidance. Code with strong robustness should be able to effectively redirect learners back to educational objectives, 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 solution includes surprise features that enhance the learning experience (e.g., 1. Animated character rewards for achievements 2. Voice interaction capabilities 3. Personalized learning paths based on interests). 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. Overlapping educational modules that teach the same concept in similar ways 2. Features unrelated to elementary English learning (e.g., advanced grammar unsuitable for the age group) 3. Overly complex interactions that could confuse young learners. Deduct 3 points for each redundancy found, and directly deduct 10 points if core learning functions are interfered with by redundant features.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 7,
-      "title": "Does the code have engineering quality?",
-      "description": "Review modular design (separating content/interaction logic/user progression tracking), reusability of educational components, and documentation quality. Deduct 5 points if global state management is chaotic; deduct 5 points if code organization makes content updates difficult; deduct 5 points if configuration lacks comments explaining pedagogical choices. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 8,
-      "title": "Does the interface vision meet child-friendly design standards?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the design follows child-UX principles: 1) Age-appropriate visuals with clear, simple layouts 2) Large, readable text (minimum 16px, rounded friendly fonts) 3) Consistent, intuitive navigation with visual cues. Deduct 3 points for each complex menu structure, 5 points for overwhelming visual elements, and 5 points for inadequate spacing between interactive elements. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 9,
-      "title": "Is the learning interaction engaging and encouraging?",
-      "description": "Judge whether the interactions support positive learning behaviors: 1) Immediate, constructive feedback for answers 2) Celebration of achievements with appropriate rewards 3) Gentle, encouraging correction for mistakes. Deduct 5 points for delayed or missing feedback, 3 points for discouraging messaging, and 5 points for lack of progression visibility. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    }
-  ],
-  "class": "Web Applications-Education/Learning",
-  "difficulty": "medium"
-}

package/library/web_applications-education_learning/energy-storage-hr-information-webpage.json

@@ -1,68 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "index": 1691,
-  "question": "You are a code expert, please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Make sure the code you generate is executable whenever possible. As an experienced web developer, I need you to create a webpage that collects information about energy storage from across the internet each week, organizes it by category, and presents it on the webpage for my learning and reference. Since I work in human resources, I would also like to include knowledge related to human resources in the energy storage field. The page should be simple and clear.",
-  "checklist": [
-    {
-      "id": 0,
-      "title": "Is the web scraping and data collection functionality properly implemented?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the code includes robust web scraping mechanisms to collect energy storage information from various sources. Check if it handles different website structures, uses proper request throttling to avoid IP blocking, and implements error handling for failed requests. Score 0 if no scraping functionality exists, 5 if basic scraping is implemented but lacks robustness, and 10 if comprehensive scraping with multiple source handling is included.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 1,
-      "title": "Is the weekly information categorization system well-designed?",
-      "description": "Check if the code implements a proper categorization system for energy storage information (e.g., battery technologies, grid storage, EV applications, policy updates) and specifically includes HR-related categories (e.g., job trends, salary benchmarks, required skills). Assess if the categorization is dynamic or static, and whether it can adapt to changing content patterns. Deduct 3 points if the categories are hardcoded without flexibility, and 5 points if HR-specific categories are missing. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 2,
-      "title": "Is the data storage and update mechanism efficient?",
-      "description": "Review how the collected information is stored and updated weekly. Check if the solution uses an appropriate database or storage method (localStorage, IndexedDB, or server-side database), implements data versioning, and has mechanisms to prevent duplicate entries. Assess whether the update process is automated or manual. Deduct 5 points if there's no persistence mechanism, and 3 points if the weekly update process requires manual intervention. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 3,
-      "title": "Is the user interface presentation clear, simple, and effective?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the webpage has a clean, minimalist design as requested, with clear navigation, readable typography, and logical information hierarchy. Check if the HR-specific information is visually distinguished from other energy storage categories. Deduct 3 points for cluttered layouts, 5 points for poor readability (small fonts, low contrast), and 5 points for overly complex navigation structures. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 4,
-      "title": "Is the code robust?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as network failures during scraping, malformed data from sources, browser compatibility issues) and provide friendly error prompts or recovery mechanisms. Code with strong robustness should be able to effectively handle these edge cases, giving 10 points. If the robustness is average, give 5 points, and if no exceptions are handled, give 0 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 5,
-      "title": "Are there any innovative features that are eye-catching?",
-      "description": "Check whether the code includes surprise features that enhance the experience (e.g., 1. AI-powered summary of weekly trends 2. Visualization of energy storage market data 3. Personalized content recommendations based on reading history). Add 3 points for each practical innovative feature implemented (maximum 10 points).",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 6,
-      "title": "Are there any redundant features?",
-      "description": "Strictly check three types of redundancy: 1. Redundant implementation of similar functions (e.g., multiple sorting mechanisms that do the same thing) 2. Function modules unrelated to energy storage information (e.g., a built-in game) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., unnecessary animations that slow page loading). Deduct 3 points for each redundancy found, and directly deduct 10 points if the core functions are interfered with by redundant code.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 7,
-      "title": "Does the code have engineering quality?",
-      "description": "Review modular design (such as separating data fetching/processing/presentation layers), code readability, and maintainability. Deduct 5 points if global state pollution is found or design patterns are not used; deduct 5 points if the code duplication rate is too high (over 30%); deduct 5 points if there's no error logging or debugging mechanism. 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 scrolling through weekly information, and 5 points for hard-to-find filtering or search functions. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    }
-  ],
-  "class": "Web Applications-Education/Learning",
-  "difficulty": "easy"
-}

