@getollie/cli 0.0.5 → 0.2.1

package/library/game_development-shooting/web-based-tank-battle-game.json

@@ -1,68 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "index": 1802,
-  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Be sure to provide executable code that can be demonstrated. Help me write code for a web-based game similar to Tank Battle.",
-  "checklist": [
-    {
-      "id": 0,
-      "title": "Is the tank battle core game system fully implemented?",
-      "description": "Review whether the code accurately implements tank movement mechanics, collision detection with walls/obstacles, bullet firing system with trajectory calculation, and tank destruction logic through HTML5 Canvas/JavaScript. Check if tank controls are responsive (WASD/arrow keys), bullets have proper physics (speed, range, penetration), and hit detection is precise. Score 0 if core combat mechanics are missing, 5 if only basic movement is implemented, and 10 if complete tank battle system with multiple weapon types and power-ups is included.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 1,
-      "title": "Is the battlefield environment and obstacle system properly designed?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the game includes a well-designed battlefield with destructible/indestructible walls, strategic cover positions, and environmental hazards. Check if collision detection works accurately for all terrain elements, if destructible walls have realistic destruction animations, and if the map layout provides tactical gameplay opportunities. Deduct 3 points if wall collision is imprecise, 5 points if destructible elements don't function properly. Full score requires multiple map layouts with varying strategic elements.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 2,
-      "title": "Is multi-player functionality or AI opponent system implemented?",
-      "description": "Check whether the game supports either local multiplayer (split controls) or AI-controlled enemy tanks with intelligent behavior patterns. For AI implementation, evaluate pathfinding algorithms, tactical decision-making, and difficulty scaling. For multiplayer, assess control separation and fair gameplay mechanics. Deduct 5 points if AI behavior is too predictable or simplistic, 3 points if multiplayer controls conflict. Full score requires sophisticated AI with multiple difficulty levels or smooth multiplayer experience.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 3,
-      "title": "Is the complete game progression and scoring system constructed?",
-      "description": "Verify whether the code includes comprehensive game state management with level progression, scoring system, lives/health management, and win/lose conditions. Check for features like high score tracking, level advancement mechanics, bonus systems, and game restart functionality. Deduct 5 points if no progression system exists, 3 points if scoring is basic without bonuses. Give 10 points if full campaign mode with multiple levels and achievement system is implemented.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 4,
-      "title": "Is the code robust?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as rapid key presses, boundary collisions, simultaneous bullet impacts, frame rate drops, etc.) and provide stable gameplay without crashes or glitches. Code with strong robustness should effectively handle edge cases like multiple collisions, memory leaks from bullet objects, and performance optimization. Give 10 points for excellent error handling, 5 points for average robustness, and 0 points if no exception handling exists.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 5,
-      "title": "Are there any innovative features that are eye-catching?",
-      "description": "Check whether the code includes engaging features that enhance gameplay experience (e.g., 1. Special weapon types with unique effects 2. Environmental interactions like exploding barrels 3. Tank customization options 4. Replay system with slow-motion highlights 5. Particle effects for explosions). Add 2-3 points for each well-implemented innovative feature that adds genuine value to gameplay (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 collision detection systems coexisting) 2. Function modules unrelated to tank battle gameplay (e.g., built-in social media integration) 3. Excessive visual effects that impact performance (e.g., overly complex particle systems causing frame drops). Deduct 3 points for each redundancy found, and directly deduct 10 points if core gameplay is hindered by unnecessary features.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 7,
-      "title": "Does the code have engineering quality?",
-      "description": "Review modular design (separating game engine/rendering/input/physics systems), code organization with proper class structures, and performance optimization. Deduct 5 points if global variable pollution is found or no design patterns are used; deduct 5 points if code duplication rate exceeds 30%; deduct 3 points if no frame rate optimization or object pooling for bullets/effects is implemented. Full score requires clean architecture with separated concerns and optimized performance.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 8,
-      "title": "Does the interface vision meet professional game design standards?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the visual design follows game UI principles: 1) Consistent pixel art or vector graphics style 2) Clear visual hierarchy with readable HUD elements (health, score, ammo) 3) Appropriate color contrast for gameplay visibility 4) Professional sprite design for tanks and environmental elements. Deduct 3 points for each poorly designed visual element, 5 points for inconsistent art style, and 5 points if UI elements obstruct gameplay view. Full score requires polished, cohesive visual design.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 9,
-      "title": "Is the dynamic interaction smooth and seamless?",
-      "description": "Judge whether game controls and animations provide smooth gameplay experience: 1) Input response delay ≤ 50ms for tank movement 2) Smooth tank rotation and movement animations at 60fps 3) Satisfying explosion effects and screen shake feedback 4) Audio-visual synchronization for shooting and impacts. Deduct 5 points for each laggy control response, 3 points for choppy animations during intense gameplay, and 5 points for missing or poorly timed feedback effects. Full score requires console-quality smooth gameplay feel.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    }
-  ],
-  "class": "Game Development-Shooting",
-  "difficulty": "hard"
-}

