@getollie/cli 0.0.5 → 0.2.1

package/library/management_systems-frontend_backend_platforms/warehouse-management-page-with-navigation.json

@@ -1,68 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "index": 836,
-  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Make sure the generated code is executable for demonstration. Create a warehouse management page with a LOGO in the upper left corner, a menu bar on the left including common warehouse functions such as outbound and inbound operations, search functionality in the upper right corner along with email and the logged-in user's name, and a content area in the lower right.",
-  "checklist": [
-    {
-      "id": 0,
-      "title": "Is the basic warehouse management layout properly implemented?",
-      "description": "Evaluate if the code correctly implements the required layout structure with LOGO in upper left, left sidebar menu, upper right utilities (search, email, username), and main content area. Score 0 if layout is completely incorrect, 5 if partially implemented but with significant positioning issues, and 10 if all elements are properly positioned according to requirements.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 1,
-      "title": "Are all required UI components included and functional?",
-      "description": "Check whether all specified components exist and function correctly: LOGO, left menu with warehouse functions (inbound/outbound operations), search bar, email notification, username display. Deduct 2 points for each missing component. For non-functional components (e.g., clickable menu that doesn't respond), deduct 1 point each.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 2,
-      "title": "Is the warehouse menu functionality comprehensive?",
-      "description": "Assess the completeness of the warehouse management functions in the left menu. Expected functions should include: inventory management, inbound operations, outbound operations, returns processing, inventory counts, and reporting. Award 10 points for a comprehensive set of logically organized functions, 5 points for basic functions only, 0 points if critical warehouse operations are missing.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 3,
-      "title": "Is the navigation and interaction flow logical and intuitive?",
-      "description": "Review if the navigation structure makes sense for warehouse management workflows (e.g., related functions grouped together, proper hierarchy). Check if state changes are preserved when navigating between sections. Award 10 points for an intuitive flow that follows warehouse management best practices, 5 points for basic but workable navigation, 0 points for confusing or illogical navigation.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 4,
-      "title": "Is the code robust?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as empty search results, menu item loading failures, user authentication 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. Real-time inventory alerts 2. Dashboard with key metrics visualization 3. Dark/light mode toggle for warehouse environments). Add 3 points for each practical innovative feature implemented (maximum 10 points).",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 6,
-      "title": "Are there any redundant features?",
-      "description": "Strictly check three types of redundancy: 1. Redundant implementation of similar functions (e.g., multiple search bars with identical functionality) 2. Function modules unrelated to warehouse management (e.g., social media feeds) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., unnecessary animations that slow down critical warehouse operations). Deduct 3 points for each redundancy found, and directly deduct 10 points if the core functions are interfered with by redundant code.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 7,
-      "title": "Does the code have engineering quality?",
-      "description": "Review modular design (such as separating UI components/business logic/data management), component reusability, and build process organization. Deduct 5 points if global state pollution is found or design patterns are not used; deduct 5 points if the code duplication rate is too high (over 30%); deduct 5 points if the build process is not automated or lacks proper dependency management. 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 enterprise application design principles: 1) Harmonious color matching suitable for extended use (no eye strain) 2) Proper layout spacing with clear visual hierarchy 3) Professional font system with adequate size for warehouse environment use (possibly on different devices). Deduct 3 points for each crowded visual element, 5 points for a glaring color combination, and 5 points for chaotic text-image layout. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 9,
-      "title": "Is the dynamic interaction smooth and seamless?",
-      "description": "Judge whether the dynamic effects conform to human perception characteristics: 1) Click feedback delay ≤ 100ms 2) Transition animation duration controlled between 300-500ms 3) Clear visual focus guidance for warehouse management tasks. Deduct 5 points for each operation without feedback, 3 points for visual after-images during fast navigation, 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": "easy"
-}