package/library/web_applications-education_learning/english-dictation-system.json

@@ -1,68 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "index": 492,
-  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Be sure to provide executable code when possible. Build an English dictation system. After the user clicks to play an audio, they need to manually input the phrase or sentence word by word based on what they hear. The system detects spelling or grammar errors, displays the correct example sentence alongside the user's errors, and provides correction suggestions.",
-  "checklist": [
-    {
-      "id": 0,
-      "title": "Is the audio playback system properly implemented?",
-      "description": "Review whether the code implements proper audio controls using HTML5 Audio API or Web Audio API. Check if it includes play/pause functionality, replay options, and speed control for different learning levels. Score 0 if audio playback is not implemented, 5 if basic playback exists but lacks controls, and 10 if the implementation includes advanced features like speed adjustment, section repeat, and proper error handling when audio fails to load.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 1,
-      "title": "Is the text input and comparison system accurately implemented?",
-      "description": "Evaluate the system's ability to capture user input in real-time, compare it against the correct text, and identify errors. Check whether it properly handles capitalization, punctuation, spacing, and special characters. Deduct 3 points if it doesn't handle capitalization properly, 3 points if punctuation comparison is flawed, and 5 points if the comparison algorithm produces false positives/negatives. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 2,
-      "title": "Is the error detection and correction suggestion system comprehensive?",
-      "description": "Check if the system identifies spelling errors, grammatical mistakes, and word choice issues. Evaluate whether the correction suggestions are relevant and helpful. The system should differentiate between minor typos and significant errors. Deduct 5 points if only basic spell checking exists without grammar checking, 3 points if suggestions are generic rather than contextual, and 5 points if the system fails to provide explanations for corrections. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 3,
-      "title": "Is there a comprehensive dictionary/database with example sentences?",
-      "description": "Review the implementation of the word database or API integration. Assess whether the system contains or accesses a robust dictionary of words with example sentences, pronunciations, and definitions. Check if the database includes various difficulty levels and topics. Deduct 5 points if the dictionary is limited (fewer than 1000 words), 3 points if example sentences are missing, and 5 points if the system doesn't categorize words by difficulty level. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 4,
-      "title": "Is the code robust?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as invalid inputs, audio loading failures, server connection 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 learning experience (e.g., 1. Voice recognition for spoken practice 2. Personalized difficulty adjustment based on user performance 3. Visual representation of progress over time 4. Gamification elements like streaks or achievements). 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 spell-checkers running simultaneously) 2. Function modules unrelated to language learning (e.g., a built-in calculator) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., excessive animations during typing). 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 handling/text processing/UI display 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 response delay ≤ 100ms 2) Error highlighting appears within 300ms of submission 3) Clear visual guidance between different learning stages. Deduct 5 points for each operation without feedback, 3 points for jarring transitions between dictation states, and 5 points for hard-to-find key function buttons. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    }
-  ],
-  "class": "Web Applications-Education/Learning",
-  "difficulty": "medium"
-}