package/library/game_development-shooting/web-version-contra-game.json

@@ -1,68 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "index": 265,
-  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Make sure to ensure the code you generate is executable. Create a web version of Contra for me that can be played directly after running.",
-  "checklist": [
-    {
-      "id": 0,
-      "title": "Is the core Contra gameplay mechanics fully implemented?",
-      "description": "Review whether the code accurately implements the classic Contra mechanics: running, jumping, shooting in 8 directions, and weapon power-ups. Check if the character movement feels responsive (< 50ms delay) and if the hit detection system works correctly for both player and enemy interactions. Score 0 if the core mechanics are missing, 5 if basic movement and shooting are implemented but lack refinement, and 10 if the gameplay feels authentic to the original Contra experience.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 1,
-      "title": "Is the level design and progression system properly implemented?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the code includes at least one complete level with proper enemy placement, terrain obstacles (platforms, water, etc.), and a boss fight at the end. Check if the game has a proper level progression system (either through multiple levels or checkpoints). Deduct 5 points if the level design is too simplistic or empty, and 3 points if there's no boss implementation. Give full 10 points only if the level design captures the essence of Contra's challenging but fair gameplay.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 2,
-      "title": "Are the enemy AI and variety properly implemented?",
-      "description": "Check if the game includes multiple enemy types with distinct behaviors (e.g., stationary shooters, runners, jumpers, and turrets). Evaluate whether the enemy AI provides adequate challenge without being unfair. Verify if enemies spawn at appropriate rates and locations. Deduct 5 points if enemy AI is too simplistic (just moving in one direction), and 3 points if there's less than 3 different enemy types. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 3,
-      "title": "Is the weapon system and power-up collection mechanism implemented?",
-      "description": "Assess whether the code implements Contra's iconic weapon system, including at least 3 different weapon types (e.g., spread gun, laser, rapid fire) and the power-up collection mechanism. Check if weapon switching works correctly and if there's appropriate visual and audio feedback when collecting power-ups. Deduct 5 points if only the default weapon is implemented, and 3 points if weapon switching has bugs. 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 user input, browser window resizing, focus loss, 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. Two-player cooperative mode 2. Custom level editor 3. Secret areas and unlockable content). 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 collision detection systems) 2. Function modules unrelated to Contra gameplay (e.g., a built-in chat system) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., excessive particle effects 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 game logic/view/input handling layers), sprite and asset management, and game loop implementation. Deduct 5 points if global state pollution is found or proper 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 proper game state management system. 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 the classic Contra aesthetic while maintaining modern UI principles: 1) Faithful sprite artwork and animations that respect the original style 2) Proper HUD layout showing lives, score, and current weapon 3) Consistent pixel art style throughout the game. Deduct 3 points for inconsistent visual style, 5 points for a hard-to-read HUD, and 5 points for low-quality or mismatched sprite artwork. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 9,
-      "title": "Is the dynamic interaction smooth and seamless?",
-      "description": "Judge whether the game runs at a consistent frame rate (ideally 60 FPS) and whether the controls are responsive: 1) Input lag < 50ms 2) Smooth animations without stuttering 3) Appropriate sound effects and visual feedback for all actions. Deduct 5 points if the game has noticeable frame drops, 3 points for delayed input response, and 5 points if sound effects are missing or mismatched. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    }
-  ],
-  "class": "Game Development-Shooting",
-  "difficulty": "hard"
-}