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

@@ -1,68 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "index": 589,
-  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Make sure the generated code is executable for demonstration. Design a warehouse management system with the following features: 1. Display inventory list after login; 2. Administrators can add or reduce product inventory and set minimum inventory thresholds; 3. Front-end warning when inventory exceeds thresholds; 4. Users can filter or search products by category; 5. Export current inventory as an Excel file.",
-  "checklist": [
-    {
-      "id": 0,
-      "title": "Is the login and authentication system fully implemented?",
-      "description": "Review whether the code includes a complete login system with proper authentication, session management, and user role differentiation (admin vs regular users). Check for secure password handling, CSRF protection, and proper logout functionality. Score 0 if authentication is missing, 5 if basic authentication exists but lacks security features, and 10 if a complete secure system is implemented with role-based access control.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 1,
-      "title": "Is the inventory display functionality properly implemented?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the inventory list displays all necessary product information (ID, name, quantity, category, price, threshold values) in a clean table or grid format. Check for proper pagination if the inventory is large, sorting capabilities, and responsive design that works on different screen sizes. Deduct 3 points if any critical product information is missing, 3 points if the display is not responsive, and 2 points if sorting/pagination is absent. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 2,
-      "title": "Are the inventory management functions for administrators properly implemented?",
-      "description": "Check if administrators can add new products, update existing inventory levels, and set minimum inventory thresholds. Verify that the code includes input validation, prevents negative inventory values, and provides confirmation dialogs for critical operations. Deduct 5 points if threshold management is missing, 3 points if inventory adjustment lacks validation, and 3 points if there's no confirmation for destructive operations. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 3,
-      "title": "Is the threshold warning system properly implemented?",
-      "description": "Assess whether the code implements visual alerts (color coding, icons, notifications) when inventory falls below the defined thresholds. Check if the warning system works in real-time and is visually distinct. Verify if there's a dashboard or summary view highlighting critical inventory items. Deduct 5 points if warnings are not visually prominent, 3 points if they're not real-time, and 5 points if the warning system is entirely missing. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 4,
-      "title": "Is the code robust?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as network errors, invalid inputs, concurrent user operations, etc.) and provide friendly error prompts or recovery mechanisms. Check for proper exception handling, input validation, and graceful degradation. 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. Inventory trend analysis/visualization 2. Barcode/QR code scanning integration 3. Smart inventory recommendations based on usage 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 edit inventory) 2. Function modules unrelated to warehouse management (e.g., a built-in game) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., excessive animations). Deduct 3 points for each redundancy found, and directly deduct 10 points if the core functions are interfered with by redundant code.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 7,
-      "title": "Does the code have engineering quality?",
-      "description": "Review modular design (such as separating data/service/UI layers), unit test coverage, and build process automation. Check for proper code comments and documentation. 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 search/filter and export functionality properly implemented?",
-      "description": "Judge whether the search and filter functions are intuitive and effective: 1) Search responds in under 300ms 2) Filter options are clearly categorized 3) Export function produces a properly formatted Excel file with all relevant inventory data. Deduct 5 points if search functionality is slow or buggy, 3 points if filtering is limited or confusing, and 5 points if the Excel export is missing or incomplete. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    }
-  ],
-  "class": "Management Systems-Frontend/Backend Platforms",
-  "difficulty": "medium"
-}

package/library/management_systems-frontend_backend_platforms/wastewater-lab-management-system.json

