@getollie/cli 0.0.5 → 0.2.1

package/library/multimedia_editing-video_production/simple-love-confession-code-video.json

@@ -1,68 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "index": 784,
-  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Be sure to produce executable code whenever possible. Create a simple love confession code for me that can be presented in video format.",
-  "checklist": [
-    {
-      "id": 0,
-      "title": "Is the love confession video generation implemented correctly?",
-      "description": "Review whether the code successfully creates a video output with proper love confession elements. Check if the code includes video creation libraries (e.g., ffmpeg wrappers), animation frameworks, or canvas-to-video conversion. Score 0 if no video output is possible, 5 if basic video is created but with limitations, 10 if a complete video with smooth playback is implemented.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 1,
-      "title": "Does the confession include interactive or animated elements?",
-      "description": "Evaluate the implementation of animations, transitions, or interactive elements in the confession. Look for CSS animations, JavaScript animations (GSAP, anime.js), or canvas-based animations. Deduct 5 points if animations are jerky or have performance issues, 3 points if timing is poorly synchronized. The full score is 10 points for smooth, thematic animations that enhance the confession.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 2,
-      "title": "Is the text content of the confession customizable?",
-      "description": "Check if the code allows for personalization of the confession message, names, dates, or other content. Score 10 points if the code includes clear variables or parameters for customization, 5 points if limited customization is possible but requires code editing, 0 points if all content is hardcoded without any customization options.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 3,
-      "title": "Does the code include audio or sound integration?",
-      "description": "Assess whether background music, sound effects, or voice narration capabilities are implemented. Check for proper audio format support, volume control, and synchronization with visual elements. Deduct 5 points if audio implementation is present but not synchronized with visuals, 3 points if audio controls are missing. The full score is 10 points for complete audio implementation with proper timing.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 4,
-      "title": "Is the code robust?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as media loading failures, browser compatibility issues, mobile responsiveness, etc.) and provide fallbacks or friendly error prompts. Code with strong robustness should handle edge cases effectively, 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. Interactive elements that respond to user input 2. Particle effects or visual surprises 3. Responsive design that adapts to different viewing contexts). 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 the confession (e.g., unnecessary game elements) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., excessive particle systems). 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 content/presentation/interaction layers), code structure, and maintainability. Deduct 5 points if global scope pollution is found or design patterns are not used; deduct 5 points if the code duplication rate is too high (over 30%); deduct 5 points if there's no clear organization or commenting. 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 (romantic theme with complementary colors) 2) Proper layout spacing and composition 3) Professional typography (readable fonts, proper sizing and contrast). Deduct 3 points for each visual design flaw, 5 points for clashing colors or illegible text, and 5 points for chaotic layout. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 9,
-      "title": "Is the emotional impact effective and appropriate?",
-      "description": "Judge whether the confession creates genuine emotional resonance: 1) Appropriate pacing for emotional buildup 2) Harmonious integration of visuals, text, and potentially audio 3) Tasteful presentation without being cliché. Deduct 5 points for an overly generic approach, 3 points for mismatched tone or mood, and 5 points for elements that detract from the sincere message. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    }
-  ],
-  "class": "Multimedia Editing-Video Production",
-  "difficulty": "easy"
-}

package/library/multimedia_editing-video_production/social-media-short-video-generator.json

