QuantumChecker 0.2.2__tar.gz → 0.2.4__tar.gz

{quantumchecker-0.2.2 → quantumchecker-0.2.4}/PKG-INFO

@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 Metadata-Version: 2.4
 Name: QuantumChecker
-Version: 0.2.2
+Version: 0.2.4
 Summary: A package to evaluate homework submissions in Python, SQL, PowerBI, and SSIS.
 Author: Qobiljon
 Author-email: qobiljonkhayrullayev@gmail.com

quantumchecker-0.2.4/QuantumCheck/main.py

@@ -0,0 +1,125 @@
+import logging
+import os
+from datetime import datetime
+from typing import List, Dict, Optional
+from .python_evaluator import PythonEvaluator
+from .sql_evaluator import SQLEvaluator
+from .powerbi_evaluator import PowerBIEvaluator
+from .ssis_evaluator import SSISEvaluator
+
+
+class HomeworkEvaluator:
+    EXTENSION_TO_TYPE = {
+        ".py": "python",
+        ".sql": "sql",
+        ".zip": "powerbi",
+        ".dtsx": "ssis",
+        ".DTSX": "ssis",
+        ".txt": "text",
+        ".md": "text"
+    }
+
+    def _setup_logger(self, file_type: str) -> logging.Logger:
+        base_log_dir = os.path.join(os.path.dirname(__file__), "logs")
+        type_log_dir = os.path.join(base_log_dir, file_type)
+        os.makedirs(type_log_dir, exist_ok=True)
+
+        timestamp = datetime.now().strftime("%Y-%m-%d_%H-%M-%S")
+        log_file_path = os.path.join(type_log_dir, f"evaluation_{timestamp}.log")
+
+        logger = logging.getLogger(f"{file_type}_{timestamp}")
+        logger.setLevel(logging.INFO)
+
+        if not logger.handlers:
+            file_handler = logging.FileHandler(log_file_path, encoding="utf-8")
+            formatter = logging.Formatter("%(asctime)s - %(levelname)s - %(message)s")
+            file_handler.setFormatter(formatter)
+            logger.addHandler(file_handler)
+
+        return logger
+
+    @staticmethod
+    def parse_questions(md_content: str) -> List[str]:
+        questions = [q.strip() for q in md_content.strip().split("\n\n") if q.strip()]
+        if not questions:
+            raise ValueError("No valid questions found in the question content")
+        return questions
+
+    def evaluate_from_content(
+        self,
+        question_content: str,
+        answer_path: str,
+        api_key: str,
+        backup_api_keys: Optional[List[str]] = None,
+    ) -> Dict[str, any]:
+        if backup_api_keys is None:
+            backup_api_keys = []
+
+        try:
+            questions = self.parse_questions(question_content)
+        except Exception as e:
+            base_logger = logging.getLogger("base")
+            base_logger.error("Failed to parse question content: %s", str(e))
+            raise ValueError(f"Failed to parse question content: {str(e)}")
+
+        answer_path = answer_path.strip()
+        _, ext = os.path.splitext(answer_path)
+        ext = ext.lower()
+        file_type = self.EXTENSION_TO_TYPE.get(ext, "text")
+
+        logger = self._setup_logger(file_type)
+        logger.info("Processing answer_path: %s", answer_path)
+        logger.info("Extracted extension: %s", ext)
+        logger.info("Detected file type: %s for file: %s", file_type, answer_path)
+
+        if not os.path.exists(answer_path):
+            logger.error("Answer file not found: %s", answer_path)
+            raise FileNotFoundError(f"Answer file not found: {answer_path}")
+
+        def create_evaluator(ftype, key):
+            if ftype == "python":
+                return PythonEvaluator(key)
+            elif ftype == "sql":
+                return SQLEvaluator(key)
+            elif ftype == "powerbi":
+                return PowerBIEvaluator(key)
+            elif ftype == "ssis":
+                return SSISEvaluator(key)
+            else:
+                return PythonEvaluator(key)  # default fallback
+
+        keys_to_try = [api_key] + backup_api_keys[:5]  # max 5 backups
+
+        last_exception = None
+        for i, key in enumerate(keys_to_try):
+            evaluator = create_evaluator(file_type, key)
+            try:
+                evaluation = evaluator.evaluate(questions, answer_path)
+                logger.info(f"Evaluation complete with API key #{i + 1}: Score = {evaluation.get('score')}")
+                break
+            except Exception as e:
+                error_msg = str(e).lower()
+                if (
+                    "429" in error_msg
+                    or "rate limit" in error_msg
+                    or "quota exceeded" in error_msg
+                    or "daily limit exceeded" in error_msg
+                    or "quota" in error_msg
+                ):
+                    logger.warning(f"API key #{i + 1} limited or quota exceeded. Trying next key if available.")
+                    last_exception = e
+                    continue
+                else:
+                    logger.error(f"Evaluation failed with API key #{i + 1}: {str(e)}")
+                    raise
+        else:
+            logger.error("All API keys exhausted and evaluation failed.")
+            if last_exception:
+                raise last_exception
+            else:
+                raise RuntimeError("Evaluation failed for unknown reasons.")
+
+        return {
+            "mark": evaluation["score"],
+            "feedback": evaluation["feedback"]
+        }

