@getollie/cli 0.0.5 → 0.2.1

package/library/management_systems-frontend_backend_platforms/electronic-medical-record-editor-web.json

@@ -1,68 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "index": 728,
-  "question": "You are a coding expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Be sure to provide executable code for demonstration. Create an electronic medical record editor using JavaScript, HTML, CSS, and Markdown.",
-  "checklist": [
-    {
-      "id": 0,
-      "title": "Is the core electronic medical record editing functionality implemented?",
-      "description": "Review whether the code properly implements a Markdown editor with medical record-specific features such as structured templates for patient information, medical history, diagnosis, treatment plans, and follow-ups. Score 0 if basic editing is not implemented, 5 if only simple text editing is available, and 10 if it includes specialized medical formatting options and templates.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 1,
-      "title": "Does the implementation include proper data structure for medical records?",
-      "description": "Check if the code includes appropriate data structures for storing and managing medical record components (patient demographics, vital signs, medications, allergies, lab results, etc.). Evaluate if the structure allows for proper organization, quick retrieval, and maintaining relationships between different medical data elements. Deduct 5 points if the data structure is too simplistic, and 3 points if it doesn't support proper medical record organization. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 2,
-      "title": "Is data validation and medical terminology support implemented?",
-      "description": "Assess whether the editor validates medical-specific data (e.g., vital sign ranges, drug dosages, ICD-10 codes) and provides medical terminology assistance (autocomplete, standardized terms). Check if there's integration with or simulation of medical coding systems. Deduct 5 points if basic validation is missing, and 3 points if there's no medical terminology support. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 3,
-      "title": "Does the implementation address medical record security and privacy?",
-      "description": "Examine if the code includes considerations for HIPAA compliance, such as user authentication, access controls, audit logging, data encryption, or session timeouts. Check if there are warnings about PHI handling. Deduct 5 points if no security features are implemented, and 3 points if only basic measures are present. 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 medical data input, browser compatibility issues, network interruptions during saving, etc.) and provides 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 medical record experience (e.g., 1. Voice-to-text for dictation 2. Automated coding assistance 3. Interactive anatomical diagrams 4. Decision support alerts). 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 save mechanisms with overlapping functionality) 2. Function modules unrelated to medical record keeping (e.g., a built-in game) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., unnecessary animations that slow down critical medical data entry). 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/data model/validation logic), unit test coverage, and build process automation. Deduct 5 points if global state pollution is found or design patterns are not used; deduct 5 points if the code duplication rate is too high (over 30%); deduct 5 points if the build process is not automated. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 8,
-      "title": "Does the interface vision meet professional medical software standards?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the overall design follows healthcare UI principles: 1) Neutral, calming color scheme with clear visual hierarchy 2) Proper layout with distinct sections for different medical record components 3) Professional typography with excellent readability (body font size ≥ 14px, line height over 1.5 times). Deduct 3 points for cluttered layouts, 5 points for inappropriate color schemes in a medical context, and 5 points for poor information hierarchy. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 9,
-      "title": "Is the dynamic interaction optimized for clinical workflow?",
-      "description": "Judge whether the UI interactions support efficient clinical documentation: 1) Quick access to common templates and terms 2) Minimal clicks for frequent actions (≤ 3 clicks) 3) Clear visual feedback for saved vs. unsaved data. Deduct 5 points for workflows requiring excessive navigation, 3 points for slow response times (> 300ms) during data entry, and 5 points for missing autosave or data recovery features. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    }
-  ],
-  "class": "Management Systems-Frontend/Backend Platforms",
-  "difficulty": "medium"
-}

package/library/management_systems-frontend_backend_platforms/employee-daily-work-plan-calendar.json

