@getollie/cli 0.0.5 → 0.2.1

package/library/multimedia_editing-video_production/online-dynamic-background-video-generator.json

@@ -1,68 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "index": 490,
-  "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 whenever possible.\n\n======== ROLE ========\nYou are an experienced code expert. You are provided with a software development requirement description and asked to generate project code based on these requirements. Strictly follow the rules to help users generate complete project code with simple and understandable comments. Don't output anything else.\n\n======== OUTPUT RULES ========\n1. Always generate complete, runnable project code. Please ensure the project is fully executable\n2. Ensure all code files you output are complete without omitting any code\n3. Carefully review and check all code before final output, evaluating its executability. If the code cannot be executed or contains errors, it needs to be regenerated\n4. If the requirements involve external API access or need to use user data (images, videos, audio, etc.), please provide simulated data\n\n======== PROJECT REQUIREMENTS ========\nDevelop an online dynamic background video generator where users can choose different dynamic backgrounds (such as dynamic particles, animated smoke), add text and images, adjust animation effects and timing of elements, preview in real-time, and export as video.",
-  "checklist": [
-    {
-      "id": 0,
-      "title": "Is the dynamic background generation system fully implemented?",
-      "description": "Review whether the code properly implements at least 3 different dynamic background effects (particles, animated smoke, etc.) with appropriate HTML5 Canvas/WebGL rendering. Check if the animation loop is well-optimized and maintains consistent frame rates (minimum 30 FPS) even with complex effects. Score 0 if no dynamic backgrounds are implemented, 5 if only basic effects are available, and 10 if multiple high-quality effects with customization options are provided.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 1,
-      "title": "Does the code implement comprehensive text and image overlay capabilities?",
-      "description": "Evaluate if users can add, edit, and position both text and images on the dynamic background. Check for text styling options (font family, size, color, shadows, animation), and image manipulation features (resize, crop, opacity, filters). Verify if the code handles text wrapping, image loading errors, and maintains proper layering. Deduct 5 points if either text or image functionality is missing, 3 points if basic positioning is implemented but advanced styling is absent. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 2,
-      "title": "Is the animation control system properly implemented?",
-      "description": "Check if the code provides a timeline or keyframe-based system for controlling element animations. Verify if users can adjust timing, duration, easing functions, and transition effects for all elements. The system should support entry/exit animations and persistent effects. Deduct 5 points if only basic animations are available with fixed timing, 3 points if the timeline lacks precision control or preview scrubbing. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 3,
-      "title": "Is the real-time preview and video export functionality working correctly?",
-      "description": "Evaluate if the code includes real-time preview capabilities that accurately represent the final output. Check if the video export functionality uses proper techniques (such as MediaRecorder API, canvas capture with WebM encoding, or server-side rendering). Verify export settings (resolution, frame rate, file format) and error handling. Deduct 5 points if preview is implemented but export is missing, 5 points if export quality is significantly lower than preview. 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 large file uploads, browser compatibility issues, memory constraints with complex animations, 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-suggested design templates 2. Audio-reactive backgrounds 3. Community sharing platform for created videos). 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 animation systems coexisting) 2. Function modules unrelated to video generation (e.g., a built-in music player without purpose) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., excessive background calculations). 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 rendering/animation/export 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": "Multimedia Editing-Video Production",
-  "difficulty": "hard"
-}

package/library/multimedia_editing-video_production/online-video-background-removal-tool.json

