@getollie/cli 0.0.5 → 0.2.1

package/library/other-music_player/online-music-player-with-search-and-controls.json

@@ -1,68 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "index": 577,
-  "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 displayed. Create an online music player that allows users to search for songs and play them. The player should display song titles, artists, and album covers. It should support play, pause, previous, and next functions, and include a volume control slider.",
-  "checklist": [
-    {
-      "id": 0,
-      "title": "Is the music player's core playback functionality fully implemented?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the code implements essential music playback controls (play, pause, previous, next) using HTML5 audio API or similar. Check if the player handles audio events properly (ended, timeupdate, loadedmetadata). Score 0 if core playback is missing, 5 if basic playback works but lacks proper event handling, and 10 if all playback functions work seamlessly with proper state management.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 1,
-      "title": "Is the song search functionality properly implemented?",
-      "description": "Check whether the search functionality connects to a music API (like Spotify, Last.fm, or a mock API) with proper error handling and loading states. Verify if search results display relevant information (title, artist, album) and if pagination/infinite scrolling is implemented for large result sets. Deduct 5 points if the search lacks filtering options, and 3 points if there's no feedback during search operations. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 2,
-      "title": "Is the music metadata display complete and accurate?",
-      "description": "Assess if the player displays song titles, artists, and album covers as specified. Check if metadata is properly fetched and displayed for the currently playing song and in search results. Verify the handling of missing metadata (e.g., using placeholders for missing album art). Deduct 3 points for each missing metadata type, and 2 points if metadata isn't updated when songs change. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 3,
-      "title": "Is the volume control slider correctly implemented?",
-      "description": "Evaluate the volume control implementation, checking for smooth volume adjustment, visual feedback, and proper connection to the audio API. Verify if the volume state persists between songs and if a mute toggle is available. Deduct 5 points if volume changes are not reflected in real-time, and 3 points if the slider lacks proper visual indicators. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 4,
-      "title": "Is the code robust?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as network errors during search or playback, missing audio files, API limitations) and provide friendly error prompts or recovery mechanisms. Code with strong robustness should be able to effectively handle these edge cases, giving 10 points. If the robustness is average, give 5 points, and if no exceptions are handled, give 0 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 5,
-      "title": "Are there any innovative features that are eye-catching?",
-      "description": "Check whether the code includes surprise features that enhance the experience (e.g., 1. Visualizer for audio frequencies 2. Lyrics display with time synchronization 3. Playlist creation and management 4. Cross-fade between tracks). 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) 2. Function modules unrelated to music playback (e.g., a built-in calculator) 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 audio handling/UI/API services), 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 music player UI principles: 1) Harmonious color matching suitable for long viewing sessions 2) Proper layout with clear hierarchy between playback controls, track info, and search results 3) Professional typography with adequate contrast for readability. Deduct 3 points for each cluttered section, 5 points for poor color combinations, and 5 points for inconsistent spacing/alignment. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 9,
-      "title": "Is the dynamic interaction smooth and seamless?",
-      "description": "Judge whether the dynamic effects enhance the music experience: 1) Responsive playback controls with < 100ms feedback 2) Smooth transitions between search, selection, and playback states 3) Progress bar that updates in real-time and allows seeking. Deduct 5 points for laggy playback controls, 3 points for jarring transitions between player states, and 5 points for non-interactive or jumpy progress indicators. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    }
-  ],
-  "class": "Other-Music Player",
-  "difficulty": "medium"
-}

package/library/other-productivity_scheduling/online-scheduling-tool-with-calendar-and-sync.json