@@ -1,68 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "index": 1463,
-  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Be sure to ensure that the generated code is executable for demonstration. I want to create an Excel spreadsheet for employees to fill in their daily work plans, with a perpetual calendar for selecting dates. It should have 7 windows displaying Monday through Sunday, where daily work plans can be entered. All employees will use the same spreadsheet, but it should be possible to select individual employees to view their work plans.",
-  "checklist": [
-    {
-      "id": 0,
-      "title": "Is the perpetual calendar fully implemented?",
-      "description": "Review whether the calendar component accurately handles date selection, supports month/year navigation, and properly highlights weekends/holidays. Check if it correctly maps selected dates to the appropriate day-of-week columns. Score 0 if the calendar is not implemented, 5 if basic date picking works but has issues with edge cases (month boundaries, leap years), and 10 if it handles all date scenarios correctly including proper month/year transitions.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 1,
-      "title": "Is the 7-day work plan display correctly implemented?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the spreadsheet properly renders 7 columns for Monday through Sunday, with correct date headers for each day. Check that the system correctly populates content based on the selected week, with appropriate styling for current day, weekend days, and holidays. Deduct 5 points if days are mislabeled or inconsistently formatted; deduct 3 points if column widths are not optimized for content. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 2,
-      "title": "Is the employee selection and filtering functionality complete?",
-      "description": "Check if the code implements a robust employee selection system that allows filtering work plans by specific employees. Verify that the dropdown/selection mechanism is functional, includes search capabilities for larger employee lists, and properly persists the selected employee across date changes. Deduct 5 points if employee filtering doesn't maintain state when navigating between weeks; deduct 3 points if there's no visual indication of which employee is currently selected. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 3,
-      "title": "Does the work plan entry system allow for proper data input and management?",
-      "description": "Assess whether the system provides appropriate cell editing capabilities for entering work plans, with features like text formatting, multi-line input, and character limits. Check if the implementation includes data validation, auto-save functionality, and undo/redo capabilities. Deduct 5 points if there's no data persistence mechanism; deduct 3 points if editing capabilities are limited to basic text input without formatting. 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 date inputs, concurrent edits by multiple users, browser compatibility issues, etc.) and provide friendly error prompts or recovery mechanisms. Code with strong robustness should be able to effectively handle these edge cases, giving 10 points. If the robustness is average, give 5 points, and if no exceptions are handled, give 0 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 5,
-      "title": "Are there any innovative features that are eye-catching?",
-      "description": "Check whether the code includes surprise features that enhance the experience (e.g., 1. Automated task tracking with completion indicators 2. Integration with notification systems for deadlines 3. Work plan templates for quick entry 4. Visual workload indicators across the week). Add 3 points for each practical innovative feature implemented (maximum 10 points).",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 6,
-      "title": "Are there any redundant features?",
-      "description": "Strictly check three types of redundancy: 1. Redundant implementation of similar functions (e.g., multiple date pickers with different behaviors) 2. Function modules unrelated to work planning (e.g., a built-in game) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., excessive animations when switching between employees). 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 data/view/controller layers), code reusability, and maintainability. Deduct 5 points if global variable 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 is no error handling or logging mechanism. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 8,
-      "title": "Does the interface vision meet professional spreadsheet design standards?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the spreadsheet follows professional design principles: 1) Clean grid layout with consistent cell sizing 2) Proper visual hierarchy with distinct headers and data areas 3) Professional color coding system (e.g., for weekends, current day, or priority tasks). Deduct 3 points for inconsistent cell formatting, 5 points for poor contrast making content difficult to read, and 5 points for cluttered or confusing layout. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 9,
-      "title": "Is the dynamic interaction smooth and intuitive?",
-      "description": "Judge whether interactions match spreadsheet user expectations: 1) Cell selection and editing behaves similarly to Excel 2) Calendar selection is immediate and visible 3) Employee switching maintains context and position. Deduct 5 points for unintuitive navigation between dates or employees, 3 points for laggy input response when entering work plans, and 5 points for missing keyboard shortcuts for common operations. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    }
-  ],
-  "class": "Management Systems-Frontend/Backend Platforms",
-  "difficulty": "medium"
-}

package/library/management_systems-frontend_backend_platforms/energy-consumption-monitoring-and-warning-system.json

