@getollie/cli 0.0.5 → 0.2.1

package/library/game_development-casual/small-decompression-game.json

@@ -1,68 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "index": 1759,
-  "question": "You are a coding expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and expert responses. Be sure to provide executable code demonstrations when possible. Help me create code for a small decompression game.",
-  "checklist": [
-    {
-      "id": 0,
-      "title": "Is the core decompression mechanic properly implemented?",
-      "description": "Check whether the code accurately implements the fundamental decompression mechanism (such as clicking, dragging, or interacting with stress-relieving objects). The core interaction should respond to user input with appropriate visual feedback and physics. Score 0 if no interaction is implemented, 5 if basic interactions exist but lack polish, and 10 if interactions feel natural and satisfying.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 1,
-      "title": "Are the game objects and physics systems correctly coded?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the game includes properly implemented physical objects with realistic behaviors (e.g., bouncing balls, squishable items, destructible objects). Verify that collision detection works correctly and physics parameters create a satisfying feel. Deduct 5 points if physics feels unnatural, 3 points if collisions are buggy, and 2 points if object interactions are limited.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 2,
-      "title": "Is the progression system or gameplay loop well-designed?",
-      "description": "Assess whether the code includes some form of progression (like unlockable items, increasing challenges, or measurable stress reduction metrics). Check if there's a clear gameplay loop that encourages continued engagement. Give 0 points if there's no progression at all, 5 points if basic progression exists, and 10 if the system is thoughtfully designed with appropriate rewards.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 3,
-      "title": "Are visual and audio feedback systems effectively implemented?",
-      "description": "Review whether the code includes appropriate visual effects (particle systems, animations) and sound effects that enhance the decompression experience. Judge whether they're synchronized with user actions and provide satisfying sensory feedback. Deduct 5 points if visual feedback is missing, 3 points if audio feedback is absent, and 2 points if the effects don't complement the interaction.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 4,
-      "title": "Is the code robust?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as rapid clicking, unusual input combinations, window resizing, 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. Personalized stress tracking 2. Dynamic difficulty adjustment based on user behavior 3. Creative interaction methods beyond standard clicks/taps). 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 mechanics (e.g., multiple ways to achieve the same decompression effect) 2. Function modules unrelated to decompression (e.g., unnecessary mini-games) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., excessive particle systems causing lag). 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 game logic/view/input handling layers), code organization, and maintainability. Deduct 5 points if global state pollution is found or design patterns are not used; deduct 5 points if the code duplication rate is too high (over 30%); deduct 5 points if there's no clear separation of concerns. 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) Intuitive UI that doesn't distract from the decompression experience. Deduct 3 points for each crowded visual element, 5 points for a glaring color combination, and 5 points for interface elements that create rather than relieve stress. 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) Immediate feedback on interaction (≤ 50ms) 2) Smooth animations with appropriate easing 3) Consistent frame rate without stuttering. Deduct 5 points for each interaction without immediate feedback, 3 points for jerky animations, and 5 points for performance issues during intensive interactions. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    }
-  ],
-  "class": "Game Development-Casual",
-  "difficulty": "easy"
-}