@@ -1,68 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "index": 526,
-  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Be sure to provide executable code in your responses. Develop an online scheduling tool where users can add, edit, and delete events in a calendar view. The tool should support day, week, and month view switching, event recurrence settings, reminder functionality, and a search feature to quickly find specific events. User data should be able to synchronize across different devices.",
-  "checklist": [
-    {
-      "id": 0,
-      "title": "Is the calendar view system fully implemented?",
-      "description": "Review whether the code accurately implements day/week/month view switching through HTML/JavaScript, and whether it includes proper date navigation, grid layout rendering, and event positioning calculations. Check if timezone handling is implemented and if the calendar correctly displays events across different time periods. Score 0 if core calendar rendering is not implemented, 5 if only basic month view is working, and 10 if all three views are fully functional with smooth transitions.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 1,
-      "title": "Is the event management functionality complete?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the code implements comprehensive CRUD operations for events including add/edit/delete with form validation, drag-and-drop rescheduling, event recurrence patterns (daily/weekly/monthly/yearly), and exception handling for recurring events. Check if event data structure supports all required fields (title, description, start/end time, recurrence rules, reminders). Deduct 5 points if recurrence logic is missing, 3 points if drag-and-drop is not implemented. Full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 2,
-      "title": "Is the reminder system and search functionality implemented?",
-      "description": "Check whether the reminder system uses appropriate browser APIs (Notification API, Service Workers) with proper permission handling and scheduling mechanisms. Evaluate search functionality including text search across event titles/descriptions, date range filtering, and real-time search suggestions. Deduct 5 points if notifications don't work properly, 3 points if search is limited to exact matches only, 2 points if no search result highlighting. Full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 3,
-      "title": "Is cross-device data synchronization properly designed?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the synchronization mechanism includes proper data persistence (localStorage/IndexedDB), conflict resolution strategies for concurrent edits, and real-time sync capabilities (WebSocket/Server-Sent Events). Check if offline functionality is supported with proper sync when connection is restored. Deduct 5 points if no real-time sync is implemented, 3 points if conflict resolution is missing, 5 points if offline mode is not supported. Full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 4,
-      "title": "Is the code robust?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as invalid date inputs, network interruption, browser storage limits, concurrent editing conflicts, 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. Smart scheduling suggestions based on user patterns 2. Integration with external calendar services (Google Calendar, Outlook) 3. Collaborative scheduling with invitation system 4. AI-powered event categorization 5. Weather integration for outdoor events). 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 date picker implementations coexisting) 2. Function modules unrelated to scheduling (e.g., built-in games or social media feeds) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., excessive animations or heavy graphics). Deduct 3 points for each redundancy found, and directly deduct 10 points if the core scheduling 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 calendar logic/view components/data layer), component reusability, state management patterns, and build process automation. Deduct 5 points if global state pollution is found or proper architecture patterns are not used; deduct 5 points if the code duplication rate is too high (over 30%); deduct 5 points if no bundling/minification process is implemented. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 8,
-      "title": "Does the interface vision meet professional design standards?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the calendar design follows modern UI principles: 1) Clean and readable date grid layout with proper contrast ratios 2) Consistent color coding system for different event types 3) Professional typography (calendar dates clearly readable, event text ≥ 12px) 4) Responsive design that works on mobile devices. Deduct 3 points for each cramped calendar cell, 5 points for poor color accessibility, and 5 points for non-responsive layout. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 9,
-      "title": "Is the dynamic interaction smooth and seamless?",
-      "description": "Judge whether the calendar interactions conform to user expectations: 1) View switching animations ≤ 300ms 2) Event creation/editing modal appears within 100ms 3) Drag-and-drop operations provide clear visual feedback 4) Date navigation is intuitive with proper loading states 5) Touch gestures work properly on mobile devices. Deduct 5 points for each laggy interaction, 3 points for missing hover/focus states, and 5 points for confusing navigation patterns. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    }
-  ],
-  "class": "Other-Productivity/Scheduling",
-  "difficulty": "hard"
-}

package/library/other-programming_consultation/python-backend-frontend-code-expert-responses.json

