@getollie/cli 0.0.5 → 0.2.0

package/library/management_systems-frontend_backend_platforms/shadcn-frontend-architecture.json

@@ -1,68 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "index": 903,
-  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Make sure the code you generate is executable for demonstration purposes. Quickly create a frontend architecture based on shadcn.",
-  "checklist": [
-    {
-      "id": 0,
-      "title": "Is the shadcn/ui framework correctly integrated and configured?",
-      "description": "Review whether the code properly initializes shadcn/ui with correct Tailwind CSS configuration, components.json setup, and proper CLI installation. Check if the theme provider is correctly implemented with dark/light mode support. Score 0 if shadcn is not properly configured, 5 if basic setup exists but missing theme configuration, and 10 if complete integration with proper theming system is implemented.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 1,
-      "title": "Are shadcn components properly implemented and customized?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the implementation includes at least 5 different shadcn components (Button, Input, Card, Dialog, etc.) with proper imports and usage. Check if components are customized using the built-in variant system and className overrides. Deduct 3 points for each improperly imported component, 5 points if no component customization is shown. Full score requires diverse component usage with proper styling.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 2,
-      "title": "Is the frontend architecture well-structured and scalable?",
-      "description": "Check whether the code demonstrates a clear folder structure with proper separation of components, hooks, utils, and types. Evaluate if React best practices are followed including proper component composition, custom hooks usage, and state management. Deduct 5 points if components are not properly separated, 3 points if no custom hooks are implemented, 5 points if the folder structure is chaotic. Full score requires enterprise-level architecture.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 3,
-      "title": "Does the implementation showcase modern React patterns and TypeScript integration?",
-      "description": "Assess whether the code uses modern React patterns like functional components, hooks, context API, and proper TypeScript typing. Check for proper interface definitions, generic types usage, and type safety. Score 0 if plain JavaScript is used, 5 if basic TypeScript without proper typing, 10 if comprehensive TypeScript integration with proper type definitions and modern React patterns.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 4,
-      "title": "Is the code robust?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as component loading failures, prop validation errors, API call failures, etc.) and provide friendly error boundaries or fallback mechanisms. Code with strong robustness should include error boundaries, loading states, and proper error handling, 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 impressive features that showcase shadcn's capabilities (e.g., 1. Advanced form validation with react-hook-form integration 2. Complex data tables with sorting/filtering 3. Interactive dashboard components 4. Custom theme switching mechanisms). 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 UI components (e.g., multiple button variations without purpose) 2. Unnecessary third-party libraries when shadcn components exist 3. Over-engineered solutions for simple UI tasks. Deduct 3 points for each redundancy found, and directly deduct 10 points if redundant code interferes with the clean architecture demonstration.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 7,
-      "title": "Does the code have engineering quality?",
-      "description": "Review modular design, proper import/export patterns, ESLint/Prettier configuration, and build process setup. Check for proper component reusability, consistent naming conventions, and clean code principles. Deduct 5 points if component props are not properly typed; deduct 5 points if code duplication rate is high (over 20%); deduct 5 points if no linting configuration is provided. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 8,
-      "title": "Does the interface vision meet professional design standards?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the shadcn implementation follows design system principles: 1) Consistent use of design tokens and CSS variables 2) Proper spacing using Tailwind's spacing scale 3) Coherent typography hierarchy using shadcn's text utilities 4) Accessible color contrast ratios. Deduct 3 points for inconsistent spacing, 5 points for poor color contrast, and 5 points for typography hierarchy issues. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 9,
-      "title": "Is the dynamic interaction smooth and seamless?",
-      "description": "Judge whether the shadcn components demonstrate proper interaction states: 1) Hover states and focus indicators working correctly 2) Loading states and skeleton screens implemented 3) Smooth transitions using shadcn's built-in animations 4) Proper keyboard navigation support. Deduct 5 points for missing interaction states, 3 points for jarring animations, and 5 points for poor accessibility support. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    }
-  ],
-  "class": "Management Systems-Frontend/Backend Platforms",
-  "difficulty": "medium"
-}

package/library/management_systems-frontend_backend_platforms/shared-bicycle-management-system.json