@@ -1,68 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "index": 548,
-  "question": "You are a code expert, please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Be sure to provide executable code whenever possible. Implement a social media short video generator where users can upload image and video materials, and the system provides various video templates (such as stories, product showcases, travel logs, etc.). Users can replace materials in templates, adjust duration, add text and stickers. Support adding background music and adjusting volume, and export the finished product in different sizes and formats suitable for Instagram, TikTok and WeChat.",
-  "checklist": [
-    {
-      "id": 0,
-      "title": "Is the material upload and management system fully implemented?",
-      "description": "Review whether the code implements a complete upload system that handles both images and videos with proper validation, processing, and storage management. Check for file type validation, size limits, progress indicators, and thumbnail generation. Score 0 if upload functionality is missing, 5 if basic upload exists but lacks proper validation or processing, 10 if the system includes comprehensive asset management with tagging, categorization, and search capabilities.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 1,
-      "title": "Are the video templates properly implemented with customization options?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the code provides a variety of templates (stories, product showcases, travel logs, etc.) with placeholder slots for user content. Check if templates include timing information, transition effects, and customizable sections. Deduct 3 points if fewer than 5 template options are provided, 5 points if templates cannot be previewed before selection, and 3 points if template customization is limited. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 2,
-      "title": "Is the timeline editor functionality complete?",
-      "description": "Verify whether the code implements an interactive timeline editor that allows users to adjust clip duration, arrange segments, add transitions, and precisely control the video flow. Check for frame-accurate editing capabilities, drag-and-drop functionality, and preview options. Deduct 5 points if the timeline lacks visual representation of content, 3 points if trimming functionality is missing, and 5 points if there's no real-time preview of changes. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 3,
-      "title": "Are text overlay and sticker functionalities properly implemented?",
-      "description": "Assess whether the code allows adding text with customizable fonts, sizes, colors, and animations, as well as sticker/overlay placement with scaling and rotation options. Check for text timing controls, animation presets, and sticker library management. Score 0 if text/sticker functionality is missing, 5 if basic implementation exists but lacks animation or positioning flexibility, and 10 if it includes advanced features like text effects, sticker categories, and keyframe animation control.",
-      "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 uploads, 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 video creation suggestions 2. Voice-to-text caption generation 3. One-click theme application with color correction). Add 3 points for each practical innovative feature implemented (maximum 10 points).",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 6,
-      "title": "Are there any redundant features?",
-      "description": "Strictly check three types of redundancy: 1. Redundant implementation of similar functions (e.g., multiple video processing libraries doing the same job) 2. Function modules unrelated to video creation (e.g., a built-in chat system) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., excessive background animations in the editor). 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 logic/UI/state management), 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 audio handling and export functionality complete?",
-      "description": "Judge whether the code properly implements audio features (background music addition, volume adjustment, fade in/out) and export capabilities for different platforms. Check if the system can export in various aspect ratios (9:16 for TikTok, 4:5 for Instagram, 1:1 for others) and appropriate quality settings. Deduct 5 points if audio waveform visualization is missing, 3 points if volume normalization is not implemented, and 5 points if exports don't include platform-specific metadata or optimizations. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    }
-  ],
-  "class": "Multimedia Editing-Video Production",
-  "difficulty": "hard"
-}

package/library/multimedia_editing-video_production/software-video-player-all-formats.json