package/library/game_development-shooting/webpage-2d-shooting-mini-game.json

@@ -1,68 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "index": 1562,
-  "question": "You are a coding expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Make sure that the code you generate is executable for demonstration. Help me create a webpage with a 2D shooting mini-game similar to Contra.",
-  "checklist": [
-    {
-      "id": 0,
-      "title": "Is the core shooting game mechanics fully implemented?",
-      "description": "Review whether the code accurately implements player movement (8-directional control), weapon shooting system with different bullet types, enemy AI behavior patterns, and collision detection between bullets/enemies/environment. Score 0 if basic shooting mechanics are missing, 5 if only simple movement and shooting exist, and 10 if includes multiple weapon types, enemy variety, and accurate hit detection with visual feedback.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 1,
-      "title": "Is the game physics and animation system properly constructed?",
-      "description": "Check whether the implementation includes smooth sprite animations (running, shooting, jumping), proper physics for bullet trajectories, gravity effects for jumping mechanics, and frame-rate independent movement. Deduct 5 points if animations are choppy or inconsistent, 3 points if physics calculations cause glitches. Evaluate sprite sheet management and animation timing. Full score requires 60fps performance with smooth character animations.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 2,
-      "title": "Are game levels and progression mechanics implemented?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the code includes multiple game levels with increasing difficulty, enemy spawn patterns, power-up systems (weapon upgrades, health packs), and score tracking. Check for level progression logic, checkpoint systems, and boss battles. Deduct 5 points if only single-screen gameplay exists, 3 points if no progression mechanics. Full score requires multiple levels with distinct challenges and upgrade systems.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 3,
-      "title": "Is the complete game state management system constructed?",
-      "description": "Check whether the code includes comprehensive game state management covering start screen, gameplay, pause/resume, game over, and high score systems. Evaluate local storage implementation for saving progress and settings. Deduct 5 points if state transitions are buggy, 3 points if no save/load functionality. Give 10 points if includes complete menu systems, settings management, and persistent data storage.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 4,
-      "title": "Is the code robust?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as rapid key presses, browser tab switching, memory leaks from game objects, frame rate drops, etc.) and provide graceful degradation. Code with strong robustness should include proper cleanup of game objects, error boundaries, and performance monitoring. Give 10 points for excellent error handling, 5 points if robustness is average, and 0 points if no exception handling exists.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 5,
-      "title": "Are there any innovative features that are eye-catching?",
-      "description": "Check whether the code includes impressive features that enhance gameplay experience (e.g., 1. Particle effects for explosions and impacts 2. Dynamic background music and sound effects 3. Screen shake and visual juice 4. Procedural level generation 5. Special weapon mechanics). Add 3 points for each well-implemented innovative feature that adds genuine value to the gaming experience (maximum 10 points).",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 6,
-      "title": "Are there any redundant features?",
-      "description": "Strictly check three types of redundancy: 1. Redundant game loop implementations or duplicate collision detection systems 2. Unrelated features like social media integration or complex UI frameworks 3. Performance-heavy effects that don't enhance core gameplay (e.g., excessive particle systems, unnecessarily complex shaders). Deduct 3 points for each redundancy found, and directly deduct 10 points if redundant code interferes with game performance or core mechanics.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 7,
-      "title": "Does the code have engineering quality?",
-      "description": "Review modular architecture (separating game engine, entities, input handling, rendering layers), proper asset management, and code organization. Deduct 5 points if global variables pollute the namespace or no design patterns are used; deduct 5 points if code has high duplication (over 30%); deduct 5 points if no proper asset loading or memory management. Full score requires clean separation of concerns and maintainable code structure.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 8,
-      "title": "Does the interface vision meet professional game design standards?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the visual design follows game UI principles: 1) Consistent pixel art style or coherent visual theme 2) Readable HUD elements with proper contrast 3) Intuitive visual hierarchy for game elements 4) Appropriate sprite scaling and resolution. Deduct 3 points for each visual inconsistency, 5 points for poor readability of game elements, and 5 points for mismatched art styles. Full score requires polished, cohesive visual presentation.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 9,
-      "title": "Is the game interaction responsive and intuitive?",
-      "description": "Judge whether the game controls and feedback meet gaming standards: 1) Input response time ≤ 16ms (60fps standard) 2) Clear visual and audio feedback for all actions 3) Intuitive control scheme with proper key mapping 4) Consistent interaction patterns throughout gameplay. Deduct 5 points for each unresponsive control, 3 points for missing feedback on important actions, and 5 points for confusing or inconsistent control schemes. Full score requires tight, responsive controls with excellent game feel.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    }
-  ],
-  "class": "Game Development-Shooting",
-  "difficulty": "hard"
-}