@@ -1,68 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "index": 1139,
-  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Make sure the generated code is executable for demonstration. Provide the following functionalities:\n\nEnergy statistics for total water consumption with corresponding total amount display\nEnergy statistics for total electricity consumption with corresponding total amount display\nTotal coal consumption functionality with corresponding total amount display\nEnergy statistics for monthly water consumption by park with corresponding total amount display\nEnergy statistics for monthly electricity consumption by park with corresponding total amount display\nEnergy statistics for monthly coal consumption by park with corresponding total amount display\nEnergy statistics water consumption monitoring and warning functionality\nEnergy statistics electricity consumption monitoring and warning functionality\nEnergy statistics coal consumption monitoring and warning functionality\nWater monitoring warning list functionality, including affiliation, warning time, location points, and warning content",
-  "checklist": [
-    {
-      "id": 0,
-      "title": "Is the total energy consumption statistics system fully implemented?",
-      "description": "Review whether the code accurately implements the total water, electricity, and coal consumption statistics with proper visualization and numerical displays. Check for integration of consumption data sources, calculation logic, and data refresh mechanisms. Score 0 if none implemented, 5 if partial implementation (missing one type), and 10 if all three energy types are fully implemented with accurate totals.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 1,
-      "title": "Is the monthly park-level energy consumption breakdown functionality complete?",
-      "description": "Evaluate if the code includes monthly breakdowns of water, electricity, and coal consumption by park. Check for filtering capabilities, time range selection, and proper aggregation logic. Score 0 if the breakdown is missing, 5 if only some energy types are broken down by park, and 10 if all energy types have complete monthly park-level statistics with proper data visualization.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 2,
-      "title": "Are the energy consumption monitoring and warning systems implemented?",
-      "description": "Check if the code implements threshold-based monitoring and warning systems for all three energy types. Review if configurable thresholds are available, if real-time/near-real-time monitoring is supported, and if warning triggers function properly. Score 0 if monitoring systems are absent, 5 if basic monitoring exists without proper warning mechanisms, and 10 if comprehensive monitoring with configurable thresholds and proper warning systems are implemented for all energy types.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 3,
-      "title": "Is the water monitoring warning list functionality properly implemented?",
-      "description": "Review if the warning list for water consumption includes all required fields (affiliation, warning time, location points, warning content), supports sorting/filtering, and integrates with the monitoring system. Check if warning details can be viewed and if the system allows for acknowledgment/resolution of warnings. Score 0 if the list is missing, 5 if a basic list exists but lacks required fields or functionality, and 10 if the complete warning list with all functionality is implemented.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 4,
-      "title": "Is the code robust?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as data loading failures, invalid data formats, user input errors, 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. Predictive consumption analytics 2. Interactive comparison tools between parks 3. Automated efficiency recommendations based on consumption patterns). 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 statistics functions (e.g., multiple calculation methods for the same metric) 2. Function modules unrelated to energy statistics (e.g., unnecessary system settings) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., complex animations in data visualization). 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 data processing/visualization/alert logic layers), unit test coverage, and build process automation. Deduct 5 points if global state pollution is found or design patterns are not used; deduct 5 points if the code duplication rate is too high (over 30%); deduct 5 points if the build process is not automated. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 8,
-      "title": "Does the interface vision meet professional design standards?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the overall design follows modern design principles: 1) Harmonious color matching (using appropriate colors for energy types - blue for water, yellow for electricity, black for coal) 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 for chart updates 3) Clear visual focus guidance when switching between energy types or time periods. Deduct 5 points for each operation without feedback, 3 points for visual after-images during fast data refreshing, and 5 points for hard-to-find key function buttons. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    }
-  ],
-  "class": "Management Systems-Frontend/Backend Platforms",
-  "difficulty": "medium"
-}

package/library/management_systems-frontend_backend_platforms/energy-system-monitoring-frontend-interface.json