@@ -1,68 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "index": 813,
-  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Pay attention to ensuring that the code you generate can be executed and displayed. Design a video player that supports software playback of all formats.",
-  "checklist": [
-    {
-      "id": 0,
-      "title": "Is the video player's core functionality fully implemented?",
-      "description": "Review whether the code accurately implements the core video playing capabilities through HTML5 video API or custom implementations. Check support for multiple codecs (H.264, VP9, AV1, HEVC), container formats (MP4, WebM, MKV, AVI), and streaming protocols (HLS, DASH, RTMP). Score 0 if basic playback isn't working, 5 if only common formats work, 10 if comprehensive format support is implemented with proper fallback mechanisms.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 1,
-      "title": "Is codec and format detection properly implemented?",
-      "description": "Evaluate the player's ability to detect and handle various video formats automatically. Check for proper MIME type detection, codec identification, and dynamic loading of necessary decoders. Deduct 5 points if format detection requires manual input, 3 points if some major formats aren't properly detected. The player should intelligently select the best available codec based on browser support and provide clear error messages when a format is unsupported.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 2,
-      "title": "Does the player include essential playback controls and features?",
-      "description": "Check for implementation of standard controls (play/pause, volume, seek, fullscreen), along with advanced features like playback speed adjustment, subtitles/captions support (SRT, VTT, ASS formats), and quality selection. Verify that keyboard shortcuts work properly. Deduct 2 points for each missing essential control and 1 point for each missing advanced feature. Full score requires picture-in-picture support and custom keyboard mapping.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 3,
-      "title": "Is there an adaptive streaming implementation?",
-      "description": "Evaluate the player's ability to dynamically adjust quality based on network conditions. Check for implementation of ABR (Adaptive Bitrate) algorithms, buffer management, and bandwidth estimation. Verify the player can smoothly switch between quality levels without interruption. Deduct 5 points if adaptive streaming is missing, 3 points if the implementation doesn't handle network fluctuations well. Full score requires preloading strategies and intelligent quality selection based on device capabilities.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 4,
-      "title": "Is the code robust?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as corrupted video files, network interruption, 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-powered content analysis for smart thumbnails 2. Advanced audio normalization 3. Frame-accurate editing capabilities 4. Social sharing with timestamp links). 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 volume control mechanisms coexisting) 2. Function modules unrelated to video playback (e.g., unnecessary social features) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., excessive animations that impact playback). 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 player core/UI/plugin systems), 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) Controls appear/disappear within 100ms 2) Hover effects respond instantly 3) Seeking and volume changes reflect immediately in UI. Deduct 5 points for each operation without feedback, 3 points for laggy transitions when controls appear/disappear, and 5 points for controls that obstruct video content unnecessarily. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    }
-  ],
-  "class": "Multimedia Editing-Video Production",
-  "difficulty": "medium"
-}

package/library/multimedia_editing-video_production/tiktok-watermark-removal-mini-program.json

@@ -1,68 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "index": 859,
-  "question": "You are a code expert, please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Be sure to ensure that the code you generate is executable for demonstration. Develop a TikTok watermark removal mini-program using uni-app in HBuilder, send me the project structure and complete code with properly closed tags.",
-  "checklist": [
-    {
-      "id": 0,
-      "title": "Is the TikTok watermark removal core functionality implemented correctly?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the code properly implements the watermark removal algorithm through video processing techniques. Check if it can extract the original video URL from TikTok shared links, download the video, and process it to remove watermarks. Score 0 if no watermark removal logic is present, 5 if basic URL extraction is implemented but processing is incomplete, and 10 if the complete pipeline (link parsing, video downloading, watermark removal) is functional.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 1,
-      "title": "Is the uni-app framework properly utilized for cross-platform compatibility?",
-      "description": "Check whether the project correctly implements the uni-app structure and employs its APIs for cross-platform functionality. The mini-program should work on WeChat, Alipay, and other platforms. Examine if conditional compilation is used for platform-specific code. Deduct 5 points if platform adaptation is missing, 3 points if uni-app lifecycle hooks are improperly implemented. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 2,
-      "title": "Is the HBuilder project structure organized properly?",
-      "description": "Assess whether the project follows the standard uni-app directory structure with proper organization of pages, components, static resources, and configuration files. Check for presence of manifest.json, pages.json, and App.vue with appropriate configurations. Deduct 3 points for each critical missing file, and 2 points for improper nesting of directories. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 3,
-      "title": "Is the user authentication and permission handling implemented?",
-      "description": "Evaluate if the code includes proper handling of necessary permissions (camera, storage, network) and user authentication for saving processed videos. Check if it includes permission request flows and graceful fallbacks when permissions are denied. Deduct 5 points if permission handling is missing, 3 points if error states aren't handled. 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 TikTok links, network interruption, video processing failures, etc.) and provide friendly error prompts or recovery mechanisms. Code with strong robustness should be able to effectively handle these edge cases, giving 10 points. If the robustness is average, give 5 points, and if no exceptions are handled, give 0 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 5,
-      "title": "Are there any innovative features that are eye-catching?",
-      "description": "Check whether the code includes surprise features that enhance the experience (e.g., 1. Batch processing of multiple TikTok videos 2. Custom watermark replacement options 3. Video quality enhancement 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 video processing libraries used for the same purpose) 2. Function modules unrelated to watermark removal (e.g., built-in games) 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 UI/business logic/network 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/video-auto-editing-tool-with-scene-detection.json