@@ -1,68 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "index": 605,
-  "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 and can be demonstrated. Design an online video background removal tool where users can upload videos with green screens, which will automatically remove the background and replace it with user-selected images or videos. Support real-time preview of changes and allow users to download the processed videos.",
-  "checklist": [
-    {
-      "id": 0,
-      "title": "Is the green screen background removal algorithm accurately implemented?",
-      "description": "Review whether the code implements precise chroma key algorithm using HTML5 Canvas/WebGL, including HSV color space conversion, edge feathering, and shadow handling. Check if it supports adjustable tolerance parameters and multiple green shade detection. Score 0 if core removal logic is missing, 5 if only basic color threshold removal is implemented, and 10 if advanced edge smoothing and color spill correction are fully included.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 1,
-      "title": "Is the video upload and processing pipeline robust?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the implementation includes chunked file upload, progress tracking, and format validation (MP4/WebM/MOV support). Check for memory management during large video processing and worker thread utilization to prevent UI blocking. Deduct 5 points if no progress indication, 3 points if browser crashes on large files. Full score requires seamless handling of videos up to 100MB.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 2,
-      "title": "Is real-time preview functionality implemented with acceptable performance?",
-      "description": "Check whether the preview system uses efficient frame sampling (every 3-5 frames) and WebGL acceleration for real-time rendering. Evaluate if preview updates respond within 500ms of parameter changes. Deduct 5 points if preview lags exceed 1 second, 3 points if no frame rate optimization. Requires smooth 15+ FPS preview for videos under 1080p.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 3,
-      "title": "Is the background replacement system comprehensively designed?",
-      "description": "Verify whether the code supports multiple background types (static images, videos, solid colors) with proper scaling and positioning controls. Check for aspect ratio preservation, background loop handling for shorter clips, and blend mode options. Deduct 5 points if no background scaling options, 3 points if video backgrounds don't loop properly. Full score requires advanced compositing features.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 4,
-      "title": "Is the code robust?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as unsupported video formats, memory overflow, processing failures, corrupted uploads, 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 edge refinement 2. Batch processing multiple videos 3. Custom mask drawing tools 4. Background blur effects 5. Motion tracking for moving subjects). 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 video decoders coexisting) 2. Function modules unrelated to video processing (e.g., built-in social sharing widgets) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., unnecessary particle systems during 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 video processing/UI/file handling layers), error handling coverage, and build process automation. Deduct 5 points if global state pollution is found or memory leaks occur; deduct 5 points if the code duplication rate is too high (over 30%); deduct 5 points if no proper cleanup of video resources. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 8,
-      "title": "Does the interface vision meet professional design standards?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the overall design follows modern design principles: 1) Harmonious color matching (no more than 3 primary colors) 2) Proper layout spacing (element spacing follows the 8px multiple principle) 3) Professional font system (body font size ≥ 14px, line height over 1.5 times) 4) Clear visual hierarchy for video controls. Deduct 3 points for each crowded visual element, 5 points for a glaring color combination, and 5 points for chaotic control 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) Parameter adjustment feedback delay ≤ 100ms 2) Smooth timeline scrubbing without stuttering 3) Clear loading states during processing 4) Intuitive drag-and-drop for file uploads. Deduct 5 points for each operation without feedback, 3 points for jerky video playback, and 5 points for confusing processing status indicators. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    }
-  ],
-  "class": "Multimedia Editing-Video Production",
-  "difficulty": "hard"
-}

package/library/multimedia_editing-video_production/online-video-format-conversion-tool.json

@@ -1,68 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "index": 573,
-  "question": "You are a code expert, please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Try to ensure that the generated code is executable for demonstration.\n\n======== Role ========\nYou are an experienced code expert. You are provided with a software development requirement description, and you need to generate project code based on these requirements. Strictly follow the rules to help users generate complete project code with simple and understandable commentary, without outputting anything else.\n\n======== Output Rules ========\n1. You should always generate complete, runnable project code. Please ensure the project is fully executable.\n2. Ensure that all code files you output are complete, without omitting any code.\n3. Carefully review and check all code before final output, evaluating its executability. If the code cannot be executed or contains errors, regenerate it.\n4. If the requirements involve external API access or need to use user data (images, videos, audio, etc.), please provide simulated data.\n\n======== Project Requirements ========\nWrite code to create an online video format conversion tool. After users upload videos, they can select the target video format (such as MP4, AVI, FLV, etc.) on the front-end page, click the convert button, and then convert the video to the specified format and provide a download link.",
-  "checklist": [
-    {
-      "id": 0,
-      "title": "Is the video upload functionality properly implemented?",
-      "description": "Review whether the code properly implements file upload using HTML/JavaScript with proper validation for video files. Check if it includes file type checking, size limitations, and progress indication during upload. Score 0 if there's no upload functionality, 5 if basic upload exists but lacks validation or progress indication, and 10 if the implementation is complete with all validations and user feedback.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 1,
-      "title": "Is the format conversion functionality implemented correctly?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the code includes proper backend implementation for video format conversion using appropriate libraries (like FFmpeg). Check if all mentioned formats (MP4, AVI, FLV, etc.) are supported. Score 0 if conversion logic is missing, 5 if only basic conversion is implemented with limited formats, and 10 if comprehensive conversion with multiple format options and proper error handling is included.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 2,
-      "title": "Is the download functionality properly implemented?",
-      "description": "Check if the code provides a secure download mechanism for the converted videos, including proper file naming, content-type headers, and download progress indication. Score 0 if download functionality is missing, 5 if basic download exists but lacks proper implementation details, and 10 if a complete and secure download system is implemented.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 3,
-      "title": "Is there a proper conversion status/progress tracking mechanism?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the code includes real-time progress updates during conversion, estimated time remaining calculations, and proper status notifications. Score 0 if no progress tracking exists, 5 if basic status updates are provided but not real-time, and 10 if comprehensive real-time progress tracking with visual indicators is implemented.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 4,
-      "title": "Is the code robust?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as upload failures, conversion errors, invalid file types, server disconnections, 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. Video preview before conversion 2. Batch processing capabilities 3. Additional video editing options like trimming/cropping 4. Conversion presets for common devices). 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 file handling methods) 2. Function modules unrelated to video conversion (e.g., unnecessary social sharing features) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., excessive animations during conversion). 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 upload/conversion/download logic), error handling, security measures (against injection attacks), 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 during the multistep conversion process. Deduct 5 points for each operation without feedback, 3 points for visual after-images during transitions, and 5 points for hard-to-find key function buttons. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    }
-  ],
-  "class": "Multimedia Editing-Video Production",
-  "difficulty": "medium"
-}