@@ -1,68 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "index": 1053,
-  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Be sure to ensure that the generated code is executable for demonstration. I want to create a front-end interface for an energy system monitoring platform.",
-  "checklist": [
-    {
-      "id": 0,
-      "title": "Is the energy system monitoring dashboard layout properly implemented?",
-      "description": "Review whether the code implements a comprehensive dashboard layout with key energy monitoring sections (overview panel, detailed metrics, historical data, alerts). Check for responsive design that adapts to different screen sizes. Score 0 if no dashboard structure exists, 5 if only basic layout is implemented, and 10 if the layout includes all necessary monitoring components with proper hierarchy and organization.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 1,
-      "title": "Are real-time data visualization components correctly implemented?",
-      "description": "Evaluate the implementation of dynamic charts (line graphs, gauges, heat maps) for energy metrics. Charts should update in real-time with proper animations for transitions. Verify that data binding mechanisms are implemented for live updates. Deduct 5 points if visualizations are static only, 3 points if real-time updates are missing. Full score requires at least 3 different visualization types with proper legends and tooltips.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 2,
-      "title": "Is there a comprehensive system for alerts and anomaly detection?",
-      "description": "Check for implementation of visual alert indicators, notification system, and threshold configuration. The alert system should include different severity levels with appropriate visual cues (colors, icons). Evaluate whether anomaly detection logic is implemented to highlight unusual energy consumption patterns. Deduct 5 points if alerts are visual-only without interaction, and 5 points if threshold configuration is missing.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 3,
-      "title": "Is there a complete energy data comparison and analysis module?",
-      "description": "Review whether the code implements features for comparing historical vs. current energy usage, cross-system component comparison, and trend analysis. Check for filtering capabilities by time range and system components. Deduct 5 points if only basic comparisons are available, 5 points if advanced analytics features (forecasting, pattern detection) are missing. Full score requires interactive comparison tools with exportable reports.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 4,
-      "title": "Is the code robust?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as data loading failures, empty datasets, sensor malfunction indicators, network interruption, 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. Predictive maintenance alerts using data patterns 2. Energy efficiency recommendations based on usage 3. Custom dashboard configuration for different user roles). 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 data displays (e.g., multiple charts showing the same information) 2. Function modules unrelated to energy monitoring (e.g., unnecessary administrative tools) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., excessive animations that impact dashboard responsiveness). Deduct 3 points for each redundancy found, and directly deduct 10 points if the core monitoring 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 data fetching/visualization/alert logic layers), component reusability, and code organization. Deduct 5 points if global state management is chaotic 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 clear separation between UI components and business 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 appropriate for monitoring systems (limited use of bright colors reserved for alerts) 2) Proper layout spacing with clear information hierarchy 3) Professional typography system with good readability for data-heavy displays. Deduct 3 points for each cluttered dashboard section, 5 points for poor color coding that makes data interpretation difficult, and 5 points for inconsistent styling across the interface. 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) Data updates occur without disrupting user focus 2) Transition animations for chart updates are under 300ms 3) Interactive elements provide clear feedback on hover/click/selection. Deduct 5 points for data refreshes that interrupt user workflow, 3 points for laggy interactions when filtering large datasets, and 5 points if important alerts lack appropriate attention-grabbing mechanisms. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    }
-  ],
-  "class": "Management Systems-Frontend/Backend Platforms",
-  "difficulty": "medium"
-}

package/library/management_systems-frontend_backend_platforms/engineering-management-system-permission-dotnet-mysql-vue3.json