package/library/game_development-shooting/wechat-aircraft-battle-mini-game.json

@@ -1,68 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "index": 1222,
-  "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 for demonstration. Write me the code for a WeChat mini-game called \"Aircraft Battle.",
-  "checklist": [
-    {
-      "id": 0,
-      "title": "Is the core aircraft battle gameplay fully implemented?",
-      "description": "Review whether the code implements essential game mechanics: player aircraft control, enemy aircraft generation and movement patterns, collision detection, bullet firing mechanisms, and scoring system. Score 0 if the core gameplay is missing, 5 if only basic features are implemented, and 10 if the game includes advanced features like different enemy types, power-ups, and level progression.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 1,
-      "title": "Is the WeChat mini-game API integration properly implemented?",
-      "description": "Check whether the code correctly uses WeChat Mini Game APIs (wx.* namespace) for essential functions: canvas rendering, touch controls, lifecycle management, and local storage for high scores. Deduct 5 points if the code doesn't use WeChat-specific APIs, 3 points if some APIs are incorrectly implemented, and 2 points if optional APIs like sharing or cloud storage aren't utilized. Full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 2,
-      "title": "Is game state management properly designed?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the code includes proper game state management: game start/pause/resume/over states, scene transitions, and persistent data handling. Check for proper initialization, destruction, and garbage collection to prevent memory leaks. Deduct 5 points if game states are hard-coded without a state machine, 3 points if state transitions have bugs. Full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 3,
-      "title": "Is the performance optimization suitable for mobile devices?",
-      "description": "Assess whether the code implements optimization techniques suitable for mobile devices: sprite batching, object pooling for bullets/enemies, efficient collision detection algorithms, frame rate management, and adapting to different screen sizes. Deduct 5 points if frame rate drops below 30fps with multiple enemies, 3 points if memory usage grows continuously during gameplay. 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 touch events outside game area, rapid multi-touching, app suspension/resume, low memory warnings, 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. Dynamic difficulty adjustment 2. Unique weapon systems or enemy patterns 3. Boss battles with special mechanics 4. Social features like friend challenges). 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 collision detection systems) 2. Function modules unrelated to aircraft battle gameplay 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., excessive particle effects on low-end devices). 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 entities, rendering, input handling), naming conventions, code comments, 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 structure separating core game logic from rendering. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 8,
-      "title": "Does the interface vision meet professional game design standards?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the visual design follows game UI principles: 1) Clear visual hierarchy for gameplay elements vs. UI elements 2) Readable text and UI elements at mobile screen distances 3) Consistent visual style and theme 4) Non-intrusive HUD elements that don't obstruct gameplay. Deduct 3 points for each cluttered screen area, 5 points for unreadable or poorly contrasted UI elements, and 5 points for inconsistent visual style. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 9,
-      "title": "Is the dynamic interaction smooth and responsive?",
-      "description": "Judge whether the game controls and feedback conform to mobile gaming standards: 1) Responsive aircraft movement (≤50ms input lag) 2) Clear visual/audio feedback for hits, misses, and power-ups 3) Consistent frame rate during intense action. Deduct 5 points for noticeable input lag, 3 points for missing feedback on important game events, and 5 points for stuttering animations during normal gameplay. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    }
-  ],
-  "class": "Game Development-Shooting",
-  "difficulty": "medium"
-}

package/library/game_development-shooting/zombie-mayhem-shooting-game.json

@@ -1,68 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "index": 45,
-  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate, professional responses. Make sure the generated code is executable.\n\nPlease use HTML and JavaScript to implement a:\n### Game Mechanics\n1. **Shooting and Reloading**: Players need to timely shoot zombies and replenish ammunition.\n3. **Multi-level Design**: The game includes multiple levels, each with different challenges and zombie types.\n\n### Game Features\n- **Rich Graphics and Animations**: Using HTML5 and SCSS to create smooth animations and detailed graphic effects.\n- **Intense Gaming Experience**: Fast-paced game design, combined with sound effects and visual effects, creates a tense and exciting gaming experience.\n\n### Game Tips\n- **Ammunition Replenishment**: Pay attention to timely replenishment of ammunition.\n- **Precise Aiming**: Improve aiming accuracy to effectively increase kill efficiency and survival rate.\n\n### Summary\n\"Zombie Mayhem\" is a challenging shooting game that provides players with a tense and fun gaming experience through its rich level design and engaging game mechanics. Create the game and include some comments in the code to help other developers understand your implementation process.",
-  "checklist": [
-    {
-      "id": 0,
-      "title": "Is the core shooting and reloading mechanic fully implemented?",
-      "description": "Verify if the code implements shooting mechanics (point-and-click or keyboard controls), hit detection, damage calculation, and ammunition management. Check if reloading is properly implemented with appropriate cooldowns and visual/audio feedback.0 points if core gameplay is missing, 5 points if basic shooting works without proper reloading, 10 points if the shooting system is complete with ammo tracking, reloading animations, and hit feedback.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 1,
-      "title": "Is the zombie AI behavior and variety implemented?",
-      "description": "Evaluate the implementation of zombie movement patterns, attack behaviors, and variety of zombie types. Check for different zombie classes with unique attributes (speed, health, damage, special abilities).0 points if zombies don't move or interact, 5 points for basic movement and single zombie type, 10 points for multiple zombie types with distinct behaviors and attack patterns.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 2,
-      "title": "Is the multi-level design system implemented?",
-      "description": "Assess if the game includes multiple levels with increasing difficulty, different zombie spawning patterns, and level progression logic. Check for level-specific challenges, environments, or mechanics.0 points if only one static level exists, 5 points if multiple levels exist but lack variety, 10 points for a complete level system with unique challenges per level and proper difficulty scaling.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 3,
-      "title": "Are the graphics and animations rich and smooth?",
-      "description": "Evaluate the quality of visual elements including zombie animations, shooting effects, blood splatter, environment details, and UI animations. Check if CSS/SCSS animations are used effectively for smooth transitions.Deduct 3 points for static/missing player animations, 3 points for missing zombie animations, 2 points for lack of environmental details, and 2 points for missing shooting/impact effects. 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 (browser compatibility issues, irregular screen sizes, rapid input sequences, 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. Dynamic difficulty adjustment based on player performance 2. Unique power-ups or weapons 3. Environmental interactions or destructible elements).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 2. Function modules unrelated to the zombie shooting theme 3. Fancy effects that affect performance without adding gameplay value.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, commenting quality, and maintainability. Check for proper object-oriented or functional programming principles.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; deduct 5 points if the code lacks proper comments as requested. 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 game UI principles: 1) Clear health/ammo indicators 2) Intuitive controls and feedback 3) Readable text during gameplay 4) Consistent visual style throughout.Deduct 3 points for cluttered UI elements, 3 points for inconsistent visual styling, 2 points for poor readability during gameplay, and 2 points for unintuitive control indicators. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 9,
-      "title": "Is the gaming experience intense and engaging?",
-      "description": "Judge whether the game provides a tense and exciting experience through: 1) Appropriate difficulty progression 2) Sound effects for shooting, zombie groans, and environmental ambiance 3) Visual feedback for hits, damage, and critical events 4) Game pacing that creates tension.Deduct 3 points for missing sound effects, 3 points for lack of visual feedback on important actions, 2 points for poor game pacing, and 2 points for unbalanced difficulty. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    }
-  ],
-  "class": "Game Development-Shooting",
-  "difficulty": "medium"
-}