package/library/multimedia_editing-video_production/online-video-frame-extractor.json

@@ -1,68 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "index": 471,
-  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Ensure that the code you generate is executable and can be demonstrated. Design an online video frame extractor that allows users to upload videos, select specific time points or ranges, and extract the corresponding video frames as downloadable image files. Provide a functionality to preview the selected frames.",
-  "checklist": [
-    {
-      "id": 0,
-      "title": "Is the video upload functionality fully implemented?",
-      "description": "Review whether the code correctly implements file upload with proper validation for video formats (mp4, webm, mov, etc.) and handles large files efficiently. Check if progress indicators are included and if error handling for failed uploads is implemented. Score 0 if upload functionality is missing, 5 if basic upload works but lacks validation or progress indication, and 10 if it includes all features with a fallback mechanism.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 1,
-      "title": "Is the video player implementation complete and functional?",
-      "description": "Evaluate if the player includes standard controls (play/pause, volume, timeline seeking), supports major video formats, and provides precise frame navigation. The player should display accurate timestamps and support keyboard shortcuts. Deduct 5 points if precise frame-by-frame navigation is missing, and 3 points if the player lacks responsive design. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 2,
-      "title": "Is the frame selection mechanism properly implemented?",
-      "description": "Check if both single frame selection and time range selection are supported, with intuitive UI controls like sliders or timecode input fields. Verify if preview thumbnails are generated for selected points/ranges and if multiple selection points can be saved. Deduct 5 points if only one selection method is implemented, 3 points if the selection isn't visually indicated on the timeline. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 3,
-      "title": "Is the frame extraction functionality complete?",
-      "description": "Assess if the code correctly extracts frames at selected time points or from ranges, maintains original resolution quality, and allows configuration of output format and quality. Check if batch processing with appropriate memory management is implemented. Deduct 5 points if extraction doesn't maintain original quality, 3 points if processing options are limited, and 5 points if extraction performance is poor. 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 corrupt video files, browser compatibility issues, memory limitations, and network interruptions) 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. Automatic scene detection 2. Batch export with custom naming patterns 3. Image enhancement filters for extracted frames 4. Integration with cloud storage). 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 video processing libraries doing the same thing) 2. Function modules unrelated to frame extraction (e.g., a built-in image editor when simple extraction is needed) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., unnecessary animations during 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 video processing/UI/storage 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": "Multimedia Editing-Video Production",
-  "difficulty": "medium"
-}

package/library/multimedia_editing-video_production/online-video-puzzle-generator.json