@@ -1,68 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "index": 1302,
-  "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. Create a Laboratory Information Management System suitable for wastewater treatment plant laboratories using Vue, Express, and MySQL. The system should include user login with role-based permissions, water quality testing, personnel management, equipment management, and reagent management.",
-  "checklist": [
-    {
-      "id": 0,
-      "title": "Is the user authentication and role-based access control system properly implemented?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the code implements JWT/session-based authentication with proper encryption, role-based permission control (admin, lab technician, manager roles), and secure login flows including password hashing and token expiration. Check for password policy enforcement. Score 0 if authentication is missing, 5 if basic authentication exists but lacks proper role-based controls, and 10 if a complete, secure authentication system with fine-grained permissions is implemented.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 1,
-      "title": "Is the water quality testing module comprehensive for wastewater treatment needs?",
-      "description": "Verify if the system handles essential wastewater parameters (pH, BOD, COD, TSS, nitrogen, phosphorus, metals), supports customizable test methods with validation rules, maintains testing workflow (sampling → testing → verification → reporting), and includes statistical analysis capabilities. Deduct 3 points if regulatory compliance tracking is missing, 3 points if quality control standards aren't implemented, and 2 points if trend analysis visualization is absent. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 2,
-      "title": "Are the laboratory resource management modules complete and integrated?",
-      "description": "Assess whether the system properly implements personnel management (certification tracking, scheduling), equipment management (calibration records, maintenance schedules), and reagent management (inventory, expiration tracking, reorder points). Check for traceability between resources and tests. Deduct 3 points for each major module not implemented or poorly integrated. Give 10 points only if all three systems work cohesively with automated notifications and cross-module dependencies.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 3,
-      "title": "Is the data handling architecture appropriate for laboratory workflows?",
-      "description": "Evaluate if the system implements proper data validation (with field-specific rules for lab parameters), audit trails for regulatory compliance, data versioning for test results, and comprehensive reporting capabilities. Verify database schema design with appropriate relationships and constraints. Deduct 5 points if data integrity controls are weak, 3 points if the reporting system is limited, and 5 points if there's no audit logging. 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 incorrect parameter inputs, database connection failures, concurrent user operations, etc.) and provide friendly error prompts or recovery mechanisms. Check for input sanitization to prevent SQL injection and XSS attacks. 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 laboratory experience (e.g., 1. Automated regulatory compliance reporting 2. Machine learning for anomaly detection in test results 3. Mobile-responsive interface for field sampling 4. QR code integration for equipment/reagent tracking). 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 user management interfaces) 2. Function modules unrelated to laboratory management (e.g., a built-in game for staff) 3. Overly complex features that affect performance (e.g., unnecessary real-time updates for static data). 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 Vue component architecture, Express API organization, database schema design, and test coverage. Check for proper separation of concerns between frontend and backend. Deduct 5 points if global state management is chaotic; deduct 3 points if API endpoints aren't RESTful or lack consistent error handling; deduct 5 points if there's significant code duplication; deduct 2 points if the build/deployment process isn't automated. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 8,
-      "title": "Does the interface vision meet professional laboratory standards?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the design follows laboratory-appropriate principles: 1) Clean, clinical color scheme with clear hierarchy 2) Consistent data visualization for measurements 3) Intuitive navigation between related laboratory functions 4) Appropriate data density for scientific information. Deduct 3 points for visual elements that hinder data clarity, 5 points for interfaces that don't prioritize critical laboratory information, and 5 points for designs that would be difficult to use in a lab environment. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 9,
-      "title": "Is the system optimized for laboratory workflow efficiency?",
-      "description": "Judge whether the interface supports efficient laboratory operations: 1) Minimal clicks for routine tasks (≤3 clicks) 2) Batch operations for common procedures 3) Quick access to related information (reagents needed for tests, equipment calibration status) 4) Keyboard shortcuts for data entry. Deduct 3 points for each workflow bottleneck identified, 5 points if navigation between related functions is cumbersome, and 5 points if the system would slow down rather than enhance laboratory productivity. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    }
-  ],
-  "class": "Management Systems-Frontend/Backend Platforms",
-  "difficulty": "hard"
-}

package/library/management_systems-frontend_backend_platforms/web-app-article-list-crud-functionality.json

@@ -1,68 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "index": 1655,
-  "question": "You are a code expert, please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Make sure that the code you generate is executable. Create a web application that displays a list of articles and implements CRUD (create, read, update, delete) functionality.",
-  "checklist": [
-    {
-      "id": 0,
-      "title": "Is the CRUD functionality fully implemented?",
-      "description": "Verify if the application correctly implements all CRUD operations (Create, Read, Update, Delete) for articles. Check whether forms for adding and editing articles are properly validated. Score 0 if core CRUD operations are missing, 5 if basic operations exist but with limited validation, and 10 if all operations are implemented with proper validation (required fields, data types, etc.).",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 1,
-      "title": "Is the article listing functionality properly implemented?",
-      "description": "Review whether the code implements proper listing of articles with features like pagination, sorting, or filtering. Check if the list displays relevant article information (title, date, excerpt, etc.). Deduct 3 points if pagination is missing for large datasets, 2 points if sorting/filtering options are not available, and 3 points if the display of article information is incomplete. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 2,
-      "title": "Is data persistence implemented?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the application properly stores data (using localStorage, IndexedDB, backend API, etc.) and maintains state between sessions. Check if data loading states and error handling are implemented. Deduct 5 points if no persistence mechanism is implemented, 3 points if error states aren't handled, and 3 points if loading states aren't managed properly. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 3,
-      "title": "Is the UI/UX for article management intuitive?",
-      "description": "Assess if the interface provides clear visual cues for CRUD operations, confirmation dialogs for destructive actions (delete), and intuitive navigation between article views. Check for proper feedback after operations. Deduct 3 points for missing confirmation dialogs, 3 points for unclear action buttons, and 4 points for lack of operation feedback. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 4,
-      "title": "Is the code robust?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as form validation errors, network issues, empty states, 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. Rich text editor for articles 2. Article tagging/categorization system 3. Search functionality with highlighting 4. Article reading time estimation). 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 delete an article) 2. Function modules unrelated to article management (e.g., a built-in calculator) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., excessive animations). Deduct 3 points for each redundancy found, and directly deduct 10 points if the core functions are interfered with by redundant code.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 7,
-      "title": "Does the code have engineering quality?",
-      "description": "Review modular design (such as separating API/state/UI components), code organization, reusable components, and proper state management. Deduct 5 points if global state is overused or components are tightly coupled; deduct 5 points if the code duplication rate is too high (over 30%); deduct 3 points if naming conventions are inconsistent. 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 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": "easy"
-}

package/library/management_systems-frontend_backend_platforms/web-based-inventory-management-system-small-online-shop-local-database.json