@@ -1,68 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "index": 1488,
-  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Be sure to provide executable code demonstrations when possible. Offer detailed solutions and code that implement both backend and frontend using Python.",
-  "checklist": [
-    {
-      "id": 0,
-      "title": "Is the Python backend architecture properly implemented?",
-      "description": "Review whether the code includes a well-structured backend framework (Flask/Django/FastAPI) with proper routing, middleware, database integration, and API endpoints. Check for implementation of authentication, session management, and data validation. Score 0 if no backend framework is used, 5 if basic routing is implemented without proper structure, and 10 if a complete MVC/MVT pattern with proper separation of concerns is implemented.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 1,
-      "title": "Is the frontend-backend integration seamless?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the Python backend properly serves frontend assets and provides RESTful/GraphQL APIs. Check for proper HTTP status codes, JSON response formatting, CORS handling, and error propagation from backend to frontend. Deduct 5 points if API responses lack proper error handling, 3 points if CORS is not configured, and 2 points if HTTP status codes are inconsistent. Full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 2,
-      "title": "Is the data persistence and database integration robust?",
-      "description": "Check whether the Python backend implements proper database operations using ORM (SQLAlchemy/Django ORM) or raw SQL with connection pooling. Evaluate migration scripts, data validation, transaction handling, and backup mechanisms. Deduct 5 points if no ORM is used without justification, 3 points if database connections are not properly managed, and 2 points if no data validation is implemented. Full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 3,
-      "title": "Are Python best practices and performance optimizations implemented?",
-      "description": "Assess whether the code follows Python PEP 8 standards, implements proper async/await patterns where needed, uses appropriate data structures, and includes caching mechanisms. Check for memory management, query optimization, and scalability considerations. Deduct 5 points if no async patterns are used for I/O operations, 3 points if inefficient algorithms are used, and 2 points if PEP 8 standards are not followed. 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 database connection failures, invalid user input, file system errors, network timeouts, etc.) and provide friendly error prompts or recovery mechanisms. Code with strong robustness should include try-catch blocks, input validation, logging, and graceful degradation. Give 10 points if fully implemented with comprehensive exception handling, 5 points if basic error handling exists, and 0 points if no exceptions are 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. Real-time data streaming with WebSockets 2. AI-powered recommendations or automation 3. Advanced data visualization with interactive charts 4. Progressive Web App features). Add 3 points for each practical innovative feature implemented (maximum 10 points).",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 6,
-      "title": "Are there any redundant features?",
-      "description": "Strictly check three types of redundancy: 1. Redundant implementation of similar functions (e.g., multiple authentication systems coexisting) 2. Function modules unrelated to the core purpose 3. Over-engineered solutions that add unnecessary complexity. 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 (proper package structure, separation of models/views/controllers), unit test coverage, virtual environment setup, requirements.txt, and deployment configuration. Deduct 5 points if no package structure is implemented; deduct 5 points if code duplication rate exceeds 30%; deduct 5 points if no dependency management or testing framework is included. 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) Responsive design implementation. Deduct 3 points for each crowded visual element, 5 points for glaring color combinations, and 5 points for chaotic text-image layout. 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 4) Loading states for async operations 5) Form validation feedback. Deduct 5 points for each operation without feedback, 3 points for visual after-images during interactions, and 5 points for hard-to-find key function buttons. Full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    }
-  ],
-  "class": "Other-Programming Consultation",
-  "difficulty": "medium"
-}

package/library/other-security_tools/network-security-scanner-vulnerability-detection.json