@@ -1,68 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "index": 1067,
-  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate, professional responses. Be sure to ensure that the code you generate is executable. Can you create an engineering management system that includes permission management? Use .NET with MySQL, and Vue 3 for the frontend.",
-  "checklist": [
-    {
-      "id": 0,
-      "title": "Is the permission management system fully implemented?",
-      "description": "Review whether the code accurately implements RBAC (Role-Based Access Control) with multiple permission levels, dynamic role assignment, and hierarchical permission inheritance. Check if it includes user-role mapping, permission validation middleware, and audit logging. Score 0 if core permission logic is missing, 5 if only basic role assignment exists, and 10 if all enterprise-grade permission features are implemented.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 1,
-      "title": "Is the .NET backend architecture properly structured?",
-      "description": "Evaluate the backend architecture including proper separation of concerns (Controllers, Services, Repositories), dependency injection patterns, and API design. Check if Entity Framework Core is correctly configured with MySQL, including migrations and data seeding. Deduct 5 points for monolithic controller design, 3 points for missing repository abstractions, and 5 points for hardcoded database queries. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 2,
-      "title": "Is the Vue 3 frontend implementation complete and modern?",
-      "description": "Assess the Vue 3 implementation for Composition API usage, proper state management (Pinia/Vuex), and component architecture. Check for proper routing with navigation guards that integrate with the permission system. Deduct 5 points if Options API is used exclusively, 3 points if global state is poorly managed, and 3 points if components are not reusable. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 3,
-      "title": "Is there secure authentication and API communication?",
-      "description": "Review the authentication mechanism (JWT/OAuth), secure API endpoints with proper authorization headers, CSRF protection, and secure cookie handling. Check if tokens include expiration and refresh mechanisms. Deduct 5 points if plaintext passwords are used anywhere, 5 points if API endpoints lack authorization checks, and 3 points if HTTPS is not enforced. 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 input, database connection failures, authentication errors, etc.) and provide friendly error prompts or recovery mechanisms. Check for proper exception handling in both frontend and backend. Code with strong robustness should be able to effectively handle these edge cases, giving 10 points. If the robustness is average, give 5 points, and if no exceptions are handled, give 0 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 5,
-      "title": "Are there any innovative features that are eye-catching?",
-      "description": "Check whether the code includes surprise features that enhance the experience (e.g., 1. Real-time dashboard with notifications 2. Audit trail visualization 3. Dynamic permission templates 4. Two-factor authentication). Add 3 points for each practical innovative feature implemented (maximum 10 points).",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 6,
-      "title": "Are there any redundant features?",
-      "description": "Strictly check three types of redundancy: 1. Redundant implementation of similar functions (e.g., multiple authentication methods coexisting without clear purpose) 2. Function modules unrelated to engineering management (e.g., social media features) 3. Overengineered components that reduce maintainability. 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, unit testing coverage, API documentation (Swagger/OpenAPI), and CI/CD pipeline configuration. Check for proper logging implementation and environment configuration. Deduct 5 points if global state pollution is found; deduct 3 points if the code duplication rate is too high (over 30%); deduct 5 points if there are no automated tests. 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) Consistent color scheme matching corporate identity 2) Proper layout spacing and responsive design 3) Professional typography system with proper hierarchy. Check if UI components follow design system guidelines. Deduct 3 points for inconsistent UI elements, 5 points for non-responsive layouts, and 5 points for poor information architecture. 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) Form validation with immediate feedback 2) Loading states and skeleton screens for async operations 3) Clear visual focus and navigation patterns. Deduct 5 points for missing loading indicators, 3 points for abrupt state transitions, and 5 points for confusing navigation patterns. Check if permissions changes reflect immediately in the UI. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    }
-  ],
-  "class": "Management Systems-Frontend/Backend Platforms",
-  "difficulty": "medium"
-}

package/library/management_systems-frontend_backend_platforms/enterprise-career-platform-with-two-way-matching.json