@@ -1,68 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "index": 1506,
-  "question": "You are a code expert, please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Be sure to make the generated code executable for demonstration. Help me write a shared bicycle management system, including the process and code.",
-  "checklist": [
-    {
-      "id": 0,
-      "title": "Is the bicycle management core system fully implemented?",
-      "description": "Review whether the code accurately implements bicycle inventory management, user registration/authentication, rental/return processes, and billing calculations through a complete tech stack. Must include bicycle status tracking (available/rented/maintenance), location-based search, and real-time availability updates. Score 0 if core CRUD operations are missing, 5 if only basic rental logic is implemented, and 10 if all management workflows including pricing tiers and damage reporting are fully functional.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 1,
-      "title": "Is the real-time location tracking and map integration implemented?",
-      "description": "Check whether the system integrates mapping services (Google Maps/OpenStreetMap) with real-time GPS tracking, geofencing for parking zones, and proximity-based bicycle search. Must include live location updates, route planning, and parking zone validation. Deduct 5 points if GPS accuracy is below 10 meters, and 3 points if map rendering performance is poor (>2s load time). Full score requires seamless map interaction with clustering for dense areas.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 2,
-      "title": "Is the payment and billing system properly designed with transaction security?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the payment integration includes secure payment gateways, transaction logging, refund mechanisms, and multi-tier pricing (hourly/daily/monthly passes). Must implement proper encryption for payment data and transaction rollback capabilities. Deduct 5 points if payment security standards (PCI DSS) are not followed, 3 points if transaction history is incomplete. Requires proper handling of failed payments and automatic billing suspension.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 3,
-      "title": "Is the administrative dashboard and analytics system comprehensive?",
-      "description": "Check whether the code includes a complete admin panel with bicycle fleet monitoring, usage analytics, maintenance scheduling, and user management. Must provide real-time KPI dashboards, revenue reports, and predictive maintenance alerts. Deduct 5 points if data visualization is missing, 3 points if export functionality is absent. Give 10 points if advanced analytics like demand forecasting and optimal bike distribution algorithms are implemented.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 4,
-      "title": "Is the code robust?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as network timeouts, GPS signal loss, payment failures, concurrent rentals of the same bike, etc.) and provide friendly error prompts or recovery mechanisms. Code with strong robustness should include proper error boundaries, graceful degradation, and data consistency checks, 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 user experience (e.g., 1. AI-powered bike maintenance prediction 2. Gamification with riding challenges and rewards 3. Carbon footprint tracking 4. Social features like group rides 5. AR for bike finding). Add 3 points for each practical innovative feature implemented (maximum 10 points). Features must be functional, not just UI mockups.",
-      "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 payment processing logics) 2. Function modules unrelated to bicycle management (e.g., built-in social media feed) 3. Performance-heavy effects that slow down core operations (e.g., complex 3D bike models). Deduct 3 points for each redundancy found, and directly deduct 10 points if core bike rental functions are interfered with by redundant code.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 7,
-      "title": "Does the code have engineering quality?",
-      "description": "Review modular architecture (separation of API/business logic/UI layers), database design normalization, API documentation, and deployment scripts. Deduct 5 points if database relationships are poorly designed or no indexing strategy exists; deduct 5 points if API endpoints lack proper validation and documentation; deduct 5 points if no environment configuration management. Full score requires clean architecture patterns and automated testing.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 8,
-      "title": "Does the interface vision meet professional design standards?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the overall design follows modern design principles: 1) Consistent color scheme with proper contrast ratios (WCAG AA compliant) 2) Intuitive navigation with clear information hierarchy 3) Mobile-responsive design with touch-friendly controls (minimum 44px touch targets) 4) Professional typography with readable font sizes. Deduct 3 points for each accessibility violation, 5 points for poor mobile optimization, and 5 points for inconsistent UI patterns across pages.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 9,
-      "title": "Is the dynamic interaction smooth and seamless?",
-      "description": "Judge whether the user interactions provide immediate feedback and smooth transitions: 1) Map interactions respond within 100ms 2) Form submissions show loading states 3) Real-time updates (bike availability) refresh smoothly without jarring changes 4) Touch gestures work intuitively on mobile. Deduct 5 points for each unresponsive interaction, 3 points for janky animations or slow map panning, and 5 points if critical actions lack visual feedback or confirmation dialogs.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    }
-  ],
-  "class": "Management Systems-Frontend/Backend Platforms",
-  "difficulty": "hard"
-}