@@ -1,68 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "index": 487,
-  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Ensure the code you provide is executable for demonstration. Develop a video auto-editing tool where, after users upload long videos, the algorithm automatically detects scene transition points (sudden changes in images), generates a suggested list of editing points, allows users to adjust them, and then automatically splits video segments to export a collection of selected clips.",
-  "checklist": [
-    {
-      "id": 0,
-      "title": "Is the video upload and processing system fully implemented?",
-      "description": "Review whether the code provides a complete upload interface with progress indication, handles various video formats (MP4, MOV, AVI, etc.), and properly manages file chunks for large videos. Check if video metadata extraction is implemented for resolution, duration, fps, and codec information. Score 0 if upload functionality is missing, 5 if basic upload works without proper error handling, and 10 if comprehensive upload with progress tracking and format validation is implemented.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 1,
-      "title": "Is the scene transition detection algorithm effectively implemented?",
-      "description": "Evaluate the algorithm's technical approach for detecting scene changes (e.g., pixel difference calculation, histogram comparison, machine learning-based detection). Check if the algorithm includes sensitivity adjustment parameters, false positive filtering, and optimization for processing speed. Deduct 5 points if only basic frame differencing is used without refinement, 3 points if the algorithm is not configurable, and 2 points if processing is inefficient for longer videos. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 2,
-      "title": "Is the editing point suggestion and adjustment interface user-friendly?",
-      "description": "Check if the interface displays detected scene transitions with visual indicators (thumbnails or waveforms), allows drag-and-drop adjustment of edit points, and includes features like zooming in/out on the timeline. Review the precision of frame selection controls and undo/redo functionality. Deduct 5 points if manual adjustment is difficult, 3 points if visual indicators are inadequate, and 2 points if precise frame selection is not possible. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 3,
-      "title": "Is the video splitting and export functionality complete?",
-      "description": "Examine if the code handles video segment extraction without re-encoding when possible, maintains original video quality, supports batch export of multiple segments, and provides export progress feedback. Check for export format options and quality settings. Score 0 if export functionality is missing, 5 if basic export works but lacks options or feedback, and 10 if comprehensive export with quality preservation and format options is implemented.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 4,
-      "title": "Is the code robust?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as corrupted video files, browser crashes during upload, memory limitations with large videos, etc.) and provide friendly error prompts or recovery mechanisms. Code with strong robustness should include proper exception handling, temporary storage for in-progress edits, and resume capabilities. Give 10 points for comprehensive error handling, 5 points if only basic error handling exists, and 0 points if exceptions are not handled.",
-      "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-based content recognition for smart suggestions 2. Audio waveform visualization for better edit point selection 3. Batch processing of multiple 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 video processing functions 2. Function modules unrelated to video editing (e.g., built-in social sharing that could be handled separately) 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 logic/UI/file handling layers), unit test coverage, and performance optimization. Examine the use of Web Workers for non-UI tasks and efficient memory management for video processing. Deduct 5 points if global state pollution is found; deduct 5 points if the code duplication rate is too high (over 30%); deduct 5 points if no optimization for memory usage with large videos exists. 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 video timeline design with clear markers and indicators. Deduct 3 points for each crowded visual element, 5 points for poor timeline visualization, and 5 points for chaotic control panel layout. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 9,
-      "title": "Is the dynamic interaction smooth and seamless?",
-      "description": "Judge whether the video editing interactions conform to professional standards: 1) Real-time preview responds within 500ms 2) Scrubbing through video is smooth at 24+ fps 3) Edit point adjustment has clear visual feedback. Deduct 5 points for laggy preview rendering, 3 points for jerky timeline navigation, and 5 points for unresponsive controls during video processing. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    }
-  ],
-  "class": "Multimedia Editing-Video Production",
-  "difficulty": "hard"
-}

package/library/multimedia_editing-video_production/video-background-replacement-chroma-key-tool.json