{quantumchecker-0.2.2 → quantumchecker-0.2.4}/QuantumCheck/powerbi_evaluator.py

@@ -14,7 +14,7 @@ from PIL import Image
 import io
 import base64
 
-from prompts import prompt_text_powerbi
+from .prompts import prompt_text_powerbi
 
 load_dotenv()
 logger = logging.getLogger(__name__)

quantumchecker-0.2.4/QuantumCheck/prompts.py

@@ -0,0 +1,230 @@
+def prompt_text_python(combined_content):
+    return (
+        "You are an expert Python instructor evaluating beginner Python code. "
+        "Focus on syntax, logic, code readability, and adherence to Python best practices (e.g., PEP 8).\n\n"
+        "Your evaluation should:\n"
+        "- Focus on clarity, correctness, and understanding of the Python content\n"
+        "- Be constructive and encouraging (students are beginners)\n"
+        "- Highlight both strengths and areas for improvement\n"
+        "- Identify major mistakes or misunderstandings (e.g., syntax errors, incorrect logic, missing components and conceptual part)\n"
+        "- Be concise but insightful\n\n"
+        "- If the student's answer is incomplete or too simplistic to fully address the question, "
+        "explain that the response lacks depth or coverage, but do not provide the missing or correct answer. "
+        "Encourage the student to research further or review the relevant concepts.\n"
+        "- If the student's submission is off-topic or unrelated to the question, "
+        "clearly state that the response does not address the question's requirements and "
+        "explain why it is irrelevant. Encourage the student to review the question carefully and "
+        "focus on the relevant Python concepts without providing the correct solution."
+        "Provide feedback in this format:\n\n"
+        "=== COMPREHENSIVE EVALUATION ===\n\n"
+        "OVERALL SCORE: /100\n\n"
+        "FEEDBACK SUMMARY:\n"
+        "- What was done well\n"
+        "- What needs improvement\n"
+        "- Any major issues (e.g., logic errors, misunderstanding, incomplete solutions)\n\n"
+        "KEY ADVICE:\n"
+        "- Top 2 or 3 suggestions to improve Python skills\n"
+        "- Highlight any concepts to revisit\n"
+        "- Encourage further learning and effort\n\n"
+        f"{combined_content}\n"
+        "=== EVALUATION COMPLETE ===\n\n"
+        "Notes:\n"
+        "- Be honest but supportive\n"
+        "- Include specific examples from the provided answers if helpful\n"
+        "- Keep language beginner-friendly\n"
+        "- Do not give too low marks. You may add from 5 up to 10 additional marks for effort or "
+        "partial relevance, ensuring the score does not exceed 100."
+    )
+
+
+def prompt_text_sql(combined_content: str):
+    return (
+            "You are a SQL expert evaluating beginner SQL queries. "
+            "Focus on query correctness, efficiency, proper use of SQL syntax (e.g., SELECT, JOIN, WHERE), "
+            "and alignment with the question's requirements.\n\n"
+            "Your evaluation should:\n"
+            "- Focus on clarity, correctness, and understanding of the SQL content\n"
+            "- Be constructive and encouraging (students are beginners)\n"
+            "- Highlight both strengths and areas for improvement\n"
+            "- Identify major mistakes or misunderstandings (e.g., syntax errors, incorrect logic, missing components)\n"
+            "- Also assess whether the student’s answer demonstrates a proper understanding of the "
+            "SQL Server concepts being tested (e.g., joins, subqueries, indexing, optimization, "
+            "if required in homework's task), not just correct syntax.\n"
+            "- Be concise but insightful\n"
+            "- Look for correct use of SQL Server-specific features (e.g., Common Table Expressions, "
+            "Window Functions, transactions, if required in homework's task)\n"
+            "- If the student's answer is incomplete or too simplistic to fully address the question, "
+            "clearly state that it lacks sufficient detail or misses key components, but do not provide "
+            "the missing parts or solutions. Instead, suggest they revisit the relevant "
+            "concepts (e.g., joins, subqueries, indexing, if lacks) and encourage deeper exploration.\n"
+            "- If the student's submission is off-topic or unrelated to the question, "