@@ -1,68 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "index": 649,
-  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Make sure that the code you generate is executable whenever possible. Build a network security scanner that can detect common website security vulnerabilities such as XSS, CSRF, SQL injection, and other risks. Scanning results should be displayed by severity level (high, medium, low risk) and provide detailed vulnerability descriptions and remediation suggestions. The scanner should support scan history records and scheduled automatic scanning functionality.",
-  "checklist": [
-    {
-      "id": 0,
-      "title": "Is the core vulnerability detection engine fully implemented?",
-      "description": "Review whether the code accurately implements detection algorithms for XSS, CSRF, SQL injection, and other common vulnerabilities. Check if the scanner includes proper payload injection, response analysis, and pattern matching mechanisms. Score 0 if core detection logic is missing, 5 if only basic vulnerability checks are implemented, and 10 if comprehensive detection covers all major OWASP Top 10 vulnerabilities with accurate identification.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 1,
-      "title": "Is the network scanning and crawling mechanism properly designed?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the implementation includes efficient web crawling with proper HTTP request handling, cookie management, and session tracking. Check for rate limiting, concurrent request management, and robots.txt compliance. Deduct 5 points if no rate limiting is implemented, and 3 points if the scanner doesn't handle JavaScript-rendered content. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 2,
-      "title": "Is the severity classification and risk assessment system accurate?",
-      "description": "Check whether the code implements a comprehensive risk scoring algorithm that properly categorizes vulnerabilities into high, medium, and low severity levels based on CVSS standards or similar frameworks. Evaluate if the assessment considers exploitability, impact, and environmental factors. Deduct 5 points if severity levels are arbitrarily assigned without proper scoring methodology. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 3,
-      "title": "Are scan history and scheduled scanning features fully functional?",
-      "description": "Verify whether the system includes persistent storage for scan results, historical data comparison, and trend analysis. Check if scheduled scanning supports cron-like configurations, proper job queuing, and failure recovery mechanisms. Deduct 5 points if data persistence is not implemented, and 3 points if the scheduling system lacks error handling. Give 10 points if fully implemented with comprehensive reporting capabilities.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 4,
-      "title": "Is the code robust?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as network timeouts, malformed responses, target server errors, rate limiting, etc.) and provide appropriate error handling and recovery mechanisms. Code with strong robustness should effectively handle edge cases including DNS resolution failures, SSL certificate issues, and unexpected server responses, 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 advanced features that enhance security scanning capabilities (e.g., 1. Machine learning-based anomaly detection 2. Interactive vulnerability exploitation proof-of-concept 3. Integration with threat intelligence feeds 4. Automated penetration testing workflows). 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 scanning functions (e.g., multiple XSS detection engines coexisting) 2. Function modules unrelated to security scanning (e.g., built-in web server for non-scanning purposes) 3. Resource-intensive features that slow down scanning (e.g., unnecessary GUI animations during scanning). Deduct 3 points for each redundancy found, and directly deduct 10 points if core scanning 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 scanning engine/reporting/scheduling components), security considerations in code design, and proper configuration management. Deduct 5 points if sensitive data is hardcoded or design patterns are not used; deduct 5 points if the code duplication rate is too high (over 30%); deduct 5 points if no input validation or output sanitization is implemented. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 8,
-      "title": "Does the interface vision meet professional security tool design standards?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the dashboard design follows security industry standards: 1) Clear severity color coding (red for high, yellow for medium, green for low risk) 2) Proper data visualization with charts and graphs 3) Professional layout with adequate whitespace and readable typography (body font ≥ 14px, line height ≥ 1.5). Deduct 3 points for each confusing visual element, 5 points for poor color contrast affecting readability, and 5 points for cluttered information presentation. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 9,
-      "title": "Is the scanning workflow and user interaction smooth and intuitive?",
-      "description": "Judge whether the scanning process provides clear user feedback: 1) Real-time scanning progress indicators 2) Responsive controls with feedback delay ≤ 100ms 3) Clear navigation between scan results and detailed vulnerability information 4) Intuitive export and reporting functions. Deduct 5 points for each operation without proper feedback, 3 points for confusing navigation flow, and 5 points for hard-to-access critical functions like vulnerability details or remediation guides. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    }
-  ],
-  "class": "Other-Security Tools",
-  "difficulty": "medium"
-}

package/library/other-software_development/eclipse-plugin-xml-to-awt-swing-shapes.json

@@ -1,68 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "index": 360,
-  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Be sure to provide executable code whenever possible. How can I use Eclipse plugins to transform XML into shapes displayed through AWT and Swing?",
-  "checklist": [
-    {
-      "id": 0,
-      "title": "Is XML parsing implementation complete?",
-      "description": "Check whether the code correctly implements XML parsing using standard libraries such as DOM, SAX, or JAXB. Score 0 if parsing is not implemented, 5 if only basic parsing without error handling is implemented, and 10 if comprehensive parsing with proper validation, error handling, and support for namespaces is provided.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 1,
-      "title": "Is the Eclipse plugin architecture properly implemented?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the code correctly implements Eclipse plugin architecture including plugin.xml configuration, extension points, and lifecycle methods. Deduct 5 points if plugin manifest is incomplete, 3 points if dependency management is missing, and 3 points if the plugin doesn't integrate with Eclipse workbench. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 2,
-      "title": "Is XML-to-shape transformation logic complete?",
-      "description": "Review whether the code contains a comprehensive mapping system between XML elements/attributes and graphical shapes/properties. Check if the transformation handles nested elements, coordinates, color schemes, and scaling. Score 0 if transformation logic is missing, 5 if only basic shapes are supported, and 10 if advanced transformations including complex paths and custom shapes are implemented.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 3,
-      "title": "Is AWT/Swing rendering implementation complete?",
-      "description": "Check if the code properly implements AWT/Swing components for rendering the shapes, including proper use of Graphics2D, paintComponent, and event handling. Verify if double buffering is used to prevent flickering. Deduct 3 points if rendering optimization is missing, 3 points if custom painting doesn't follow Java2D best practices, and 5 points if the rendering doesn't handle window resizing properly.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 4,
-      "title": "Is the code robust?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as malformed XML, out-of-bounds coordinates, invalid shape definitions, 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. Live preview of XML changes 2. Visual XML editor with drag-and-drop 3. Shape animation capabilities 4. Export to SVG/PNG 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 XML parsers) 2. Function modules unrelated to XML transformation (e.g., unnecessary networking components) 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 XML parsing/transformation/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). 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 shape redrawing, and 5 points for hard-to-find key function buttons. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    }
-  ],
-  "class": "Multimedia Editing-Image Editing",
-  "difficulty": "medium"
-}