@@ -1,68 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "index": 665,
-  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Make sure that the generated code is executable. Implement a video background replacement/green screen processing tool that allows users to upload videos with green screen (or blue screen), automatically detects and removes the background color, and replaces it with user-uploaded images or video backgrounds. Provide chroma key control parameters (such as hue range, tolerance, smoothness, etc.) for adjustment to optimize keying effects. Support real-time preview and export of the final composite video.",
-  "checklist": [
-    {
-      "id": 0,
-      "title": "Is the chroma key algorithm accurately implemented?",
-      "description": "Review whether the code correctly implements chroma key background removal algorithms, including HSV color space conversion, hue range detection, tolerance control, and edge smoothness processing. Check if it supports both green screen and blue screen detection with proper color distance calculations. Score 0 if basic color detection is missing, 5 if only simple RGB threshold is implemented, and 10 if advanced HSV-based chroma key with edge feathering is fully implemented.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 1,
-      "title": "Is the video processing pipeline properly constructed?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the video processing workflow includes frame-by-frame extraction, background replacement compositing, and re-encoding functionality. Check if WebGL/Canvas is used for hardware acceleration and if proper memory management prevents browser crashes during large video processing. Deduct 5 points if no frame buffering mechanism exists, and 3 points if video encoding format compatibility is limited. Full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 2,
-      "title": "Are comprehensive chroma key control parameters provided?",
-      "description": "Check whether the interface provides essential control parameters including hue range slider, color tolerance adjustment, edge smoothness control, spill suppression, and alpha channel fine-tuning. Verify if real-time parameter adjustment updates the preview immediately. Deduct 5 points if key parameters like tolerance or smoothness are missing, and 3 points if parameter changes don't reflect in real-time preview. Full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 3,
-      "title": "Is real-time preview and export functionality fully implemented?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the system provides smooth real-time preview of the chroma key effect with acceptable frame rate (≥15fps for preview). Check if video export supports multiple formats (MP4, WebM) with quality options and progress indication. Deduct 5 points if preview is laggy or non-responsive, and 5 points if export functionality is incomplete or crashes. Give 10 points if both preview and export work seamlessly.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 4,
-      "title": "Is the code robust?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as unsupported video formats, oversized files, memory overflow, corrupted video data, 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 auto chroma key detection 2. Batch processing multiple videos 3. Advanced compositing modes like screen/multiply 4. Custom mask drawing tools). 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 color detection algorithms coexisting unnecessarily) 2. Function modules unrelated to video processing (e.g., built-in social sharing widgets) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., excessive UI animations during video processing). Deduct 3 points for each redundancy found, and directly deduct 10 points if the core video processing 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), worker thread usage for heavy processing, and proper error handling. Deduct 5 points if main thread blocking is found during video processing; deduct 5 points if the code duplication rate is too high (over 30%); deduct 5 points if no progress indication exists for long operations. 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 parameter control layout with proper visual hierarchy. Deduct 3 points for each crowded visual element, 5 points for a glaring color combination, and 5 points for chaotic control panel 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 ≤ 200ms 2) Video preview playback controls are responsive 3) Clear visual focus guidance for upload areas and control panels 4) Smooth transitions between different processing states. Deduct 5 points for each operation without feedback, 3 points for jerky parameter adjustments, and 5 points for unclear upload/processing status indicators. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    }
-  ],
-  "class": "Multimedia Editing-Video Production",
-  "difficulty": "medium"
-}

package/library/multimedia_editing-video_production/video-dubbing-tool-with-audio-waveform-sync.json