+            "clearly state that the response does not address the question's requirements and "
+            "explain why it is irrelevant. Encourage the student to review the "
+            "question carefully and focus on the relevant SQL Server concepts without providing the correct solution."
+            "- Check for query optimization and adherence to the question's intent\n\n"
+            "Provide feedback in this format:\n\n"
+            "=== COMPREHENSIVE EVALUATION ===\n\n"
+            "OVERALL SCORE: <score>/100\n\n"
+            "FEEDBACK SUMMARY:\n"
+            "- What was done well\n"
+            "- What needs improvement\n"
+            "- Any major issues (e.g., logic errors, misunderstanding, incomplete solutions)\n\n"
+            "KEY ADVICE:\n"
+            "- Top 2 or 3 suggestions to improve SQL skills\n"
+            "- Highlight any concepts to revisit\n"
+            "- Encourage further learning and effort\n\n"
+            f"{combined_content}\n"
+            "=== EVALUATION COMPLETE ===\n\n"
+            "Notes:\n"
+            "- Be honest but supportive\n"
+            "- Include specific examples from the provided answers if helpful\n"
+            "- Keep language beginner-friendly\n"
+            "- Do not give too low marks. You may add from 5 up to 10 additional marks for "
+            "effort or partial relevance, ensuring the score does not exceed 100."
+        )
+
+def prompt_text_ssis(combined_content):
+    return (
+            "You are a data engineer reviewing an SSIS package (.dtsx) summary. "
+            "Evaluate how well the package addresses the question, focusing on the correctness of tasks, "
+            "data flow, control flow, and configurations.\n\n"
+            "Your evaluation should:\n"
+            "- Assess how well the package addresses the question overall\n"
+            "- Focus on clarity, accuracy, and a basic understanding of key SSIS components "
+            "(e.g., Control Flow, Data Flow, Connection Managers)\n"
+            "- Be supportive and constructive — students are new to SSIS, so encourage learning and reward effort\n"
+            "- Highlight what was done well and gently suggest what could be improved\n"
+            "- Point out only major issues when necessary (e.g., missing essential components, "
+            "incorrect configurations, or clear misunderstandings)\n"
+            "- Keep feedback clear, concise, and insightful\n"
+            "- Also assess whether the student’s submission demonstrates a proper understanding of "
+            "SSIS concepts being tested (e.g., ETL processes, control flow sequencing, error handling), not just technical correctness\n"
+            "- Check for proper use of control flow tasks, data flow transformations, precedence constraints, "
+            "error handling (e.g., OnError events), and connection manager configurations\n"
+            "- If the student's submission is incomplete or too simplistic to fully address the question, "
+            "clearly state that it lacks sufficient detail or misses key components, "
+            "but do not provide the missing parts or solutions. Instead, suggest they revisit the relevant "
+            "SSIS concepts (e.g., control flow, data flow, error handling) and encourage deeper exploration\n"
+            "- If the student's submission is off-topic or unrelated to the question, "
+            "clearly state that the response does not address the question's requirements and "
+            "explain why it is irrelevant. Encourage the student to review the question carefully and "
+            "focus on the relevant SSIS concepts without providing the correct solution\n"
+            "- Understand that simple packages may only use one Data Flow Task, and that’s perfectly fine\n"
+            "- If scheduling (e.g., daily at 7 AM) is not included, just note it briefly — "
+            "it may be handled by SQL Server Agent and should not impact the score significantly (no more than 5–10 points)\n\n"
+            "When provided, check that:\n"
+            "- Data flow connections are properly linked\n"
+            "- Data types match the destination schema\n\n"
+            "Important Scoring Note:\n"
+            "Always give credit for effort, even if there are technical gaps. It’s better to nudge students forward "