package/library/other-software_development/generate-executable-ai-code-workflow.json

@@ -1,68 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "index": 1490,
-  "question": "You are a code expert. Please utilize your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Make sure the code you generate is executable whenever possible. This includes webpage addresses, plugin loading, AI-based code node implementation workflow according to specific goals (task breakdowns including loading, extraction, parsing, storage, etc.), execution and debugging.",
-  "checklist": [
-    {
-      "id": 0,
-      "title": "Is the code execution context properly defined and implemented?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the code clearly defines its execution environment (browser, Node.js, specific frameworks) with appropriate initialization. Check if dependencies are explicitly declared with version control. Verify if the execution flow is clearly structured with proper entry points. Score 0 if execution context is undefined, 5 if basic context is provided but lacks configuration details, and 10 if comprehensive environment setup with fallback mechanisms is included.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 1,
-      "title": "Is the AI-based code workflow properly structured with clear task breakdowns?",
-      "description": "Assess whether the code implements a complete AI workflow with clearly defined stages (loading, extraction, parsing, storage). Check if each stage has appropriate error handling and progress monitoring. Validate that the workflow components are loosely coupled for maintainability. Deduct 5 points if key stages are missing, 3 points if the workflow lacks proper transitions between stages, and 2 points if success/failure states aren't clearly defined. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 2,
-      "title": "Are data loading and extraction mechanisms effectively implemented?",
-      "description": "Review the implementation of data acquisition processes, including external API calls, file system operations, or web scraping techniques. Verify support for different data formats (JSON, CSV, XML) and asynchronous loading patterns. Check for rate limiting, caching, and retry mechanisms. Score 0 if loading functionality is absent, 5 if basic loading exists without optimization, and 10 if comprehensive data acquisition with fallback strategies is implemented.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 3,
-      "title": "Is the parsing and storage logic comprehensive and efficient?",
-      "description": "Evaluate data parsing algorithms for accuracy and efficiency. Check for proper data validation, normalization, and transformation processes. Verify if storage mechanisms include appropriate indexing, query optimization, and data persistence strategies. Deduct 5 points if parsing logic contains edge case vulnerabilities, 3 points if storage doesn't implement proper transaction handling, and 2 points if data integrity checks are missing. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 4,
-      "title": "Is the code robust?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the code handles common exceptions and edge cases (network failures, malformed inputs, resource limitations) with appropriate error recovery mechanisms. Check for input validation, defensive programming practices, and graceful degradation. Look for diagnostic logging and monitoring capabilities. Deduct 3 points for each unhandled error scenario, 5 points for absence of timeout mechanisms, and 5 points if error messages aren't user-friendly. 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. Adaptive algorithm selection based on data characteristics 2. Progressive loading with visual feedback 3. Context-aware error suggestions). Evaluate implementation quality and practical utility of innovative features. 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. Duplicate implementation of similar functionality (e.g., multiple HTTP client wrappers) 2. Unnecessary processing steps that don't contribute to the core workflow 3. Over-engineered solutions for simple problems. Deduct 3 points for each redundancy found, and directly deduct 10 points if core functionality is obscured by unnecessary complexity.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 7,
-      "title": "Does the code have engineering quality?",
-      "description": "Review modular design, separation of concerns, and adherence to design patterns. Check for consistent naming conventions, code documentation, and test coverage. Evaluate configuration management and environment separation. Deduct 5 points if global state is mismanaged, 5 points if the code duplication rate exceeds 30%, and 5 points if there's no automated testing strategy. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 8,
-      "title": "Does the interface design meet professional standards?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether any UI components follow modern design principles: 1) Consistent visual hierarchy with proper use of whitespace 2) Responsive design that adapts to different screen sizes 3) Accessibility compliance (WCAG standards, proper contrast ratios, screen reader support). Deduct 3 points for inconsistent visual patterns, 5 points for non-responsive layouts, and 5 points for major accessibility violations. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 9,
-      "title": "Is the execution and debugging experience well-designed?",
-      "description": "Judge the quality of runtime feedback and debugging capabilities: 1) Informative progress indicators for long-running operations 2) Meaningful error messages with actionable suggestions 3) Integrated debugging tools or hooks for external monitoring. Deduct 5 points for silent failures without explanation, 3 points for ambiguous progress states, and 5 points for absence of debugging entry points. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    }
-  ],
-  "class": "Other-Software Development",
-  "difficulty": "medium"
-}