package/library/management_systems-frontend_backend_platforms/shared-space-reservation-and-usage-management-system.json

@@ -1,68 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "index": 1114,
-  "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. Project overview: Manage shared spaces within a building (such as meeting rooms, activity rooms, rest areas, etc.). Implement a system for reservation and usage monitoring of shared spaces.",
-  "checklist": [
-    {
-      "id": 0,
-      "title": "Is the reservation system core functionality fully implemented?",
-      "description": "Review whether the code accurately implements the essential reservation features including calendar visualization, time slot selection, conflict detection, and confirmation flow. Score 0 if the reservation logic is missing, 5 if only basic booking without conflict checking exists, and 10 if it includes comprehensive features like recurring bookings, priority rules, and waiting lists.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 1,
-      "title": "Is the space management functionality properly implemented?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the system allows administrators to add, edit, and remove shared spaces with appropriate attributes (capacity, equipment, location, type). Check if spaces can be categorized, searched, and filtered. Deduct 5 points if space modification functionality is missing; deduct 3 points if there's no validation for space attributes. Full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 2,
-      "title": "Is the usage monitoring and analytics component developed?",
-      "description": "Assess whether the code implements space utilization tracking, usage statistics, and visualization of occupancy data. Check for features like usage reports, peak time identification, and underutilized space detection. Score 0 if monitoring is absent, 5 if basic logging exists without analytics, and 10 if comprehensive dashboards with actionable insights are implemented.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 3,
-      "title": "Is the user management and permission system properly designed?",
-      "description": "Verify the implementation of user roles (admin, regular users, space managers) with appropriate permission controls. Check if the system handles authentication, authorization, and maintains audit logs of user actions. Deduct 5 points if role-based access control is missing; deduct 3 points if there's no audit trail. 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 double-booking attempts, invalid time inputs, system overload during peak hours, etc.) and provide friendly error prompts or recovery mechanisms. Code with strong robustness should be able to effectively handle these edge cases, giving 10 points. If the robustness is average, give 5 points, and if no exceptions are handled, give 0 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 5,
-      "title": "Are there any innovative features that are eye-catching?",
-      "description": "Check whether the code includes surprise features that enhance the experience (e.g., 1. Real-time occupancy sensors integration 2. Automatic room suggestion based on meeting requirements 3. Mobile check-in/QR code verification). 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 booking confirmation flows) 2. Function modules unrelated to space management (e.g., built-in chat system when notifications would suffice) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., unnecessary 3D room renderings). 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 business logic/UI/data access layers), unit test coverage, and build process automation. Deduct 5 points if global state pollution is found or design patterns are not used; deduct 5 points if the code duplication rate is too high (over 30%); deduct 5 points if the build process is not automated. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 8,
-      "title": "Does the interface vision meet professional design standards?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the overall design follows modern design principles: 1) Harmonious color matching (no more than 3 primary colors) 2) Proper layout spacing (element spacing follows the 8px multiple principle) 3) Professional font system (body font size ≥ 14px, line height over 1.5 times). Deduct 3 points for each crowded visual element, 5 points for a glaring color combination, and 5 points for chaotic text-image layout. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 9,
-      "title": "Is the dynamic interaction smooth and seamless?",
-      "description": "Judge whether the dynamic effects conform to human perception characteristics: 1) Click feedback delay ≤ 100ms 2) Transition animation duration controlled between 300-500ms 3) Clear visual focus guidance. Deduct 5 points for each operation without feedback, 3 points for visual after-images during fast sliding, and 5 points for hard-to-find key function buttons. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    }
-  ],
-  "class": "Management Systems-Frontend/Backend Platforms",
-  "difficulty": "hard"
-}

package/library/management_systems-frontend_backend_platforms/simple-accounting-program-qt.json