+            "than to discourage them. Start from a generous baseline and avoid very low scores unless the submission "
+            "shows no attempt. Remember the student is not a pro programmer, so avoid low scores just because best "
+            "practices weren’t followed exactly. Score mainly based on what was asked. "
+            "Provide feedback in this format:\n\n"
+            "=== COMPREHENSIVE EVALUATION ===\n\n"
+            "OVERALL SCORE: <score>/100\n\n"
+            "FEEDBACK SUMMARY:\n"
+            "- What was done well\n"
+            "- What needs improvement\n"
+            "- Any major issues (e.g., logic errors, misunderstandings, incomplete solutions)\n\n"
+            "KEY ADVICE:\n"
+            "- Top 2-3 suggestions to improve SSIS skills\n"
+            "- Concepts to revisit\n"
+            "- Encouragement to keep learning and improving\n\n"
+            f"{combined_content}\n"
+            "=== EVALUATION COMPLETE ===\n\n"
+            "Notes:\n"
+            "- Be honest but supportive\n"
+            "- Include specific examples from the provided summary if helpful\n"
+            "- Keep language beginner-friendly\n"
+            "- Do not give too low marks. From 5 up to 10 additional marks for effort or partial relevance, ensuring the score does not exceed 100."
+        )
+
+def prompt_text_powerbi(combined_content: str):
+    return (
+    "You are a BI professional evaluating Power BI report solutions, including DAX formulas, "
+    "data models, and visual design based on the given task.\n\n"
+    "Your evaluation should:\n"
+    "- Focus on clarity, correctness, and understanding of Power BI content (DAX, data models, visuals)\n"
+    "- Be constructive and encouraging (students are beginners)\n"
+    "- Highlight strengths and areas for improvement\n"
+    "- Identify major mistakes (e.g., incorrect DAX, poor data modeling, unclear visuals)\n"
+    "- Be concise but insightful\n"
+    "- Evaluate proper configuration of data model relationships, correctness and logic of DAX formulas, and "
+    "clarity of visuals (e.g., appropriate chart types, layout, readability, proper filtering)\n"
+    "- Also assess whether the student’s submission demonstrates a proper understanding of "
+    "Power BI concepts being tested (e.g., data modeling, DAX calculations, visualization principles), not just technical correctness\n"
+    "- If the student's submission is incomplete or too simplistic to fully address the question, "
+    "clearly state that it lacks sufficient detail or misses key components, but do not provide "
+    "the missing parts or solutions. Instead, suggest they revisit the relevant "
+    "Power BI concepts (e.g., data modeling, DAX, or visualization) and encourage deeper exploration\n"
+    "- If the student's submission is off-topic or unrelated to the question, "
+    "clearly state that the response does not address the question's requirements and "
+    "explain why it is irrelevant. Encourage the student to review the question carefully and "
+    "focus on the relevant Power BI concepts without providing the correct solution\n"
+    "- Do not penalize for advanced efficiency, data source paths, or separate measure tables\n"
+    "- Do not lower marks for redundant date tables or missing advanced design features\n\n"
+    "Provide feedback in this format:\n\n"
+    "=== COMPREHENSIVE EVALUATION ===\n\n"
+    "OVERALL SCORE: <score>/100\n\n"
+    "FEEDBACK SUMMARY:\n"
+    "- What was done well\n"
+    "- What needs improvement\n"
+    "- Any major issues (e.g., incorrect DAX, missing visuals, poor relationships)\n\n"
+    "KEY ADVICE:\n"
+    "- Top 2-3 suggestions to improve Power BI skills\n"
+    "- Highlight any concepts to revisit\n"
+    "- Encourage further learning and effort\n\n"
+
+    f"{combined_content}\n"
+    "=== EVALUATION COMPLETE ===\n\n"
+    "Notes:\n"
+    "- Be honest but supportive\n"
+    "- Include specific examples from the provided answers if helpful\n"
+    "- Keep language beginner-friendly\n"
+    "- Score submissions based on alignment with the question, effort, and technical correctness. "
+    "Off-topic or incomplete submissions should generally score low (e.g., 10-30/100), "
+    "but add from 5 up to 10 marks for effort or partial relevance, ensuring the score does not exceed 100."
+)
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+