package/library/game_development-simulation_management/3d-space-universe-spacecraft-physics-game.json

@@ -1,68 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "index": 429,
-  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Be sure the code you generate is executable for demonstration. Generate a game code that can be played on a web page.\nThe game is set in a 3D space universe where players pilot a spacecraft moving between stars.\nEach planet will attract the spacecraft according to actual physical laws. To escape, you need to increase speed. Players can increase or decrease speed to decide whether to enter a planet or not.",
-  "checklist": [
-    {
-      "id": 0,
-      "title": "Is the 3D space universe environment properly implemented?",
-      "description": "Evaluate the implementation of the 3D space environment using WebGL/Three.js or similar technologies. Check for proper perspective, camera controls, and realistic space rendering (stars, nebulae, etc.). Score 0 if only 2D implementation, 5 if basic 3D space is present but lacks detail, and 10 if the universe is immersive with visual depth and realistic space elements.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 1,
-      "title": "Are the physics of gravitational attraction accurately implemented?",
-      "description": "Assess whether the code correctly implements Newton's law of universal gravitation (F = G*m1*m2/r²). Check if forces are properly calculated and applied to the spacecraft, with accurate direction vectors. Verify that closer planets exert stronger pull and that multiple planets' gravitational fields interact correctly. Score 0 if gravity is faked/simplified, 5 if basic attraction exists but has inaccuracies, and 10 if physics implementation closely matches real gravitational behavior.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 2,
-      "title": "Is the spacecraft movement and speed control system well-designed?",
-      "description": "Evaluate the spacecraft control mechanism, including acceleration/deceleration, directional control, and inertia effects. Check for smooth controls with proper keystroke/input handling and intuitive speed adjustment. Verify if spacecraft maintains momentum in space and if thrusters visually indicate direction changes. Deduct 5 points if movement feels jerky or unresponsive, and 3 points if speed adjustments lack granularity or feedback.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 3,
-      "title": "Does the game feature a well-designed planetary system with varied celestial bodies?",
-      "description": "Assess the variety and design of celestial bodies (planets, stars, moons, etc.). Check if planets have distinct visual characteristics, different masses affecting gravitational pull, and unique properties. Verify if there's a logical arrangement of celestial bodies creating interesting navigation challenges. Score 0 if only simple spheres exist, 5 if planets have basic variety, and 10 if the system includes diverse celestial bodies with unique properties affecting gameplay.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 4,
-      "title": "Is the code robust?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as browser compatibility issues, performance degradation on lower-end devices, unexpected user inputs, 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. Dynamic celestial events like supernovas or meteor showers 2. Wormholes for fast travel 3. Visual effects for gravitational distortion 4. Procedurally generated universe). 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 physics calculations (e.g., multiple gravity systems coexisting) 2. Function modules unrelated to space navigation (e.g., unnecessary mini-games) 3. Fancy effects that severely affect performance (e.g., excessive particle systems). Deduct 3 points for each redundancy found, and directly deduct 10 points if the core functions are interfered with by redundant code.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 7,
-      "title": "Does the code have engineering quality?",
-      "description": "Review modular design (such as separating physics engine/rendering/input handling), code organization, and performance optimization. Deduct 5 points if global state pollution is found or object-oriented principles are not followed; deduct 5 points if the code duplication rate is too high (over 30%); deduct 5 points if no performance optimizations are implemented for 3D rendering. 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 game UI principles: 1) Non-intrusive HUD elements showing speed, position, and gravitational influence 2) Clear visual cues for navigation and planet information 3) Consistent sci-fi aesthetic with appropriate color scheme for space. Deduct 3 points for cluttered UI elements, 5 points for poor readability against space background, and 5 points for inconsistent visual style. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 9,
-      "title": "Is the dynamic interaction smooth and seamless?",
-      "description": "Judge whether the game's performance and interactions conform to gaming standards: 1) Maintains at least 30 FPS during gameplay 2) Responsive controls with < 100ms input lag 3) Smooth transitions when approaching/leaving gravitational fields with visual/audio feedback. Deduct 5 points for frame rate drops below 30 FPS, 3 points for jerky spacecraft movement, and 5 points for lack of feedback when entering gravitational fields. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    }
-  ],
-  "class": "Game Development-Simulation/Management",
-  "difficulty": "medium"
-}