@@ -1,68 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "index": 382,
-  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Make sure the generated code is executable whenever possible. Help me write a simple accounting program using Qt.",
-  "checklist": [
-    {
-      "id": 0,
-      "title": "Is the core accounting functionality implemented?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the code implements essential accounting features such as income/expense tracking, category management, balance calculation, and transaction recording. Score 0 if no accounting functions are present, 5 if only basic transactions are supported, and 10 if the system includes comprehensive accounting features (transaction history, categorization, searching).",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 1,
-      "title": "Is the Qt implementation correct and properly structured?",
-      "description": "Check if the code follows Qt best practices including proper signal-slot connections, appropriate use of Qt widgets, and correct implementation of the Qt event loop. Deduct 5 points if the code doesn't utilize Qt's object model correctly, and 3 points for failing to follow Qt naming conventions. Verify if the code uses appropriate Qt modules (QtWidgets, QtCore, etc.).",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 2,
-      "title": "Is data persistence implemented?",
-      "description": "Review the data storage mechanism. Check if the code properly saves and loads accounting data using appropriate methods (QSettings, SQLite database, file I/O, etc.). Deduct 5 points if there's no data persistence, 3 points if data is saved but without proper error handling. Full score requires proper initialization, data validation, and recovery mechanisms.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 3,
-      "title": "Is the UI design appropriate for an accounting application?",
-      "description": "Evaluate if the UI includes essential accounting elements like transaction input forms, balance displays, report views, and filtering options. Check if the layout is logical with clear visual hierarchy. Deduct 5 points if critical financial information isn't clearly presented, and 3 points if the workflow is confusing.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 4,
-      "title": "Is the code robust?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as invalid input, calculation errors, data corruption, 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 financial reporting 2. Budget forecasting 3. Data visualization for spending patterns). 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 calculate the same thing) 2. Function modules unrelated to accounting (e.g., a built-in calculator when Qt already provides this) 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 business logic/view/data access layers), code organization, and maintainability. Deduct 5 points if global state pollution is found or design patterns are not used; deduct 5 points if the code duplication rate is too high (over 30%); deduct 5 points if memory management is poor (Qt parent-child relationships not managed properly). 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 financial applications (professional and trustworthy) 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 feedback for financial operations. Deduct 5 points for transactions without confirmation feedback, 3 points for laggy interface when handling large datasets, and 5 points for hard-to-find critical financial controls. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    }
-  ],
-  "class": "Management Systems-Frontend/Backend Platforms",
-  "difficulty": "easy"
-}

package/library/management_systems-frontend_backend_platforms/simple-warehouse-management-system.json