@@ -1,68 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "index": 1516,
-  "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. How do I write a web-based inventory management system suitable for a small online shop, with the database stored locally?",
-  "checklist": [
-    {
-      "id": 0,
-      "title": "Is the inventory management core functionality fully implemented?",
-      "description": "Review whether the code accurately implements essential inventory operations through HTML/JavaScript, including product CRUD operations (Create, Read, Update, Delete), stock level tracking, low stock alerts, and batch operations. Score 0 if core inventory logic is missing, 5 if only basic add/remove products is implemented, and 10 if comprehensive inventory management including stock adjustments, product categories, and search/filter functionality is fully included.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 1,
-      "title": "Is the local database storage properly implemented?",
-      "description": "Check whether the local storage implementation uses appropriate technologies (IndexedDB/WebSQL/localStorage) with proper data persistence, transaction handling, and data integrity checks. Evaluate if the database schema is well-designed for inventory needs. Deduct 5 points if data corruption risks exist, 3 points if no backup/export mechanism is provided, and 3 points if storage quota management is missing. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 2,
-      "title": "Is the small shop business logic accurately modeled?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the system addresses small shop specific needs: supplier management, purchase orders, sales tracking, profit margin calculations, and basic reporting. Check if multi-location inventory support and barcode scanning integration are considered. Deduct 5 points if essential business workflows are missing, 3 points if no sales analytics are provided, and 2 points if supplier relationship management is absent. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 3,
-      "title": "Is comprehensive data management and reporting constructed?",
-      "description": "Check whether the code includes complete data lifecycle management: inventory reports, sales analytics, stock movement history, and data export/import capabilities. Evaluate if real-time dashboard with key metrics is implemented. Deduct 5 points if historical data tracking is not implemented, 3 points if no visual charts/graphs are provided, and 2 points if data export functionality is missing. Give 10 points if fully implemented with professional reporting features.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 4,
-      "title": "Is the code robust?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as invalid product data, storage quota exceeded, concurrent operations, data corruption, etc.) and provide friendly error prompts or recovery mechanisms. Code with strong robustness should include input validation, error boundaries, and graceful degradation, 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 small shop experience (e.g., 1. Automated reorder suggestions based on sales patterns 2. QR code generation for products 3. Mobile-responsive design for on-the-go inventory checks 4. Integration with popular e-commerce platforms). 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 product search mechanisms coexisting) 2. Function modules unrelated to inventory management (e.g., built-in games or social features) 3. Overly complex features that don't fit small shop needs (e.g., enterprise-level workflow systems). Deduct 3 points for each redundancy found, and directly deduct 10 points if the core inventory 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 layer/business logic/presentation layers), proper error handling, and code organization. Deduct 5 points if global state pollution is found or no design patterns are used; deduct 5 points if the code duplication rate is too high (over 30%); deduct 3 points if no data validation layer exists; deduct 2 points if performance optimization is ignored. 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 web application principles: 1) Clean and professional color scheme suitable for business use (no more than 3 primary colors) 2) Proper layout spacing with clear information hierarchy (element spacing follows 8px grid system) 3) Professional typography (body font size ≥ 14px, line height over 1.5 times) 4) Consistent iconography and visual elements. Deduct 3 points for each cluttered section, 5 points for unprofessional color combinations, and 5 points for poor information architecture. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 9,
-      "title": "Is the dynamic interaction smooth and seamless?",
-      "description": "Judge whether the user interactions conform to modern web application standards: 1) Form submissions and data operations provide immediate feedback (≤ 100ms) 2) Loading states and transitions are smooth (300-500ms duration) 3) Clear navigation and workflow guidance 4) Responsive design works across devices. Deduct 5 points for each operation without proper feedback, 3 points for jarring transitions or slow performance, and 5 points for confusing navigation or hidden critical functions. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    }
-  ],
-  "class": "Management Systems-Frontend/Backend Platforms",
-  "difficulty": "medium"
-}

package/library/management_systems-frontend_backend_platforms/web-based-mysql-data-reporting-tool.json