package/library/game_development-simulation_management/capture-and-collection-game.json

@@ -1,68 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "index": 7,
-  "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 and can be demonstrated.\n\nPlease use HTML and JavaScript to implement a Capture and Collection game.\n\n**Task**: Implement a capturing system where players can capture certain objects or creatures in the game through specific operations, and collect them.\n\n**Hint**: You can capture objects by throwing nets or using specific items, and add them to the player's collection.\n\nPlease include comments in your code so other developers can understand your implementation process.",
-  "checklist": [
-    {
-      "id": 0,
-      "title": "Is the capture mechanism fully implemented?",
-      "description": "Review whether the code accurately implements capture operations through HTML/JavaScript, including throwing mechanics (trajectory calculation, collision detection), capture success/failure logic, and different capture tools (nets, traps, etc.). Score 0 if core capture interaction is not implemented, 5 if only basic click-to-capture is implemented, and 10 if physics-based throwing with realistic trajectories and multiple capture methods are fully included.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 1,
-      "title": "Is the collection system comprehensively designed?",
-      "description": "Check whether the collection system includes inventory management, item categorization, rarity systems, and collection progress tracking. Evaluate if captured objects have different attributes (size, rarity, behavior patterns). Deduct 5 points if no inventory UI is provided, 3 points if objects lack unique properties, and 2 points if collection statistics are missing. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 2,
-      "title": "Are the game objects and creatures intelligently designed?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether capturable objects/creatures have realistic movement patterns, AI behaviors (fleeing, hiding, different speeds), and spawn mechanics. Objects should have varied difficulty levels and unique characteristics. Deduct 5 points if objects are static or move in simple patterns, 3 points if no difficulty progression exists, and 2 points if spawn timing is not balanced. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 3,
-      "title": "Is the complete game progression system constructed?",
-      "description": "Check whether the code includes complete progression mechanics such as player levels, unlockable capture tools, achievement systems, and collection milestones. Evaluate if there are rewards for completing collections and progression feedback. Deduct 5 points if no progression tracking is implemented, 3 points if achievements are missing, and 2 points if unlock mechanisms are absent. Give 10 points if fully implemented.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 4,
-      "title": "Is the code robust?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as out-of-bounds input, rapid clicking, collision edge cases, inventory overflow, 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. Photo mode for captured creatures 2. Breeding/evolution system 3. Trading mechanism 4. Environmental interaction affecting capture rates 5. Mini-games for difficult captures). 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 capture validation logics coexisting) 2. Function modules unrelated to capture/collection gameplay (e.g., built-in calculator) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., excessive particle systems on every capture). Deduct 3 points for each redundancy found, and directly deduct 10 points if 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 capture logic/collection management/rendering layers), code documentation quality, and maintainable structure. 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 comments are insufficient 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) Professional font system (body font size ≥ 14px, line height over 1.5 times) 4) Clear inventory and collection UI organization. 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) Capture action feedback delay ≤ 100ms 2) Transition animation duration controlled between 300-500ms 3) Clear visual focus guidance for capturable objects 4) Smooth inventory opening/closing animations. Deduct 5 points for each operation without feedback, 3 points for visual after-images during object movement, and 5 points for hard-to-identify interactive elements. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    }
-  ],
-  "class": "Game Development-Simulation/Management",
-  "difficulty": "medium"
-}

package/library/game_development-simulation_management/class-teacher-simulator.json