@@ -1,68 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "index": 1694,
-  "question": "You are a code expert, please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Be sure to ensure that the code you generate is executable for demonstration. Help me write a simple warehouse management system using a programming language.",
-  "checklist": [
-    {
-      "id": 0,
-      "title": "Is the core data model properly implemented?",
-      "description": "Check if the code implements essential data structures (Product, Inventory, Order, User entities) with appropriate attributes and relationships. Evaluate if proper normalization principles are applied to avoid data redundancy. Score 0 if no data model is implemented, 5 if basic entities exist but relationships are poorly defined, and 10 if a complete, normalized data model is implemented with proper validation rules.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 1,
-      "title": "Are CRUD operations for inventory management fully implemented?",
-      "description": "Verify that the code includes Create, Read, Update, Delete operations for inventory items with proper input validation and error handling. Check if stock level tracking, batch operations, and inventory history are implemented. Deduct 3 points if any CRUD operation is missing, 2 points if validation is insufficient, and 3 points if inventory history tracking is absent. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 2,
-      "title": "Is the warehouse location management system implemented?",
-      "description": "Assess if the code implements a location system (zones, aisles, shelves, bins) with proper item placement logic and optimization. Check if location search, space utilization calculations, and reordering suggestions are implemented. Deduct 4 points if the location system is oversimplified (just using IDs), 3 points if there's no optimization logic, and 2 points if visualization of warehouse layout is missing. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 3,
-      "title": "Are reporting and analytics features implemented?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the system provides essential reports (inventory status, stock movements, expiration alerts, reorder recommendations) with appropriate filtering and export capabilities. Check if any basic analytics (turnover rates, inventory value, forecasting) are implemented. Score 0 if no reporting exists, 5 if only basic listing without analytics is provided, and 10 if comprehensive reporting with visual representations is implemented.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 4,
-      "title": "Is the code robust?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as invalid inputs, duplicate entries, concurrent access, system failures, 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. Barcode/QR code integration 2. Mobile-friendly interface 3. Predictive inventory forecasting 4. Supplier 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 functions (e.g., multiple ways to update inventory) 2. Function modules unrelated to warehouse management (e.g., a built-in email client) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., unnecessary animations in a business application). 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 domain logic/persistence/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 data operations, and 5 points for hard-to-find key function buttons. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    }
-  ],
-  "class": "Management Systems-Frontend/Backend Platforms",
-  "difficulty": "medium"
-}

package/library/management_systems-frontend_backend_platforms/smart-expense-report-recognition-system-with-api-integration.json

@@ -1,68 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "index": 581,
-  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Be sure to ensure that the code you generate is executable. Implement a smart expense report recognition system that supports uploading receipts via photos, automatically recognizes key fields (amount/date/type), generates editable expense report forms, and integrates with the company's financial system API.",
-  "checklist": [
-    {
-      "id": 0,
-      "title": "Is the receipt image upload and processing system fully implemented?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the code implements a complete image upload system with proper handling of various image formats (JPEG, PNG, PDF), compression for large files, and image preprocessing (rotation correction, brightness adjustment) before OCR processing. Score 0 if image upload isn't implemented, 5 if basic upload exists but lacks preprocessing, and 10 if all features including error handling for corrupted images are present.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 1,
-      "title": "Is the OCR recognition system properly implemented for key expense fields?",
-      "description": "Check if the code implements accurate OCR functionality that can identify and extract key fields (amount, date, merchant name, expense type, tax information) from receipts. Assess the implementation of field validation logic (date format checks, currency symbol handling, etc.). Score 0 if OCR is missing, 5 if basic recognition exists but accuracy is questionable, and 10 if robust field extraction with confidence scoring and fallback mechanisms are implemented.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 2,
-      "title": "Is the editable expense report form generation complete?",
-      "description": "Review the implementation of dynamic form generation based on OCR results, with proper editable fields, validation for each field type, and preservation of original image data alongside the form. Score 0 if form generation is missing, 5 if basic non-customizable forms exist, and 10 if fully responsive forms with field-level validation, draft saving, and multi-receipt support are implemented.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 3,
-      "title": "Is the financial system API integration properly implemented?",
-      "description": "Evaluate the code for comprehensive API integration including authentication handling, data formatting to match API requirements, request/response logging, error handling with retry mechanisms, and transaction verification. Check for proper handling of API rate limits and asynchronous submission. Score 0 if API integration is missing, 5 if basic submission exists without proper error handling, and 10 if complete bidirectional integration with sync status tracking is implemented.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 4,
-      "title": "Is the code robust?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as blurry images, network interruption, incomplete receipts, API failures) 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 expense categorization 2. Automated currency conversion for international receipts 3. Receipt fraud detection algorithms 4. Budget tracking visualization). Add 3 points for each practical innovative feature implemented (maximum 10 points).",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 6,
-      "title": "Are there any redundant features?",
-      "description": "Strictly check three types of redundancy: 1. Redundant implementation of similar functions (e.g., multiple image processing pipelines) 2. Function modules unrelated to expense reporting (e.g., excessive user profile features) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., unnecessary animations during OCR processing). 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 OCR logic/UI/API integration layers), unit test coverage for critical components like field extraction, 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 for financial applications) 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 receipt preview layouts. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 9,
-      "title": "Is the dynamic interaction smooth and seamless?",
-      "description": "Judge whether the dynamic effects conform to human perception characteristics: 1) Feedback during OCR processing with accurate progress indicators 2) Smooth transitions between upload, recognition, and form editing stages 3) Clear visual guidance for correcting recognition errors. Deduct 5 points for lack of loading states during processing, 3 points for jarring transitions between workflow steps, and 5 points for unintuitive error correction interfaces. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    }
-  ],
-  "class": "Management Systems-Frontend/Backend Platforms",
-  "difficulty": "hard"
-}