package/library/game_development-casual/stickman-mini-game-html-web-format.json

@@ -1,68 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "index": 1602,
-  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Be sure to provide executable code for demonstration purposes. Help me create a stickman mini-game in HTML web format.",
-  "checklist": [
-    {
-      "id": 0,
-      "title": "Is the core stickman character implementation complete?",
-      "description": "Review whether the code properly implements the stickman character using HTML elements (canvas or SVG), with appropriate proportions and connections between body parts. Check if the stickman's anatomy is properly articulated (head, torso, arms, legs) with proper joint connections. Score 0 if no stickman is created, 5 if basic static stickman is implemented, and 10 if a fully articulated stickman with proper proportions is implemented.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 1,
-      "title": "Is the animation system for the stickman properly implemented?",
-      "description": "Evaluate if the code includes smooth animations for the stickman character (walking, jumping, etc.) using either CSS animations, JavaScript animation frameworks, or requestAnimationFrame. Check frame rate consistency (should maintain 60fps) and the naturalness of movements. Deduct 5 points if animations are jerky or choppy, 3 points if keyframes are poorly spaced, and 2 points if there are no transitions between animation states. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 2,
-      "title": "Is there a complete game mechanics implementation?",
-      "description": "Check whether the mini-game has clear objectives, challenges, and interaction mechanisms. The game should have scoring systems, win/lose conditions, and at least one core gameplay loop. Deduct 5 points if there are no clear objectives, 5 points if the gameplay is too simplistic (just moving with no purpose), and 3 points if there's no scoring mechanism. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 3,
-      "title": "Is there proper user control implementation?",
-      "description": "Assess whether user input (keyboard, touch, mouse) is properly captured and translated into stickman movements/actions. Check for responsiveness (input lag under 100ms), custom key bindings or touch areas, and proper event handling. Deduct 5 points if controls are sluggish, 3 points if multiple input methods aren't supported, and 5 points if there's no visual feedback for controls. 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 window resizing, rapid input changes, browser compatibility issues) and provide friendly error prompts or recovery mechanisms. Code with strong robustness should be able to effectively handle these edge cases, giving 10 points. If the robustness is average, give 5 points, and if no exceptions are handled, give 0 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 5,
-      "title": "Are there any innovative features that are eye-catching?",
-      "description": "Check whether the code includes surprise features that enhance the experience (e.g., 1. Physics-based ragdoll effects 2. Environmental interactions like climbing or swinging 3. Character customization 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 animation systems overlapping) 2. Function modules unrelated to the stickman game (e.g., unnecessary social sharing features) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., excessive particle effects or shader usage). 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 game logic/view/input handling), code organization, and maintainability. Deduct 5 points if global state pollution is found or design patterns are not used; deduct 5 points if the code duplication rate is too high (over 30%); deduct 5 points if there are no comments explaining complex logic. 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/input feedback delay ≤ 100ms 2) Game loop execution consistency at 60fps 3) Clear visual feedback for interactions with game elements. Deduct 5 points for each operation without feedback, 3 points for frame drops during animations, and 5 points for confusing or misleading visual cues. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    }
-  ],
-  "class": "Game Development-Casual",
-  "difficulty": "easy"
-}

package/library/game_development-casual/two-player-hand-hitting-game.json

@@ -1,68 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "index": 1718,
-  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Make sure the code you generate is executable for demonstration. Hand-hitting game - a two-player battle game where whoever presses the button ten times first will cause a rod to drop and hit the opponent's hand. [Include] logic judgments, variables, and displays.",
-  "checklist": [
-    {
-      "id": 0,
-      "title": "Is the core button-pressing game mechanic fully implemented?",
-      "description": "Review whether the code accurately implements a counter system that tracks button presses for each player, with clear progression toward the 10-press goal. Check if the winning condition (first to 10 presses) triggers the rod animation to hit the opponent's hand. Score 0 if the core interaction logic is not implemented, 5 if basic counting is implemented but without proper winning conditions, and 10 if the full game loop with proper win detection is implemented.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 1,
-      "title": "Is the two-player input system properly designed?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the code handles simultaneous inputs from two different players, with clear key bindings or UI elements for each player. Check for input validation, prevention of key-spamming exploits, and clear visual feedback when buttons are pressed. Deduct 5 points if inputs aren't clearly separated between players, and 3 points if there's no visual feedback on button presses. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 2,
-      "title": "Is the rod animation and hit detection properly implemented?",
-      "description": "Check whether the rod movement animation is smooth and realistic when triggered, and whether the 'hit' on the opponent's hand is visually clear. Review the timing of the animation to ensure it properly represents the game state. Deduct 5 points if the animation is jerky or unrealistic, and 5 points if the hit detection doesn't visually align with the rod and hand positions. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 3,
-      "title": "Is the game state management and round system implemented?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the code includes proper game state management (start, in-progress, game over states) and a round system that allows multiple matches. Check if scores are tracked across rounds and if there's a clear way to reset or start a new game. Deduct 5 points if state transitions are buggy, and 5 points if there's no way to play multiple rounds without refreshing the page. 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 rapid button mashing, browser tab switching, simultaneous key presses, 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. Power-up mechanics after consecutive presses 2. Sound effects or haptic feedback 3. Dynamic difficulty adjustment based on player performance). Add 3 points for each practical innovative feature implemented (maximum 10 points).",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 6,
-      "title": "Are there any redundant features?",
-      "description": "Strictly check three types of redundancy: 1. Redundant implementation of similar functions (e.g., multiple ways to count presses) 2. Function modules unrelated to the hand-hitting game (e.g., unnecessary mini-games) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., excessive particle effects that slow down gameplay). 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 game logic/view/input handling layers), code organization, and maintainability. Deduct 5 points if global state pollution is found or design patterns are not used; deduct 5 points if the code duplication rate is too high (over 30%); deduct 5 points if variable naming is inconsistent or unclear. 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) Clear visual representation of game elements (rod, hands, buttons, counters). Deduct 3 points for each crowded visual element, 5 points for a glaring color combination, and 5 points for confusing visual representation of game elements. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 9,
-      "title": "Is the dynamic interaction smooth and responsive?",
-      "description": "Judge whether the game responds quickly to player inputs and provides clear visual feedback: 1) Button press feedback delay ≤ 50ms 2) Animation smoothness at minimum 30fps 3) Clear visual indication of game progress and current scores. Deduct 5 points for noticeable input lag, 3 points for choppy animations, and 5 points for unclear game state representation. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    }
-  ],
-  "class": "Game Development-Casual",
-  "difficulty": "easy"
-}