@@ -1,68 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "index": 279,
-  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Class Teacher Simulator\n\n## Basic Mechanisms\n\n1. Time Setting\n\n* Each academic year is divided into spring and fall semesters, with five teaching days per week. The last week of the semester is for exams and parent-teacher conferences.\n* As the head teacher, you have 8 action points to allocate each day (can be increased later based on physical condition). Mandatory action points include morning and evening self-study sessions and teaching your own subject classes.\n\nMorning and evening self-study options: independent study or specific subject study.\n\nTeaching your own subject requires increasing lesson preparation to improve teaching quality.\n\nOther action points can be used for: auditing classes, lesson preparation, discussing class situations with other teachers, grading assignments, etc.\n\nWeekends allow free actions, with Sunday evening mandating class schedule planning. Winter and summer breaks may trigger special events (such as home visit crises, romance storylines, etc.)\n\n2. Main Character and Teacher Attribute Growth\n\nRandomly generated subject teachers with different personalities and attributes trigger different events.\n\n* Intelligence determines lesson preparation efficiency and problem-solving ability.\n* Charisma affects class officer loyalty and parent communication success rate, can be improved through hosting class meetings or participating in public lessons.\n* Subject expertise is locked to your initially chosen teaching subject (e.g., Chinese language teachers have ancient text analysis privileges).\n* Physical strength limits daily action count; continuing work after 1 AM will trigger a blood-coughing event.\n* When health falls below 30, you may collapse at the lectern, forcing a three-day hospitalization and missing critical teaching progress.\n* Emotional intelligence is used to resolve student conflicts; high EQ individuals can unlock the hidden \"Soul Dialogue\" option.\n\n## Class Ecosystem\n\n1. Student Generation System\n\n40 students randomly generated with the following trait combinations:\n\n* Family background: Single-parent families, wealthy second-generation, intellectual families, etc. (over 10 types of family situations).\n* Subject grades: Nine independent values (main subjects fluctuate ±5%, minor subjects ±10%)\n* Charisma and emotional intelligence: Affects students' interpersonal networks, triggering friendship/conflict/romance events\n* Diligence and talent: Affects learning efficiency and subject performance.\n   - Daily adjustments based on personality, mood, class atmosphere, family situation, etc.\n   - Below 40 triggers \"lying flat mode\" (homework completion rate plummets)\n\nAttribute linking formula:\nSingle subject improvement = (Talent×0.3 + Diligence×0.7) × Teacher subject expertise modifier\nPsychological breakdown probability = (Family pressure + Class average pressure) ÷ Student's EQ\n\n2. Class Committee System\n\nAppoint class officers at the beginning of each semester, with options for appointment or class election. Class officers include: class monitor, deputy monitor, study representative, arts and entertainment representative, labor representative, publicity representative, organizational representative, and subject representatives. Different combinations trigger different chain reactions.\n\nFree Day Mechanism\n\n* Saturday-Sunday: Teacher's free actions (consuming physical strength)\n   - Home visits (must match student family type: single-parent families require EQ ≥60)\n   - Self-improvement (library +Intelligence/gym +Health)\n   - Unexpected events (15% probability of events like \"student running away from home\")\n\n* Sunday evening: Mandatory class schedule arrangement\n\nClass Schedule System\n\n* Resource balance:\n   - Main subjects >60% → Triggers \"homework overload protest\" event (next day efficiency -20%)\n   - Interest classes for two consecutive days → Principal's warning about \"not focusing on proper teaching\"\n\n## Events and Choices\n\n1. 40+ Daily Random Events\n\n* Pink envelope: When discovering love letters, choosing \"tear up publicly\" will cause the couple to elope; choosing \"anonymous counseling\" might foster a top student couple.\n* Cheating storm: Catching mass cheating during exam supervision—severe punishment loses the class's red flag award, overlooking it plants landmines for college entrance exams.\n\n2. Competition Arena\n\n* Competition pyramid\n* Basic level: School exams affect class ranking in the grade, monthly tests (affect class ranking and next month's learning efficiency), midterm and final exams (affect ranking, parents' and school leaders' attitudes, overall class atmosphere)\n   - Academic Olympiad competitions\n   - National New Concept Writing Competition\n\n3. Campus Carnival\n\n* Spring Sports Meet:\n   - Hidden attribute \"Sportsmanship\" determines ranking (not purely physical ability)\n\n* New Year's Arts Performance:\n   - Winning brings special funding from the principal\n\n## Endings and Evaluation\n\nCollege Entrance Exam System\n\nFinal results are determined by \"Basic Strength\" (subject values), \"On-site Luck\" (hidden random number), and \"Psychological Pressure Resistance\" (stress value conversion), with possible dramatic reversals like \"God Mode\" (30% overperformance) or \"Ten years of study ruined in one day\" (key subject failure).\n\nCollege Entrance Exam Results Night generates a \"Life Trajectory Map\":\n\n* Worldly Success: Number of students admitted to Tsinghua/Peking University, percentage of top-tier university admissions, competition medals.