@@ -1,68 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "index": 1296,
-  "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. Don't use any formal syntax - just present it in the most intuitive way:\n\n[Visitor access][Register/Login]\n[User Management]\n[Create Enterprise]\n    [Enterprise Verification]\n[Post Updates]\n   [Information Display]\n    [Publish Job Listings]\n   [Resume Submission]\n    [Intelligent Recommendations]\n   [Career Analysis]\n    [Two-way Matching] includes only these features",
-  "checklist": [
-    {
-      "id": 0,
-      "title": "Is the visitor access and authentication system properly implemented?",
-      "description": "Check whether the code implements a robust visitor access system with proper authentication flow (register/login). Verify if it includes secure password handling with hashing, form validation with appropriate error messages, and session management with JWT or similar tokens. Score 0 if authentication is missing, 5 if basic implementation exists, and 10 if complete with security best practices (CSRF protection, rate limiting, etc.).",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 1,
-      "title": "Is the user management system comprehensive?",
-      "description": "Evaluate the user management functionality for both job seekers and enterprise users. Check if it includes profile creation, role-based permissions, account settings management, and data privacy controls. Verify if users can update their information, manage notification preferences, and control data sharing. Deduct 5 points if key management features are missing, 3 points if permission controls are inadequate.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 2,
-      "title": "Is the enterprise creation and verification process well-designed?",
-      "description": "Review the enterprise creation workflow and verification system. Check if it includes company profile creation, document upload for verification, admin approval interface, and status tracking. Verify if the system handles edge cases such as verification rejection, resubmission process, and expiration handling. Score 0 if verification logic is absent, 5 if basic implementation exists, and 10 if comprehensive with fraud prevention measures.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 3,
-      "title": "Are the core job marketplace features well-implemented?",
-      "description": "Assess the implementation of key job marketplace features: posting updates, information display, job listings, resume submission, intelligent recommendations, career analysis, and two-way matching. Check if the code properly integrates these components into a cohesive system with appropriate data flow. Deduct 3 points for each missing core feature, and 5 points if the features exist but don't interact properly with each other.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 4,
-      "title": "Is the code robust?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as invalid inputs, server errors, concurrent user actions, etc.) and provide friendly error prompts or recovery mechanisms. Code with strong robustness should be able to effectively handle these edge cases, giving 10 points. If the robustness is average, give 5 points, and if no exceptions are handled, give 0 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 5,
-      "title": "Are there any innovative features that are eye-catching?",
-      "description": "Check whether the code includes surprise features that enhance the experience (e.g., 1. AI-powered job matching algorithm 2. Interactive career path visualization 3. Automated resume quality scoring). 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 user profile systems coexisting) 2. Function modules unrelated to job marketplace (e.g., a built-in game system) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., excessive animations on critical pages). 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 business logic/UI/API layers), unit test coverage, and build process automation. Deduct 5 points if global state pollution is found or design patterns are not used; deduct 5 points if the code duplication rate is too high (over 30%); deduct 5 points if the build process is not automated. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 8,
-      "title": "Does the interface vision meet professional design standards?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the overall design follows modern design principles: 1) Harmonious color matching (no more than 3 primary colors) 2) Proper layout spacing (element spacing follows the 8px multiple principle) 3) Professional font system (body font size ≥ 14px, line height over 1.5 times). Deduct 3 points for each crowded visual element, 5 points for a glaring color combination, and 5 points for chaotic text-image layout. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 9,
-      "title": "Is the dynamic interaction smooth and seamless?",
-      "description": "Judge whether the dynamic effects conform to human perception characteristics: 1) Click feedback delay ≤ 100ms 2) Transition animation duration controlled between 300-500ms 3) Clear visual focus guidance. Deduct 5 points for each operation without feedback, 3 points for visual after-images during fast sliding, and 5 points for hard-to-find key function buttons. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    }
-  ],
-  "class": "Management Systems-Frontend/Backend Platforms",
-  "difficulty": "hard"
-}

package/library/management_systems-frontend_backend_platforms/enterprise-recruitment-website-vue3-js-frontend.json