@@ -1,68 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "index": 823,
-  "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. Help me create a web-based universal data calling template tool that connects to MySQL databases. The tool should allow users to visually drag database table fields into the tool and perform SQL query searches on the data. It should enable visual report creation, save report templates, automatically generate reports in the same format for different time periods, and allow creation of different templates.",
-  "checklist": [
-    {
-      "id": 0,
-      "title": "Is the database connection and management system properly implemented?",
-      "description": "Review whether the code includes secure MySQL connection handling with proper authentication, connection pooling, and error handling. Check if the implementation includes database configuration options, SSL support, and connection timeout settings. Score 0 if connection functionality is missing, 5 if basic connection is implemented without security measures, and 10 if a complete, secure, and robust connection system is implemented with proper error handling.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 1,
-      "title": "Is the visual drag-and-drop interface for database fields fully functional?",
-      "description": "Evaluate the implementation of the drag-and-drop interface for database tables and fields. Check if it includes field metadata display, proper visual feedback during drag operations, and accurate drop target handling. The interface should correctly render different field types with appropriate icons. Deduct 3 points if drag-and-drop is buggy, 5 points if it lacks visual feedback, and 2 points if it doesn't handle all MySQL field types properly. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 2,
-      "title": "Is the SQL query builder properly implemented with validation?",
-      "description": "Check if the SQL query builder allows users to visually construct queries with proper conditions, joins, grouping, and sorting. Verify that it includes SQL injection prevention, query validation, and query optimization suggestions. Score 0 if the query builder is not implemented, 5 if it only supports basic queries without validation, and 10 if it fully supports complex queries with proper validation, optimization, and security measures.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 3,
-      "title": "Is the report template creation and management system complete?",
-      "description": "Assess whether users can create, save, edit, and delete report templates. Check if templates support various visualizations (tables, charts, etc.), conditional formatting, and custom layouts. Verify that the system includes template versioning, sharing capabilities, and template categories. Deduct 5 points if template saving is not implemented, 3 points if template editing is limited, and 5 points if there's no template management 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 database credentials, SQL errors, network interruptions, browser compatibility issues, etc.) and provide friendly error prompts or recovery mechanisms. Code with strong robustness should be able to effectively handle these edge cases, giving 10 points. If the robustness is average, give 5 points, and if no exceptions are handled, give 0 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 5,
-      "title": "Are there any innovative features that are eye-catching?",
-      "description": "Check whether the code includes surprise features that enhance the experience (e.g., 1. AI-assisted query suggestions 2. Natural language to SQL conversion 3. Real-time collaborative editing 4. Advanced data visualization options). Add 3 points for each practical innovative feature implemented (maximum 10 points).",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 6,
-      "title": "Are there any redundant features?",
-      "description": "Strictly check three types of redundancy: 1. Redundant implementation of similar functions (e.g., multiple query builders coexisting) 2. Function modules unrelated to data reporting (e.g., a built-in file manager) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., excessive animations when switching between reports). 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 database/UI/templating 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 when working with data fields and report elements. Deduct 5 points for each operation without feedback, 3 points for visual after-images during fast scrolling through data tables, 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/web-based-roll-call-system.json