package/library/management_systems-frontend_backend_platforms/smart-locker-system-javascript.json

@@ -1,68 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "index": 1532,
-  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Be sure to ensure that the code you generate is executable and can be demonstrated. Could you implement a Fengchao (Smart Locker) system using JavaScript?",
-  "checklist": [
-    {
-      "id": 0,
-      "title": "Is the core Fengchao (Smart Locker) system functionality implemented?",
-      "description": "Check whether the code properly implements the basic smart locker functionality including locker initialization, package placement, user authentication, and package retrieval. Score 0 if the core system logic is missing, 5 if only basic operations are implemented without proper state management, and 10 if the complete locker management system with proper state transitions is implemented.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 1,
-      "title": "Is the user authentication and access control system properly implemented?",
-      "description": "Evaluate the authentication mechanisms (QR codes, PIN codes, mobile verification) and the security measures implemented. Check for input validation, secure token generation, and proper authentication flow. Deduct 5 points if authentication is simplistic or trivial, 3 points if validation logic is incomplete. Look for proper encryption of sensitive data and timeout mechanisms for authentication attempts. Full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 2,
-      "title": "Is the locker status management and reservation system designed effectively?",
-      "description": "Review how the system manages locker statuses (empty, occupied, reserved, maintenance) and the reservation logic. Check for race conditions handling, timeout mechanisms for unclaimed packages, and proper notification systems. Deduct 5 points if status transitions are incomplete, 3 points if reservation conflicts aren't handled. Give 10 points if the system includes comprehensive status management with proper error recovery.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 3,
-      "title": "Is there a well-designed admin interface and monitoring system?",
-      "description": "Assess whether the code includes admin functionality for system monitoring, manual interventions, usage statistics, and maintenance operations. Check for dashboard visualization capabilities and alert mechanisms for system issues. Deduct 5 points if admin features are minimal, 3 points if monitoring capabilities are limited. Award 10 points for comprehensive admin features with detailed reporting.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 4,
-      "title": "Is the code robust?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as network failures, power outages, hardware malfunctions, invalid inputs, etc.) and provide graceful degradation or recovery mechanisms. Code with strong robustness should include error logging, retry mechanisms, and data persistence. Give 10 points if these are well implemented, 5 points if robustness is average, and 0 points if no exception handling exists.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 5,
-      "title": "Are there any innovative features that are eye-catching?",
-      "description": "Check whether the code includes surprise features that enhance the experience (e.g., 1. Predictive locker assignment based on package size 2. Integration with delivery tracking APIs 3. Smart notifications with estimated arrival times 4. Contactless biometric authentication). 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 authentication systems that serve the same purpose) 2. Function modules unrelated to smart lockers (e.g., unrelated social networking features) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., unnecessary animations that slow down the 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 modular design (such as separating business logic/view/data access layers), unit test coverage, and build process automation. Inspect for design patterns appropriate for IoT/embedded systems. 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 error handling is inconsistent. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 8,
-      "title": "Does the interface vision meet professional design standards?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the user interface follows modern kiosk/touchscreen design principles: 1) High contrast for visibility in various lighting conditions 2) Large touch targets (at least 44x44px) 3) Clear instruction text (concise language, legible fonts). Deduct 3 points for each accessibility issue, 5 points for confusing navigation flows, and 5 points for information overload on screens. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 9,
-      "title": "Is the dynamic interaction smooth and seamless?",
-      "description": "Judge whether the interaction flow is intuitive and efficient: 1) Complete package deposit/retrieval in under 30 seconds 2) Clear progress indicators for multi-step processes 3) Immediate visual/audio feedback for user actions. Deduct 5 points for each unclear state transition, 3 points for slow response times (over 500ms), and 5 points for confusing error messages. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    }
-  ],
-  "class": "Management Systems-Frontend/Backend Platforms",
-  "difficulty": "hard"
-}