@@ -1,68 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "index": 1231,
-  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Make sure the generated code is executable whenever possible. I want to implement the enterprise side functionality of a recruitment website using Vue3+JS.\n\nThe functions include: account/password login, WeChat QR code login; enterprise registration, viewing and editing enterprise information; job posting, job details, job editing, viewing applicant lists for positions, processing applications (marking as unsuitable, passing initial screening, etc.), viewing applicant details, online resume preview, message notifications, personal settings, etc.",
-  "checklist": [
-    {
-      "id": 0,
-      "title": "Authentication System Implementation",
-      "description": "Evaluate the implementation of multiple authentication methods including account/password and WeChat QR code login.Check if the code includes secure password validation (hashing, salting), JWT token management, and WeChat OAuth integration. Verify that session timeout handling and refresh token mechanisms are implemented. Deduct 5 points if secure storage practices are missing; deduct 3 points if no remember-me functionality exists; deduct 5 points if CSRF protection is absent.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 1,
-      "title": "Enterprise Registration and Profile Management",
-      "description": "Assess the completeness of enterprise registration and profile management functionality.Verify if the code includes form validation for business registration (checking business license format, duplicate prevention), profile editing capabilities with proper state management, and data validation. Check if file uploading for business credentials is implemented securely. Deduct 5 points if validation is incomplete; deduct 3 points if changes aren't confirmed before submission; deduct 5 points if there's no separation between viewing and editing modes.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 2,
-      "title": "Job Management System",
-      "description": "Review the implementation of job posting, editing, and management functionalities.Assess whether the code implements comprehensive job CRUD operations, including draft saving, validation rules for job descriptions, salary ranges, and required fields. Check if there are preview capabilities before publishing. Deduct 5 points for missing job status tracking (active/inactive/expired); deduct 3 points if job templates or duplication features are absent; deduct 5 points if job search/filter capabilities are missing.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 3,
-      "title": "Applicant Processing Workflow",
-      "description": "Evaluate the applicant tracking system and processing workflow.Check if the code implements a complete applicant lifecycle (new, screened, interviewed, rejected, hired) with appropriate state transitions and permissions. Verify that batch operations for applications are supported and that interview scheduling integrations are available. Deduct 5 points if filtering/sorting of applicants is missing; deduct 3 points if there's no communication history tracking; deduct 5 points if application stage tracking visualizations are absent.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 4,
-      "title": "Code Robustness",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations and provide friendly error handling.Assess error boundary implementations, loading states for asynchronous operations, and form validation feedback. Code with strong robustness should handle network failures, input validation, and state recovery. Deduct 5 points for missing global error handlers; deduct 3 points for inadequate loading indicators; deduct 5 points for absent retry mechanisms.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 5,
-      "title": "Innovative Features",
-      "description": "Check for eye-catching features that enhance the recruitment experience.Look for features like AI-assisted candidate matching, automated screening tools, integrated video interviews, calendar integrations, or analytics dashboards. Add 3 points for each practical innovative feature implemented (maximum 10 points).",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 6,
-      "title": "Feature Redundancy",
-      "description": "Identify unnecessary or redundant implementations.Check for 1. Duplicate implementations of similar functions (e.g., multiple notification systems) 2. Features unrelated to recruitment (e.g., social networking tools) 3. Over-engineered components that impact performance. Deduct 3 points for each redundancy found; deduct 10 points directly if core recruitment functions are compromised by bloated code.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 7,
-      "title": "Engineering Quality",
-      "description": "Review the architecture and code organization of the Vue3 application.Evaluate component structure (atomic design principles), state management implementation (Vuex/Pinia), API service layer isolation, and Vue composition API usage. Deduct 5 points for global state mismanagement; deduct 3 points for excessive component coupling; deduct 5 points for inadequate code splitting or lazy loading; deduct 3 points for missing TypeScript interfaces (if TypeScript is used).",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 8,
-      "title": "Interface Design Standards",
-      "description": "Assess if the UI adheres to professional design standards.Evaluate component consistency, responsive design implementation, accessibility compliance (WCAG), and design system adherence. Deduct 3 points for inconsistent form elements; deduct 5 points for non-responsive layouts; deduct 3 points for poor color contrast ratios; deduct 5 points for inaccessible interactive elements.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 9,
-      "title": "Interaction Smoothness",
-      "description": "Judge the quality of dynamic interactions and user experience.Verify Vue transitions for page/component changes, loading skeletons, form feedback timing, and navigation patterns. Deduct 5 points for jarring page transitions; deduct 3 points for missing loading states; deduct 5 points for unresponsive UI during data operations; deduct 3 points for confusing information architecture.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    }
-  ],
-  "class": "Management Systems-Frontend/Backend Platforms",
-  "difficulty": "hard"
-}

package/library/management_systems-frontend_backend_platforms/enterprise-wireless-network-device-management-system.json