package/library/game_development-casual/typing-game-implementation.json

@@ -1,68 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "index": 75,
-  "question": "You are a code expert. Please utilize your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Pay attention to ensure the code you produce is executable for demonstration.\nPlease write a typing game.",
-  "checklist": [
-    {
-      "id": 0,
-      "title": "Is the core typing mechanism implemented correctly?",
-      "description": "Examine if the code properly captures keyboard input, matches it with displayed text, and updates the game state accordingly. Check for event listeners that handle keypress/keydown events, input validation against the target text, and appropriate visual feedback for correct/incorrect typing. Award 10 points for complete implementation with accurate character matching, 5 points if only basic functionality works but has edge cases, and 0 if core typing detection is missing.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 1,
-      "title": "Are the game mechanics and scoring system properly designed?",
-      "description": "Verify if the game includes essential metrics like typing speed (WPM), accuracy percentage, and a time-based or completion-based scoring system. Check for features like countdown timers, progression levels, or difficulty settings. Award 10 points for a comprehensive system that tracks multiple metrics and provides meaningful feedback, 5 points for basic scoring only, and deduct points if calculations contain errors.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 2,
-      "title": "Is there appropriate content generation for typing challenges?",
-      "description": "Assess how text content is generated for typing practice. Look for variety in content (random words, sentences, paragraphs), difficulty progression, and possibly themed content categories. Ideal implementation should avoid repetition and have sufficient content volume. Award 10 points for dynamic content generation with multiple difficulty levels, 5 points for static but sufficient content, and deduct points if content is too limited or contains errors.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 3,
-      "title": "Does the game provide real-time feedback and visual cues?",
-      "description": "Examine if the game visually indicates typing progress (highlighting current character, showing completed text differently), displays errors clearly, and provides real-time stats. Check for features like cursor position tracking and visual distinction between correct and incorrect inputs. Award 10 points for comprehensive feedback system with clear visual indicators, 5 points for basic feedback, and deduct points for confusing or missing visual cues.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 4,
-      "title": "Is the code robust?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as rapid typing, special character inputs, browser focus 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. Multiplayer racing mode 2. Typing rhythm with audio feedback 3. Heat maps showing problematic keys 4. Adaptive difficulty based on user performance). Add 3 points for each practical innovative feature implemented (maximum 10 points).",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 6,
-      "title": "Are there any redundant features?",
-      "description": "Strictly check three types of redundancy: 1. Redundant implementation of similar functions (e.g., multiple ways to track typing speed) 2. Function modules unrelated to typing practice (e.g., unrelated mini-games) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., excessive animations that slow down typing response). 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 game logic/view/input handling layers), code organization, and maintainability. Deduct 5 points if global state pollution is found or design patterns are not used; deduct 5 points if the code duplication rate is too high (over 30%); deduct 5 points if there's no clear separation between UI and game logic. 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, monospace font for typing text). Deduct 3 points for each crowded visual element, 5 points for a glaring color combination, and 5 points for poor text readability that hinders typing. 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) Instant typing feedback with no perceptible delay 2) Smooth text scrolling or transition when completing lines/paragraphs 3) Appropriate animation for game state changes (starting, finishing). Deduct 5 points for input lag that affects typing experience, 3 points for jerky animations during gameplay, and 5 points for distracting visual effects that make text hard to read. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    }
-  ],
-  "class": "Game Development-Casual",
-  "difficulty": "easy"
-}