package/library/other-tool_recommendations/ai-tool-mini-program-ui-code-generation.json

@@ -1,68 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "index": 402,
-  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Be sure to provide executable code when possible. Which AI tool is currently capable of designing mini-program UI and generating code?",
-  "checklist": [
-    {
-      "id": 0,
-      "title": "Is the AI tool evaluation comprehensive and accurate?",
-      "description": "Review whether the response covers mainstream AI tools for mini-program development (such as GitHub Copilot, Cursor, v0.dev, Figma AI, Sketch2Code, etc.) and provides accurate capability assessments. Check if the evaluation includes both UI design and code generation capabilities. Score 0 if only 1-2 tools are mentioned, 5 if 3-5 tools are covered but lack detail, and 10 if comprehensive coverage with accurate capability analysis is provided.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 1,
-      "title": "Are practical code examples provided for each recommended tool?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether executable mini-program code samples are provided for each AI tool mentioned, demonstrating their actual code generation capabilities. Examples should include WeChat mini-program (.wxml, .wxss, .js files) or other platform equivalents. Deduct 3 points for each tool mentioned without a working code example. Full score requires all recommended tools to have corresponding executable demonstrations.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 2,
-      "title": "Is the UI design capability assessment detailed and demonstrable?",
-      "description": "Check whether the response includes actual UI design outputs from the mentioned AI tools, with visual comparisons and design quality analysis. Should cover design-to-code workflow efficiency, component library integration, and responsive design capabilities. Deduct 5 points if no visual examples are provided, 3 points if design quality metrics are missing. Full score requires comprehensive UI capability demonstration with screenshots or mockups.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 3,
-      "title": "Are tool limitations and comparison criteria clearly established?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the response provides honest assessment of each tool's limitations, pricing models, learning curves, integration complexity, and suitable use cases. Should include comparative analysis matrix covering factors like accuracy, speed, platform support, and customization capabilities. Deduct 5 points if limitations are not mentioned, 3 points if comparison lacks objective criteria. Full score requires balanced pros/cons analysis with clear selection guidance.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 4,
-      "title": "Is the code robust?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the provided code examples can handle common abnormal situations (such as API failures, network interruption, invalid user input, platform compatibility issues, etc.) and provide friendly error prompts or recovery mechanisms. Code with strong robustness should effectively handle edge cases in mini-program environments, 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 insights or cutting-edge developments highlighted?",
-      "description": "Check whether the response includes emerging trends in AI-powered development (e.g., 1. Multi-modal design-to-code conversion 2. Real-time collaborative AI coding 3. Cross-platform code generation optimization 4. AI-powered accessibility compliance checking). Add 3 points for each practical innovative insight provided with concrete examples (maximum 10 points).",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 6,
-      "title": "Are there any redundant or outdated recommendations?",
-      "description": "Strictly check three types of issues: 1. Outdated tools that are no longer maintained or effective 2. Redundant recommendations of similar tools without clear differentiation 3. Off-topic suggestions not related to mini-program development. Deduct 3 points for each redundant or outdated recommendation found, and directly deduct 10 points if core mini-program development requirements are not addressed.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 7,
-      "title": "Does the response demonstrate engineering quality?",
-      "description": "Review whether code examples follow mini-program best practices including proper file structure, component modularity, performance optimization, and platform-specific guidelines. Deduct 5 points if code lacks proper organization or violates platform conventions; deduct 5 points if performance considerations are ignored; deduct 5 points if security best practices are not followed. Full score requires professional-grade code structure.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 8,
-      "title": "Do the UI examples meet professional design standards?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether UI examples or screenshots follow modern mini-program design principles: 1) Consistent with platform design guidelines (WeChat/Alipay design systems) 2) Proper component spacing and hierarchy 3) Mobile-first responsive design considerations 4) Accessibility compliance. Deduct 3 points for each design guideline violation, 5 points for poor visual hierarchy, and 5 points for mobile usability issues. Full score requires platform-compliant professional design quality.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 9,
-      "title": "Is the workflow integration seamless and practical?",
-      "description": "Judge whether the recommended tools integrate smoothly into real development workflows: 1) Clear setup and integration instructions 2) Compatibility with existing development environments 3) Efficient design-to-development handoff processes 4) Team collaboration capabilities. Deduct 5 points for each missing integration step, 3 points for unclear documentation, and 5 points if workflow efficiency gains are not demonstrated. Full score requires complete end-to-end workflow demonstration.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    }
-  ],
-  "class": "Other-Tool Recommendations",
-  "difficulty": "hard"
-}