\n* Hidden Costs: Number of psychologically traumatized students, stifled geniuses, \"defective products\" eliminated by the system.\n* Teacher Evaluation: 57 possible endings from \"Incompetent talent ruining students' futures\" to \"Educational Revolutionary,\" revealing your true educational philosophy.\n\nInterface is code-box style, preserving basic attributes, schedules and time. JavaScript interface with window-like modules. All text and emojis within the code box! Within the code window!! But omitting actual code!!! Only showing the core module text content inside the code box.\n\nSetting is realistic, no fantasy, tech, or supernatural elements allowed in the game. No mysterious events. All character behavior logic matches reality. Game progresses by action points without skipping. Next action only after current action is scheduled.\n\nNow generating main character: Head Teacher Jiang Ruoyao, female, 24, subject expertise in Chinese language. Time: New semester of high school freshman year.",
-  "checklist": [
-    {
-      "id": 0,
-      "title": "Is the class teacher simulator core mechanism fully implemented?",
-      "description": "Review whether the code correctly implements the time setting system (semesters, teaching days, action points), teacher attribute growth mechanics, and mandatory vs. optional actions. Score 0 if core game loop is missing, 5 if only basic time management exists, and 10 if all specified mechanisms (morning/evening sessions, subject teaching, action point system with proper constraints) are properly implemented.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 1,
-      "title": "Is the student generation and attribute system working as specified?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the code generates 40 students with all required attributes (family background, subject grades, charisma, EQ, diligence, talent) and properly implements the attribute linking formulas. Check if student attributes dynamically adjust based on events and teacher actions. Deduct 5 points if family background variety is limited, 5 points if subject grade fluctuation is missing, and 3 points if psychological breakdown probability calculation is incorrect. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 2,
-      "title": "Are the class committee system and class schedule mechanisms implemented?",
-      "description": "Check if the code includes appointment/election of class officers with proper role definitions and resulting chain reactions. Verify the class schedule system with resource balance constraints and consequences (homework overload protest, principal warnings). Deduct 5 points if appointment/election options are missing, 3 points for missing officer roles, and 5 points if resource balance consequences aren't implemented. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 3,
-      "title": "Are events, competitions, and endings properly implemented?",
-      "description": "Assess whether random events (like pink envelope, cheating storm), competitions (school exams, Olympiads, etc.), and the college entrance exam system with evaluation metrics are implemented. Check for the presence of the \"Life Trajectory Map\" with all specified categories. Deduct 3 points per missing event category, 5 points if competitions lack progressive difficulty, and 5 points if the ending evaluation lacks variety. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 4,
-      "title": "Is the code robust?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as invalid action selections, concurrent events, conflicting schedules, 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. Dynamic relationship networks visualized between students 2. Procedurally generated family visit conversations 3. Tension meter showing class atmosphere). 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 event mechanics 2. Function modules unrelated to the educational setting (e.g., fantasy elements explicitly prohibited in requirements) 3. Overly complex systems that don't contribute to the core 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 state/view/event systems), maintainability, and code organization. Deduct 5 points if global state pollution is found or design patterns are not used; deduct 5 points if the code duplication rate is too high (over 30%); deduct 5 points if there's no clear separation between game mechanics 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 code-box style interface follows modern design principles: 1) Clean text formatting and spacing 2) Consistent use of emojis and styling 3) Proper organization of windows and modules within the code box. Deduct 3 points for each inconsistent text styling, 5 points for cluttered information display, and 5 points for poor readability of critical game information. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 9,
-      "title": "Is the dynamic interaction smooth and realistic?",
-      "description": "Judge whether the game progression conforms to specified constraints: 1) Each action properly consumes action points 2) Events trigger based on realistic conditions 3) All character behavior matches real-world logic with no supernatural elements. Deduct 5 points for unrealistic character behavior, 5 points for actions that skip the proper progression system, and 3 points for lacking clear feedback on action results. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    }
-  ],
-  "class": "Game Development-Simulation/Management",
-  "difficulty": "easy"
-}