package/library/game_development-casual/uniapp-blind-box-lottery-system.json

@@ -1,68 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "index": 907,
-  "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 for demonstration purposes. Please provide front-end code for a blind box lottery system using uniapp.",
-  "checklist": [
-    {
-      "id": 0,
-      "title": "Is the blind box lottery core mechanism fully implemented?",
-      "description": "Review whether the code accurately implements the blind box lottery mechanism, including random selection algorithms, prize pool configuration, probability calculation, and display of lottery results. Score 0 if the core lottery logic is not implemented, 5 if only basic random selection is present, and 10 if a complete weighted probability system with proper prize distribution is fully included.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 1,
-      "title": "Is the uniapp cross-platform compatibility addressed?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the code properly utilizes uniapp's cross-platform features to ensure the lottery system works across different platforms (WeChat Mini Program, H5, App, etc.). Check for platform-specific API conditional compilation (#ifdef), responsive UI design, and proper use of uniapp components. Deduct 3 points if only one platform is supported, 5 points if platform-specific issues are not handled. Full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 2,
-      "title": "Are animation effects for the blind box opening experience implemented?",
-      "description": "Check whether appropriate animations are implemented for the blind box opening process (e.g., shaking, unwrapping, revealing). The animations should enhance user experience and create excitement. Deduct 5 points if animations are missing entirely, 3 points if animations are basic/rudimentary with no transitions, and 2 points if animations lack performance optimization. Full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 3,
-      "title": "Is there a complete state management system for user inventory and prizes?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the code includes proper state management for tracking user's obtained items, remaining chances, purchase history, and prize inventory. Check for vuex/pinia integration, local storage persistence, and prize history display. Deduct 3 points if state is not persisted between sessions, 5 points if there's no inventory management, and 5 points if user history tracking is absent. 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 during lottery draws, invalid configurations, edge cases in probability calculations, 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. AR visualization of prizes 2. Social sharing with custom cards 3. Prize combination collection systems 4. Seasonal/themed blind box designs). 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 random generators coexisting) 2. Function modules unrelated to lottery (e.g., a built-in news feed) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., excessive particle animations that cause lag). 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 lottery logic/UI components/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 dynamic interaction smooth and seamless?",
-      "description": "Judge whether the dynamic effects conform to human perception characteristics: 1) Click feedback delay ≤ 100ms 2) Transition animation duration controlled between 300-500ms 3) Clear visual focus guidance for the lottery process. Deduct 5 points for each operation without feedback, 3 points for visual stuttering during animations, and 5 points for confusing user flow in the lottery process. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    }
-  ],
-  "class": "Game Development-Casual",
-  "difficulty": "easy"
-}

package/library/game_development-casual/uniapp-lucky-draw-lottery-marquee-animation.json