@@ -1,68 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "index": 476,
-  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Be careful to ensure that the code you generate can be executed and displayed. Create an online video puzzle generator where users can select multiple images, set the order and duration of each image in the video, add transition effects, choose background music, and export as a video file. Provide a real-time preview feature.",
-  "checklist": [
-    {
-      "id": 0,
-      "title": "Is the image selection and management system fully implemented?",
-      "description": "Review whether the code allows users to select multiple images from their device, add them to a working area, reorder them, and manage them (delete, duplicate). Check if there's proper validation for file formats (JPG, PNG, WebP, etc.) and size limitations. Score 0 if no image selection is implemented, 5 if basic selection exists but lacks management features, and 10 if complete with drag-and-drop reordering and thumbnail previews.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 1,
-      "title": "Is the timeline and duration control system properly implemented?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether users can set precise durations for each image, adjust the order in a visual timeline interface, and see visual representations of image durations. Check if time markers and timeline scrubbing are implemented. Deduct 5 points if only basic duration input fields exist without visual timeline representation, and 3 points if timeline navigation lacks scrubbing functionality. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 2,
-      "title": "Are transition effects properly implemented with previews?",
-      "description": "Check whether the code provides a variety of transition effects (fade, slide, zoom, etc.) between images with real-time previews. Each transition should be customizable in terms of duration and parameters. Evaluate if transitions render smoothly in the preview. Deduct 5 points if fewer than 5 transition types are available, and 3 points if transitions appear choppy in preview. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 3,
-      "title": "Is the background music selection and audio control system functional?",
-      "description": "Assess if users can upload audio files or select from a library, adjust volume levels, trim audio length to match video duration, and synchronize with the video timeline. Check for audio visualization during preview. Deduct 5 points if audio trimming isn't supported, and 3 points if volume control is missing. Award full 10 points only if audio waveform visualization and precise timing control are implemented.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 4,
-      "title": "Is the code robust?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as unsupported file formats, oversized images/audio, 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 auto-trimming based on image content 2. Smart transitions that analyze image content 3. Text overlay and captioning tools 4. Motion effects for still images). 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 preview players running simultaneously) 2. Function modules unrelated to video puzzle creation (e.g., a built-in social sharing system) 3. Resource-intensive effects that affect performance (e.g., unnecessary real-time video processing during editing). 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 media processing/UI/export logic), unit test coverage, and build process automation. Deduct 5 points if global state pollution is found or design patterns are not used; deduct 5 points if the code duplication rate is too high (over 30%); deduct 5 points if the build process is not automated. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 8,
-      "title": "Does the interface vision meet professional design standards?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the overall design follows modern design principles: 1) Harmonious color matching (no more than 3 primary colors) 2) Proper layout spacing (element spacing follows the 8px multiple principle) 3) Professional font system (body font size ≥ 14px, line height over 1.5 times). Deduct 3 points for each crowded visual element, 5 points for a glaring color combination, and 5 points for chaotic text-image layout. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 9,
-      "title": "Is the dynamic interaction smooth and seamless?",
-      "description": "Judge whether the dynamic effects conform to human perception characteristics: 1) Preview rendering starts within 500ms of changes 2) UI remains responsive during video processing 3) Clear visual feedback during export process with progress indicators. Deduct 5 points for laggy timeline scrubbing, 3 points for delayed preview updates after parameter changes, and 5 points for export functions without progress indicators. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    }
-  ],
-  "class": "Multimedia Editing-Video Production",
-  "difficulty": "hard"
-}

package/library/multimedia_editing-video_production/online-video-resolution-adjuster.json