@@ -1,68 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "index": 1100,
-  "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. I am currently at Harbin Preschool Teachers College. My information technology teacher has asked me to create a web-based roll call system using a computer. How should I proceed?",
-  "checklist": [
-    {
-      "id": 0,
-      "title": "Is the roll call system core functionality fully implemented?",
-      "description": "Review whether the code accurately implements a student database, attendance tracking mechanism, and date/time management. Check if the system can record present/absent/late statuses for each student. Score 0 if core functionality is missing, 5 if only basic attendance recording is implemented, and 10 if comprehensive attendance tracking with various statuses and timestamps is included.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 1,
-      "title": "Is the student management system complete?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the system allows adding, editing, and removing students from the database. Check if student information (name, ID, profile photo, etc.) can be properly managed. Deduct 3 points if bulk import/export functionality is missing, 2 points if student search/filter is not implemented, and 3 points if data validation is inadequate. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 2,
-      "title": "Is the attendance record storage and retrieval mechanism properly designed?",
-      "description": "Check whether the system properly stores attendance records (using localStorage, IndexedDB, or server-side database) and allows retrieving historical data. Verify if attendance reports can be generated and exported. Deduct 5 points if data persistence is missing, 3 points if historical data cannot be accessed easily, and 3 points if there's no reporting functionality. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 3,
-      "title": "Is the user interface suitable for a classroom environment?",
-      "description": "Assess whether the UI is designed for quick roll call in a classroom setting. Look for features like a grid/list view of students, clear visual indicators of attendance status, and quick-access buttons for marking attendance. Deduct 5 points if the interface requires too many clicks for basic operations, 3 points if status indicators are not clearly visible, and 3 points if the layout is not optimized for classroom use. 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 incorrect data inputs, browser refresh/reload, network issues for server-based solutions, 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 roll call using webcam/facial recognition 2. Voice command interface 3. Absence notification system to parents/guardians 4. Statistical dashboard for attendance trends). Add 3 points for each practical innovative feature implemented (maximum 10 points).",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 6,
-      "title": "Are there any redundant features?",
-      "description": "Strictly check three types of redundancy: 1. Redundant implementation of similar functions (e.g., multiple ways to perform the same attendance task) 2. Function modules unrelated to roll call (e.g., a built-in game system) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., excessive animations when marking attendance). 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/UI/controller layers), code organization, and use of appropriate design patterns. Deduct 5 points if global state pollution is found or appropriate patterns are not used; deduct 5 points if the code duplication rate is too high (over 30%); deduct 5 points if the code lacks comments or documentation. 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 operations, and 5 points if key functions are difficult to locate. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    }
-  ],
-  "class": "Management Systems-Frontend/Backend Platforms",
-  "difficulty": "hard"
-}

package/library/management_systems-frontend_backend_platforms/web-module-for-security-expense-management.json

@@ -1,68 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "index": 358,
-  "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. Create a web module that includes factory area dropdown buttons, department filter keys, cost code filter keys, date range filter keys, and the ability to import security personnel, security unit prices, annual/monthly/daily security expenses, and annual/monthly/daily security budget.",
-  "checklist": [
-    {
-      "id": 0,
-      "title": "Is the factory area dropdown implementation complete?",
-      "description": "Check whether the code properly implements the factory area dropdown with proper data structure, event handling, and state management. The dropdown should be populated dynamically from a data source, have proper selection handling, and trigger appropriate filter actions. Deduct 5 points if the dropdown is static/hardcoded, 3 points if it lacks visual feedback on selection, and 3 points if it doesn't properly trigger filtering actions. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 1,
-      "title": "Are all required filter components implemented?",
-      "description": "Evaluate the implementation of the department filter, cost code filter, and date range filter components. Each filter should have appropriate UI controls (e.g., multi-select checkboxes for departments, dropdown or search for cost codes, and date pickers for date range). Each missing filter deducts 4 points, incomplete implementation deducts 2 points per filter. Date range filter must support both single date and range selection. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 2,
-      "title": "Is the data import functionality for security personnel properly implemented?",
-      "description": "Review whether the code supports importing security personnel data through CSV/Excel file upload or manual entry form. Check for validation of input data (e.g., name format, ID validation, role assignment), data transformation, and storage handling. Deduct 5 points if there's no data validation, 3 points if the import process lacks error handling or feedback, and 3 points if there's no preview before final import. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 3,
-      "title": "Are the security expense calculations and budget comparison features implemented?",
-      "description": "Check if the module can correctly calculate security expenses at annual/monthly/daily levels based on personnel data and unit prices, and compare them with the corresponding budget values. Verify the calculation logic for different time periods. Deduct 4 points if calculations are incorrect, 3 points if comparison visualization is missing, and 3 points if there's no variance analysis or highlighting of over-budget scenarios. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 4,
-      "title": "Is the code robust?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as invalid data imports, network errors during data fetching, invalid filter combinations, 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. Dashboard visualization with charts showing expense trends 2. Automatic alerts for budget overruns 3. Personnel allocation optimization suggestions). 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 filters or calculations 2. Function modules unrelated to security management/budgeting 3. Fancy effects that affect performance or distract from core functionality. Deduct 3 points for each redundancy found, and directly deduct 10 points if the core functions are interfered with by redundant code.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 7,
-      "title": "Does the code have engineering quality?",
-      "description": "Review modular design (such as separating data/UI/calculation logic), component reusability, state management approach, and build process. 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 or dependencies are poorly managed. 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) Filter application feedback delay ≤ 100ms 2) Transition animation duration controlled between 300-500ms 3) Clear visual focus guidance when navigating between filter and reporting views. Deduct 5 points for each operation without feedback, 3 points for laggy transitions during filter updates, 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"
-}