package/library/management_systems-frontend_backend_platforms/smart-project-management-table-with-gantt-chart.json

@@ -1,68 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "index": 1676,
-  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Be sure to ensure the generated code is executable for demonstration purposes. Create a smart project management table according to the requirements, which should include project name, department, task status, start time, deadline, completion time, automatic project progress calculation, as well as automatic generation of Gantt charts and other visualizations. It should also be able to link to project-related files in Excel, Word, and PDF formats. If possible, it would be best if the system could automatically input imported table data.",
-  "checklist": [
-    {
-      "id": 0,
-      "title": "Is the project management table structure fully implemented?",
-      "description": "Review whether the code includes all required fields (project name, department, task status, start time, deadline, completion time) and implements proper data validation and formatting. Check if the table structure allows for hierarchical task organization (tasks, subtasks) and proper data handling. Score 0 if core fields are missing, 5 if basic structure is implemented but lacks validation, and 10 if all fields are properly implemented with appropriate validation and formatting.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 1,
-      "title": "Is the automatic project progress calculation functionality implemented correctly?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the code accurately calculates project progress based on task completion status and time parameters. Check if the calculation logic handles edge cases (e.g., overdue tasks, early completion) and properly aggregates subtask progress into parent task progress. Deduct 3 points if calculation doesn't consider task dependencies, 5 points if it doesn't handle subtask aggregation correctly, and 3 points if visual progress indicators (progress bars) are missing. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 2,
-      "title": "Are the Gantt chart and other visualizations properly implemented?",
-      "description": "Assess whether the visualizations are dynamically generated from the project data with correct time scale representation. Check if the Gantt chart includes critical path highlighting, dependency arrows, milestone markers, and proper color coding for status. Verify that visualizations are responsive and interactive (e.g., hover tooltips, zoom capability). Deduct 5 points if the chart lacks interactive features, 3 points if it doesn't handle task dependencies visually, and 5 points if the time scale is not properly formatted. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 3,
-      "title": "Is the file linking functionality implemented and working correctly?",
-      "description": "Check if the code implements the ability to link to Excel, Word, and PDF files with proper file validation. Verify that file links are properly stored, displayed, and accessible. Test if file preview/thumbnail generation is implemented where appropriate. Deduct 3 points if any file type is not supported, 5 points if the linking mechanism doesn't include validation or security checks, and 3 points if there's no visual indication of linked files in the interface. 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 date inputs, file access errors, concurrent edits, 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. AI-powered deadline recommendations 2. Automated status updates based on linked document changes 3. Team workload balancing visualization). Add 3 points for each practical innovative feature implemented (maximum 10 points).",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 6,
-      "title": "Are there any redundant features?",
-      "description": "Strictly check three types of redundancy: 1. Redundant implementation of similar functions (e.g., multiple progress calculation methods coexisting) 2. Function modules unrelated to project management (e.g., a built-in calculator unrelated to project metrics) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., excessive animations that slow down table rendering). 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 model/view/controller 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 automatic data import functionality properly implemented?",
-      "description": "Judge whether the code implements robust data import mechanisms for external table data (e.g., CSV, Excel, database connections). Assess if the import process includes data validation, mapping to internal schema, error handling, and provides clear feedback on import status. Deduct 5 points for missing validation during import, 3 points for poor error handling, and 5 points if the import UI lacks proper guidance or progress indicators. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    }
-  ],
-  "class": "Management Systems-Frontend/Backend Platforms",
-  "difficulty": "hard"
-}