@@ -1,68 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "index": 535,
-  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Make sure any generated code is executable for demonstration purposes.\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 that is fully commented in simple, easy-to-understand language, without outputting anything else.\n\n======== OUTPUT RULES ========\n1. Always generate complete, runnable project code, ensuring 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, 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 ========\nImplement a video dubbing tool that supports real-time audio recording while playing existing videos, visualizes audio waveforms, allows alignment and adjustment of synchronization between recordings and video, and exports video files with the new audio track.",
-  "checklist": [
-    {
-      "id": 0,
-      "title": "Is the video playback and control system fully implemented?",
-      "description": "Review whether the code accurately implements video playback controls through HTML5 video API, including play/pause, seek, timeline scrubbing, and frame-accurate positioning. Check if custom video controls are properly styled and responsive. Score 0 if basic video playback is not implemented, 5 if only basic play/pause is available, and 10 if full video control with timeline manipulation and frame-accurate seeking is included.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 1,
-      "title": "Is the real-time audio recording functionality properly implemented?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the WebRTC MediaRecorder API is correctly implemented with proper microphone access permissions, real-time audio capture, and recording state management. Check if the recording can start/stop in sync with video playback and handles different audio formats. Deduct 5 points if permission handling is missing, 3 points if recording quality controls are absent. Full score requires seamless recording with proper error handling.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 2,
-      "title": "Is the audio waveform visualization accurately rendered?",
-      "description": "Check whether the waveform visualization uses Web Audio API with proper frequency analysis and canvas/SVG rendering. Evaluate if the waveform updates in real-time during recording and displays recorded audio accurately. Deduct 5 points if waveform doesn't sync with audio timeline, 3 points if visual quality is poor or choppy. Requires smooth real-time visualization with proper scaling and time alignment.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 3,
-      "title": "Is the audio-video synchronization and alignment system complete?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the code provides tools for fine-tuning audio-video synchronization, including offset adjustment controls, visual alignment guides, and preview functionality. Check if users can precisely align recorded audio with video timeline through drag-and-drop or numeric input. Deduct 5 points if alignment tools are basic, 3 points if no visual feedback is provided. Full score requires precise synchronization controls with millisecond accuracy.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 4,
-      "title": "Is the code robust?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as microphone access denial, unsupported video formats, memory limitations during long recordings, browser compatibility issues, etc.) and provide friendly error prompts or recovery mechanisms. Code with strong robustness should effectively handle these edge cases, giving 10 points. If robustness is average, give 5 points, and if no exceptions are handled, give 0 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 5,
-      "title": "Are there any innovative features that are eye-catching?",
-      "description": "Check whether the code includes surprise features that enhance the experience (e.g., 1. Real-time noise reduction during recording 2. Multiple audio track layering 3. Voice activity detection with auto-pause 4. Keyboard shortcuts for precise control 5. Automatic backup of work-in-progress). 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 audio processing pipelines coexisting) 2. Function modules unrelated to video dubbing (e.g., built-in video editing tools) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., excessive visual animations during recording). Deduct 3 points for each redundancy found, and directly deduct 10 points if core dubbing functions are interfered with by redundant code.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 7,
-      "title": "Does the code have engineering quality?",
-      "description": "Review modular design (such as separating audio processing/video handling/UI layers), proper async/await usage for media operations, and memory management for large files. Deduct 5 points if global state pollution is found or media resources are not properly disposed; deduct 5 points if the code duplication rate is too high (over 30%); deduct 5 points if no proper error boundaries exist for media operations. 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 media tool design principles: 1) Professional timeline UI with clear time markers 2) Intuitive waveform visualization colors (contrasting background) 3) Proper control button sizing (minimum 44px touch targets) 4) Consistent spacing following 8px grid system. Deduct 3 points for each crowded control element, 5 points for poor waveform visibility, and 5 points for confusing timeline layout. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 9,
-      "title": "Is the dynamic interaction smooth and seamless?",
-      "description": "Judge whether the media interactions conform to professional standards: 1) Video scrubbing responds within 100ms 2) Recording start/stop feedback is immediate 3) Waveform rendering maintains 30fps during playback 4) Synchronization adjustments provide real-time preview. Deduct 5 points for each laggy media operation, 3 points for choppy waveform animation, and 5 points for delayed audio-video sync feedback. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    }
-  ],
-  "class": "Multimedia Editing-Video Production",
-  "difficulty": "hard"
-}

package/library/multimedia_editing-video_production/video-editing-timeline-manager.json