@@ -1,68 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "index": 648,
-  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Make sure the code you generate is functional and executable. Create an online video resolution adjustment tool that allows users to upload videos and then adjust the resolution to either 720p or 480p, with the ability to download the processed video afterward.",
-  "checklist": [
-    {
-      "id": 0,
-      "title": "Is the video upload functionality properly implemented?",
-      "description": "Check if the code includes proper file input handling for video uploads, with support for common video formats (MP4, WebM, AVI, MOV). The implementation should validate file types, manage upload size limits (showing progress for large files), and handle upload errors gracefully with user feedback. Score 0 if no upload functionality exists, 5 if basic upload works but lacks validation, 10 if fully implemented with comprehensive error handling.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 1,
-      "title": "Is the video resolution adjustment functionality correctly implemented?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the code properly implements resolution adjustment to exactly 720p (1280x720) and 480p (854x480) while maintaining aspect ratio. The implementation should use efficient video processing libraries (like FFmpeg wrappers or Web API solutions) and properly handle codec compatibility. Deduct 3 points if aspect ratio is not preserved, 5 points if resolution options are hardcoded without flexibility, and 5 points if the conversion process doesn't provide status updates. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 2,
-      "title": "Is the video download functionality properly implemented?",
-      "description": "Review if the code generates downloadable video files after processing, with proper file naming conventions and MIME type handling. Check if the implementation includes download progress indicators and handles large file downloads appropriately (using Blob or stream processing). Deduct 5 points if the download mechanism doesn't work for videos larger than 100MB, and 3 points if no file naming options are provided. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 3,
-      "title": "Is the video preview functionality implemented?",
-      "description": "Assess whether the code includes a video preview feature that allows users to see both the original and processed videos for comparison. The preview should include basic playback controls (play/pause, seek, volume) and display resolution information. Deduct 5 points if the preview doesn't work across different browsers, and 3 points if the video controls are minimal or buggy. Give 10 points if the preview includes side-by-side comparison with visual quality indicators.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 4,
-      "title": "Is the code robust?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as unsupported video formats, aborted uploads/downloads, 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. Video thumbnail generation 2. Batch processing multiple videos 3. Additional resolution options beyond requirements 4. Video compression settings). Add 2.5 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 video processing methods) 2. Function modules unrelated to video resolution adjustment (e.g., excessive video editing features) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., unnecessary animations or filters). 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/processing/storage logic), memory management (especially for video processing), and worker thread usage. Deduct 5 points if global state pollution is found or design patterns are not used; deduct 5 points if memory leaks occur during video processing; deduct 5 points if large video processing blocks the UI thread. 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) Processing feedback is clear and immediate 2) Progress indicators for long operations (upload, processing, download) 3) Clear visual guidance through the workflow. Deduct 5 points for operations without progress indicators, 3 points for UI freezes during processing, and 5 points for confusing workflow navigation. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    }
-  ],
-  "class": "Multimedia Editing-Video Production",
-  "difficulty": "medium"
-}

package/library/multimedia_editing-video_production/photo-background-text-subtitle-video-synthesis.json

@@ -1,68 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "index": 921,
-  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Make sure the generated code is executable and demonstrable. Requirement: Upload a portrait photo, input a text, and synthesize a video output where the photo serves as the video background and the text appears as the video subtitle. Please provide the code implementation.",
-  "checklist": [
-    {
-      "id": 0,
-      "title": "Is the image upload and processing functionality fully implemented?",
-      "description": "Review whether the code accurately implements file upload validation (format checking for jpg/png/webp), image preprocessing (resolution optimization, aspect ratio adjustment), and canvas rendering capabilities. Score 0 if basic upload is not implemented, 5 if only simple upload without validation exists, and 10 if complete image processing pipeline with error handling is included.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 1,
-      "title": "Is the text input and subtitle rendering system properly constructed?",
-      "description": "Check whether the implementation includes text input validation, subtitle timing control, multi-line text handling, and proper text encoding support. Evaluate subtitle positioning algorithms, font rendering quality, and text overflow handling. Deduct 5 points if subtitle synchronization is missing, and 3 points if special characters are not properly handled. Full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 2,
-      "title": "Is the video synthesis and export functionality complete?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the video generation uses proper encoding (H.264/WebM), includes audio track handling, and provides multiple output format options. Check if the implementation supports different video resolutions and frame rates. Deduct 5 points if video quality is below 720p, and 3 points if export progress tracking is missing. Full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 3,
-      "title": "Is the complete media processing pipeline optimized?",
-      "description": "Check whether the code includes efficient memory management for large files, background processing for video generation, and proper cleanup of temporary resources. Evaluate streaming processing capabilities and batch operation support. Deduct 5 points if memory leaks are present, and 3 points if processing cancellation is not supported. Give 10 points if fully optimized.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 4,
-      "title": "Is the code robust?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as corrupted image files, oversized uploads, invalid text input, 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. Real-time preview during editing 2. Multiple subtitle animation effects 3. Background music integration 4. Batch processing capabilities 5. Social sharing options). Add 3 points for each practical innovative feature implemented (maximum 10 points).",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 6,
-      "title": "Are there any redundant features?",
-      "description": "Strictly check three types of redundancy: 1. Redundant implementation of similar functions (e.g., multiple file upload handlers coexisting) 2. Function modules unrelated to video synthesis (e.g., built-in photo editor) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., unnecessary real-time filters). 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 upload/processing/rendering 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) 4) Clear upload area design with drag-and-drop visual cues. 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) Upload progress feedback with smooth animations 2) Processing status indicators with clear transitions 3) Preview functionality with instant response 4) Export progress with accurate time estimates. Deduct 5 points for each operation without feedback, 3 points for laggy preview rendering, and 5 points for unclear processing status. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    }
-  ],
-  "class": "Multimedia Editing-Video Production",
-  "difficulty": "medium"
-}

package/library/multimedia_editing-video_production/picture-in-picture-video-editor.json