@@ -1,68 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "index": 1196,
-  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Make sure the code you provide is executable when possible. UniApp lucky draw lottery with marquee animation",
-  "checklist": [
-    {
-      "id": 0,
-      "title": "Is the lucky draw system fully implemented?",
-      "description": "Review whether the code accurately implements a complete lucky draw system including prize pool configuration, drawing logic, probability calculation, and result display. Score 0 if the core functionality is missing, 5 if only basic drawing without probability weighting is implemented, and 10 if it includes configurable probability, anti-cheating validation, and prize inventory management.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 1,
-      "title": "Is the marquee animation properly implemented?",
-      "description": "Check if the marquee animation is smooth, performant and visually appealing. The animation should use requestAnimationFrame or CSS animations rather than setTimeout/setInterval for better performance. Verify that the animation has proper easing (acceleration and deceleration), and the stopping mechanism feels natural rather than abrupt. Deduct 5 points if the animation is jerky, 3 points if it lacks proper easing, and 2 points if the stopping doesn't align perfectly with prize slots.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 2,
-      "title": "Is the UniApp cross-platform compatibility ensured?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the code uses UniApp's cross-platform APIs correctly and avoids platform-specific implementations where possible. Check for conditional compilation (`#ifdef`) where needed for platform differences. Deduct 3 points if only tested on one platform, 5 points if platform-specific bugs exist, and 7 points if critical features don't work across platforms (WeChat Mini Program, H5, App).",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 3,
-      "title": "Is the draw result handling and user feedback mechanism complete?",
-      "description": "Check if the code includes proper result handling with winning/losing notifications, prize claiming flows, and history records. Verify that animations and sound effects enhance the excitement of the draw. Award full 10 points only if the system includes prize claim verification, result persistence, and engaging feedback. Deduct 5 points if missing history tracking, 3 points if feedback is minimal.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 4,
-      "title": "Is the code robust?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as network interruption, permission denial, multiple rapid clicks) and provide friendly error prompts or recovery mechanisms. Check for validation of user inputs and draw conditions (e.g., remaining chances). Deduct 3 points for each unhandled edge case, with a minimum score of 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. Particle effects for winners 2. Social sharing of results with custom images 3. Mini-games to earn extra draw chances). 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 implementations of similar animations 2. Feature modules unrelated to lucky draw (e.g., a built-in calculator) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., excessive particle systems on mobile). 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/API calls), proper use of UniApp component system, and adherence to best practices. Check if the code follows a consistent style guide. 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 there's no error handling or logging mechanism. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 8,
-      "title": "Does the interface vision meet professional design standards?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the overall design follows modern design principles: 1) Harmonious color matching suitable for festive/game context 2) Proper layout spacing that follows UniApp's responsive design guidelines 3) Professional typography with appropriate emphasis on prize items. Deduct 3 points for each UI element with poor contrast, 5 points for inconsistent design language, and 5 points for layouts that break on different screen sizes. 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) Responsive touch feedback ≤ 100ms 2) Marquee animation speed variation that builds excitement 3) Clear visual indication of when users can/cannot draw. Deduct 5 points for laggy animations on mid-range devices, 3 points for inconsistent animation timing, and 5 points for confusing interaction states. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    }
-  ],
-  "class": "Game Development-Casual",
-  "difficulty": "medium"
-}