@@ -1,68 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "index": 488,
-  "question": "You are a code expert, please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Try to ensure the generated code is executable for demonstration. Implement an enterprise wireless network device management system for managing the company's WiFi access points, wireless controllers, and other devices. The system requires administrator login (username: admin, password: 123456), the ability to add wireless devices (device name, model, MAC address, IP address, location), monitor device status and connected user count, and configure wireless network parameters. The system needs to display device distribution on a floor plan along with signal coverage heat maps, showing signal strength, channel utilization and other information. It should also support viewing historical connection data and generating network performance reports.",
-  "checklist": [
-    {
-      "id": 0,
-      "title": "Is the administrator authentication system properly implemented?",
-      "description": "Check if the login system uses secure authentication practices: 1) Password hashing rather than plaintext storage 2) CSRF protection 3) Session timeout and management 4) Brute force protection mechanisms. Verify the implementation of the required credentials (username: admin, password: 123456) as a starting point, but evaluate if there's a secure way to change these default credentials. Score 0 if authentication is missing, 5 if basic authentication exists but has security flaws, 10 if authentication is secure and properly implemented.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 1,
-      "title": "Is the wireless device management system fully implemented?",
-      "description": "Evaluate if the system properly implements the addition, editing, and deletion of wireless devices with all required fields (device name, model, MAC address, IP address, location). Check if input validation exists for MAC address format, IP address format, and required fields. Assess if the device listing includes filtering, sorting, and search capabilities. Score 0 if device management is missing, 5 if basic management exists but lacks validation or complete CRUD operations, 10 if fully implemented with proper validation and error handling.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 2,
-      "title": "Is the device status monitoring system effectively implemented?",
-      "description": "Review the implementation of real-time device status monitoring, including connection status (online/offline), connected user count, bandwidth utilization, and error rates. Check if the system includes alerts for device issues, polling mechanisms or WebSocket for updates, and visual status indicators. Deduct 5 points if there's no real-time or near real-time updates, 3 points if monitoring metrics are incomplete. Full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 3,
-      "title": "Is the floor plan visualization with signal coverage heat maps properly implemented?",
-      "description": "Assess the quality of the floor plan visualization system: 1) Accurate device positioning on the floor plan 2) Visual representation of signal strength using color gradients 3) Channel utilization visualization 4) Interactive elements for device selection and information display. Check if the heat map calculation appears realistic based on device positions and obstacles. Deduct 5 points if the heat map visualization is static rather than dynamic, 3 points if device positioning is not customizable. 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 device connectivity issues, invalid user inputs, server errors, 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. Predictive analytics for network issues 2. Mobile app integration for notifications 3. Automated optimization suggestions based on usage patterns). 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 view the same device data) 2. Function modules unrelated to network management (e.g., a built-in game or entertainment feature) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., excessive animations that slow down the dashboard). 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 data/visualization/network layers), code organization, naming conventions, and build process automation. Evaluate the separation of concerns between backend and frontend components. 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) Enterprise-appropriate color scheme with clear status indicators 2) Proper layout spacing for dashboard elements 3) Professional typography with clear hierarchy for monitoring data vs. controls. Examine screenshots for crowded interface elements, confusing data visualization, or poorly organized navigation. Deduct 3 points for each usability issue, 5 points for poor information architecture, and 5 points for inaccessible color choices. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 9,
-      "title": "Is the historical data and reporting system comprehensive?",
-      "description": "Judge whether the historical connection data and network performance reporting system meets enterprise needs: 1) Data visualization with appropriate charts 2) Date range selection for historical analysis 3) Export capabilities for reports (PDF, CSV) 4) Customizable metrics and KPIs. Evaluate if performance trend analysis is available and if reports contain actionable insights. Deduct 5 points if reports are static only, 3 points if data filtering is limited, and 5 points if export functionality is missing. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    }
-  ],
-  "class": "Management Systems-Frontend/Backend Platforms",
-  "difficulty": "hard"
-}