package/library/other-transit_system/public-transit-system-frontend.json

@@ -1,68 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "index": 1769,
-  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Make sure the code you create is executable for display. Create a front-end page for a public transit system.",
-  "checklist": [
-    {
-      "id": 0,
-      "title": "Is the transit map visualization properly implemented?",
-      "description": "Review whether the code implements a clear and accurate transit map using HTML/SVG/Canvas, with proper representation of routes, stations, and transfer points. Score 0 if no map is implemented, 5 if a basic static map is provided, and 10 if an interactive map with zoom/pan functionality is implemented.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 1,
-      "title": "Is the route planning and search functionality complete?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether users can search for routes between stations with options for fastest/shortest routes, departure times, and transit preferences. Check if the algorithm accounts for transfer times and service frequencies. Deduct 5 points if only basic point-to-point routing exists, 3 points if time-based planning is missing. Give 10 points if advanced features like multi-criteria optimization are included.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 2,
-      "title": "Is real-time transit information handling implemented?",
-      "description": "Check whether the code implements mechanisms for displaying real-time arrival/departure information, service disruptions, and delays. Verify if data refresh mechanisms and API integration points exist. Score 0 if no real-time features exist, 5 if basic updates are implemented, and 10 if comprehensive real-time functionality with fallback mechanisms is included.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 3,
-      "title": "Is the responsive design properly implemented for multiple devices?",
-      "description": "Assess whether the transit page adapts appropriately to different screen sizes (desktop, tablet, mobile) using responsive design techniques. Check for media queries, flexible layouts, and touch-friendly controls on mobile. Deduct 5 points if the layout breaks on certain devices, and 3 points if mobile-specific optimizations are missing. Full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 4,
-      "title": "Is the code robust?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as network failures, invalid user inputs, missing transit data, API errors) 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. Augmented reality station finder 2. Personalized travel statistics/carbon footprint 3. Accessibility features for visually impaired users). 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 map libraries loaded) 2. Function modules unrelated to public transit (e.g., weather forecasts unrelated to travel) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., unnecessary animations that slow page loading). Deduct 3 points for each redundancy found, and directly deduct 10 points if the core functions are interfered with by redundant code.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 7,
-      "title": "Does the code have engineering quality?",
-      "description": "Review modular design (such as separating UI components, data services, and state management), code organization, and performance optimization. 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 no performance optimization techniques are implemented. 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 transit UI principles: 1) Clear visual hierarchy highlighting important information 2) Proper color coding for different transit lines 3) Typography that ensures readability of schedules and station names (minimum 14px font). Deduct 3 points for cluttered information display, 5 points for poor color contrast affecting readability, and 5 points for inconsistent design elements. 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) Route selection feedback delay ≤ 100ms 2) Smooth transitions when switching between views 3) Clear loading indicators for data retrieval operations. Deduct 5 points for each operation without feedback, 3 points for janky animations, and 5 points for confusing navigation patterns. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    }
-  ],
-  "class": "Other-Transit System",
-  "difficulty": "medium"
-}