package/library/game_development-casual/viral-cat-confession-code.json

@@ -1,68 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "index": 1084,
-  "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 when possible. Create a viral \"cat confession\" code that's especially popular on the internet.",
-  "checklist": [
-    {
-      "id": 0,
-      "title": "Is the core 'cat confession' functionality fully implemented?",
-      "description": "Check if the code creates an interactive interface where users can input 'confessions' alongside cat images/animations. The implementation should include text input, cat image selection/display, and confession posting mechanism. Score 0 if there's no interactive confession input, 5 if basic functionality exists but lacks visual cat elements, and 10 if the complete cat confession experience is implemented with proper text-image integration.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 1,
-      "title": "Is the viral sharing mechanism properly implemented?",
-      "description": "Evaluate the social sharing capabilities: 1) One-click sharing to major platforms (Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, TikTok) 2) Ability to generate shareable links/images 3) Copy-to-clipboard functionality. Deduct 3 points for each missing platform integration, 5 points if there's no image export functionality, and 5 points if the shared content lacks proper attribution/watermarking. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 2,
-      "title": "Is the cat visualization element compelling and customizable?",
-      "description": "Review the quality and variety of cat visualizations: 1) Multiple cat images/animations to choose from 2) Cat emotion/reaction tied to confession content 3) Customization options (cat colors, accessories, backgrounds). Deduct 3 points if fewer than 5 cat options exist, 5 points if cats don't react to content, and 5 points if no customization is available. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 3,
-      "title": "Is the 'viral' component engineered with effective growth mechanics?",
-      "description": "Assess implementation of viral growth features: 1) Call-to-action for sharing 2) Gamification elements like confession streaks or achievements 3) Subtle prompts to engage friends. Deduct 3 points for missing social proof indicators (view/share counters), 5 points for lack of friend invitation system, and 5 points if there's no reward for viral spreading. 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 empty confessions, oversized images, network interruption during sharing, 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-generated cat responses to confessions 2. Voice-to-text confession with matching cat reactions 3. Seasonal themes or trending meme integration). Add 3 points for each practical innovative feature implemented (maximum 10 points).",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 6,
-      "title": "Are there any redundant features?",
-      "description": "Strictly check three types of redundancy: 1. Redundant implementation of similar functions (e.g., multiple sharing methods that do the same thing) 2. Function modules unrelated to cat confessions (e.g., a built-in weather forecast) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., excessive 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/state management/API calls), code reusability, 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 basic performance optimizations are missing (such as image lazy loading). 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 interactions, and 5 points for hard-to-find key function buttons. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    }
-  ],
-  "class": "Game Development-Casual",
-  "difficulty": "hard"
-}

package/library/game_development-casual/web-chinese-english-matching-game.json

@@ -1,68 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "index": 1581,
-  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Make sure the generated code is executable and demonstrable. Create a web-based Chinese-English matching game that comes with 10 English words along with their Chinese translations. Words should be displayed on the left side and Chinese translations on the right side (for example, apple-苹果). Include a voice system that pronounces the English word when the Chinese translation is clicked and pronounces the Chinese when the English word is clicked.",
-  "checklist": [
-    {
-      "id": 0,
-      "title": "Is the core Chinese-English matching game functionality properly implemented?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the code accurately implements the matching game with 10 English words and their Chinese translations. Check if the matching logic handles correct and incorrect matches appropriately with visual feedback. Score 0 if matching functionality is not implemented, 5 if basic matching exists but has issues, and 10 if the matching system is fully functional with proper validation and scoring.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 1,
-      "title": "Is the word pronunciation system implemented correctly?",
-      "description": "Verify if the voice system pronounces English words when Chinese translations are clicked and Chinese translations when English words are clicked. Check if the Web Speech API or a similar technology is properly integrated, with appropriate error handling for unsupported browsers. Deduct 5 points if only one language works, 3 points if pronunciation has significant delays (>500ms), and 2 points if there's no visual feedback during pronunciation. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 2,
-      "title": "Are the required 10 English-Chinese word pairs properly included?",
-      "description": "Check if exactly 10 English-Chinese word pairs are included in the implementation. Verify that translations are accurate and culturally appropriate. Deduct 1 point for each missing pair, 0.5 points for each inaccurate translation, and 2 points if words are hardcoded rather than stored in a maintainable data structure. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 3,
-      "title": "Is the layout properly implemented with left-side English words and right-side Chinese translations?",
-      "description": "Assess if the layout follows the specification with English words on the left and Chinese translations on the right. Check if the layout is responsive and maintains proper alignment across different screen sizes. Deduct 5 points if the layout is reversed, 3 points if alignment issues exist, and 5 points if the layout breaks on mobile devices. 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 browsers without speech synthesis support, network issues loading audio resources, user rapid-clicking, 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. Spaced repetition learning system 2. Pronunciation accuracy scoring 3. Visual mnemonics for vocabulary). 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 playback methods) 2. Function modules unrelated to language learning (e.g., unrelated games or tools) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., excessive animations that slow down matching). 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 game logic/view/audio layers), code organization, and maintainability. Deduct 5 points if global state pollution is found or design patterns are not used; deduct 5 points if the code duplication rate is too high (over 30%); deduct 5 points if there's no clear separation between data and presentation. 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 interactions, and 5 points for hard-to-find key function buttons. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    }
-  ],
-  "class": "Game Development-Casual",
-  "difficulty": "easy"
-}