@@ -1,68 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "index": 690,
-  "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. Develop a Picture-in-Picture video effect editor that allows users to upload one main video and multiple auxiliary videos, displaying the auxiliary videos as picture-in-picture on the main video. Users can adjust the size, position, border, and shape (such as circle, oval, etc.) of the picture-in-picture, and set entrance and exit animation effects. Support simultaneous display of multiple picture-in-picture elements with timeline control, suitable for creating reaction videos, commentary videos, and educational demonstrations.",
-  "checklist": [
-    {
-      "id": 0,
-      "title": "Is the video upload and management system implemented correctly?",
-      "description": "Check if the code allows users to upload one main video and multiple auxiliary videos with proper file validation (checking formats like MP4, WebM, AVI, etc.) and error handling. The system should manage these videos efficiently with preview functionality before adding them to the editor. Score 0 if video upload is not implemented, 5 if only basic uploads work without validation, and 10 if complete video management with previews and format validation is implemented.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 1,
-      "title": "Is the Picture-in-Picture (PiP) positioning and sizing functionality complete?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the code provides comprehensive controls for manipulating PiP videos, including precise positioning (x/y coordinates or grid snapping), resizing with aspect ratio preservation, z-index control for overlapping PiPs, and responsive behavior across different screen sizes. Deduct 3 points if position control is limited to predefined spots, 3 points if resizing doesn't maintain aspect ratio, and 4 points if z-index management is absent. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 2,
-      "title": "Are PiP customization options fully implemented?",
-      "description": "Review whether users can customize the PiP appearance through border styles (width, color, pattern), shape masking (rectangle, circle, oval, custom shapes), opacity controls, and filters (brightness, contrast, saturation). Score 3 points for basic border controls, 3 points for shape masking implementation, 2 points for opacity/transparency features, and 2 points for video filters. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 3,
-      "title": "Is the timeline control and animation system properly implemented?",
-      "description": "Assess if the code implements a functional timeline that allows users to control when PiP elements appear and disappear, with precise timing controls (down to millisecond accuracy). Check for entrance/exit animation capabilities (fade, slide, zoom, etc.) with customizable duration and easing functions. Deduct 5 points if timeline scrubbing precision is poor, 3 points if animation options are limited to fewer than 5 types, and 2 points if animation easing controls are 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 video format incompatibility, browser memory constraints, user operation errors, etc.) and provide friendly error prompts or recovery mechanisms. Check for browser compatibility across major browsers (Chrome, Firefox, Safari, Edge). Deduct 3 points for each major browser incompatibility, 4 points if error handling is inadequate, and 3 points if the application crashes when videos fail to load. The full score is 10 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 PiP positioning 2. Audio ducking when multiple videos play simultaneously 3. Motion tracking to move PiP with content 4. Templates for common PiP layouts). Add 2.5 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 video players with different APIs) 2. Function modules unrelated to video editing (e.g., a built-in social network) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., excessive background 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 video processing/UI/state management layers), unit test coverage, and build process automation. Check for the use of appropriate design patterns, memory management for video assets, and performance optimization techniques. Deduct 3 points if global state pollution is found, 4 points if video memory isn't properly managed, and 3 points if the rendering pipeline isn't optimized. 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 editor design principles: 1) Clear separation between preview area, timeline, and controls 2) Consistent icon system and color scheme 3) Responsive layout that adapts to different screen sizes 4) High contrast between interactive elements and background. Deduct 3 points for cluttered workspace design, 3 points for inconsistent iconography, and 4 points for poor visual hierarchy of editing tools. 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 video editing expectations: 1) Real-time preview updates when modifying PiP parameters 2) Smooth timeline scrubbing without frame drops 3) Responsive drag-and-drop for PiP positioning 4) Clear visual feedback during rendering operations. Deduct 3 points for laggy preview updates, 3 points for jerky timeline scrubbing, and 4 points if export/rendering progress indicators are missing or inaccurate. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    }
-  ],
-  "class": "Multimedia Editing-Video Production",
-  "difficulty": "hard"
-}