@@ -1,68 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "index": 622,
-  "question": "You are a code expert, please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Try to ensure the generated code can be executed and demonstrated. ======== 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 easy-to-understand comments, without outputting anything else.\n\n======== OUTPUT RULES ========\n1. You will always generate complete, runnable project code. Please ensure the project is complete and executable\n2. Make sure 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 using user data (images, videos, audio, etc.), please provide mock data\n\n======== PROJECT REQUIREMENTS ========\nDevelop a video editing timeline manager where users can upload multiple video and audio files, arrange video and audio clips on the timeline through drag-and-drop operations to complete editing, and finally generate and export the video.",
-  "checklist": [
-    {
-      "id": 0,
-      "title": "Is the video timeline component fully implemented?",
-      "description": "Review whether the code implements a complete timeline interface with time markers, zoom controls, and frame-accurate positioning. Check if the timeline supports multiple video/audio tracks and if scrubbing/playback functionality is properly synchronized with the video preview. Score 0 if core timeline visualization is missing, 5 if basic timeline exists but lacks essential features, 10 if the timeline is fully featured with professional-grade precision.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 1,
-      "title": "Is the drag-and-drop media arrangement functionality properly implemented?",
-      "description": "Evaluate the drag-and-drop implementation for arranging video and audio clips on the timeline. Check if the code handles drag start/over/end events correctly, includes visual feedback during dragging, supports clip trimming/splitting, and maintains proper snapping to adjacent clips or time markers. Deduct 3 points if drag positioning is inaccurate, 3 points if visual feedback during dragging is poor, and 4 points if clip operations (trimming/splitting) are missing. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 2,
-      "title": "Is the video/audio upload and management system complete?",
-      "description": "Check if the code implements complete media upload functionality with proper file validation, progress indicators, and error handling. Verify if uploaded assets are properly organized in a media library with thumbnails/waveforms and if the system efficiently handles memory management for large media files. Deduct 4 points if media preview generation is missing, 3 points if file format validation is inadequate, and 3 points if there's no progress feedback during uploads. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 3,
-      "title": "Is the video export and rendering functionality implemented?",
-      "description": "Assess whether the rendering pipeline correctly handles timeline data to generate a final video output. Check if the code includes export resolution options, format selection, quality settings, and progress indicators. Verify if the implementation handles frame-accurate video/audio synchronization during rendering. Deduct 5 points if rendering progress feedback is missing, 3 points if export quality options are limited, and 2 points if the rendering process lacks error handling or cancellation options. 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 unsupported file formats, very large video files, browser memory limitations, 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 automatic scene detection 2. Auto-generated transitions between clips 3. Audio waveform visualization 4. Real-time video effects preview). 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 work) 2. Function modules unrelated to video editing (e.g., a built-in social network) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., excessive animations in the UI that slow down 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 editing logic/UI/rendering pipeline), 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 professional video editing software principles: 1) Appropriate dark theme with proper contrast for long editing sessions 2) Clear visual hierarchy between timeline, preview area, and controls 3) Professional iconography consistent with industry standards. Deduct 3 points for cluttered workspace layout, 5 points for poor contrast that hinders timeline readability, and 5 points for confusing or inconsistent icon usage. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 9,
-      "title": "Is the dynamic interaction smooth and seamless?",
-      "description": "Judge whether the timeline interaction conforms to video editing workflow expectations: 1) Frame-accurate scrubbing with minimal latency 2) Smooth zooming and panning without stuttering 3) Responsive clip manipulation with immediate visual feedback. Deduct 5 points for laggy playback or scrubbing, 3 points for jerky timeline navigation, and 5 points for delayed feedback when manipulating clips. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    }
-  ],
-  "class": "Multimedia Editing-Video Production",
-  "difficulty": "hard"
-}