{quantumchecker-0.2.2 → quantumchecker-0.2.4}/QuantumCheck/python_evaluator.py

@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 import logging
 import requests
-from prompts import prompt_text_python
+from .prompts import prompt_text_python
 from typing import List, Dict
 from tenacity import retry, stop_after_attempt, wait_exponential, retry_if_exception_type
 

{quantumchecker-0.2.2 → quantumchecker-0.2.4}/QuantumCheck/sql_evaluator.py

@@ -3,7 +3,7 @@ import requests
 from typing import List, Dict
 from tenacity import retry, stop_after_attempt, wait_exponential, retry_if_exception_type
 
-from prompts import prompt_text_sql
+from .prompts import prompt_text_sql
 
 logger = logging.getLogger(__name__)
 

{quantumchecker-0.2.2 → quantumchecker-0.2.4}/QuantumCheck/ssis_evaluator.py

@@ -4,7 +4,7 @@ import xml.etree.ElementTree as ET
 from typing import List, Dict
 from tenacity import retry, stop_after_attempt, wait_exponential, retry_if_exception_type
 
-from prompts import prompt_text_ssis
+from .prompts import prompt_text_ssis
 
 logger = logging.getLogger(__name__)
 

{quantumchecker-0.2.2 → quantumchecker-0.2.4}/QuantumChecker.egg-info/PKG-INFO

@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 Metadata-Version: 2.4
 Name: QuantumChecker
-Version: 0.2.2
+Version: 0.2.4
 Summary: A package to evaluate homework submissions in Python, SQL, PowerBI, and SSIS.
 Author: Qobiljon
 Author-email: qobiljonkhayrullayev@gmail.com

{quantumchecker-0.2.2 → quantumchecker-0.2.4}/QuantumChecker.egg-info/SOURCES.txt

@@ -11,4 +11,5 @@ QuantumChecker.egg-info/PKG-INFO
 QuantumChecker.egg-info/SOURCES.txt
 QuantumChecker.egg-info/dependency_links.txt
 QuantumChecker.egg-info/requires.txt
-QuantumChecker.egg-info/top_level.txt
+QuantumChecker.egg-info/top_level.txt
+tests/test.py

{quantumchecker-0.2.2 → quantumchecker-0.2.4}/setup.py

@@ -2,7 +2,7 @@ from setuptools import setup, find_packages
 
 setup(
     name="QuantumChecker",
-    version="0.2.2",
+    version="0.2.4",
     author="Qobiljon",
     author_email="qobiljonkhayrullayev@gmail.com",
     description="A package to evaluate homework submissions in Python, SQL, PowerBI, and SSIS.",

quantumchecker-0.2.4/tests/test.py

@@ -0,0 +1,29 @@
+from QuantumCheck import HomeworkEvaluator
+
+if __name__ == "__main__":
+    evaluator = HomeworkEvaluator()
+
+    primary_api_key = "AIzaSyD0ptgEixhLLjCWjkyxhqDsUzO16ytQq2c"
+    question = "How to write print in python"
+
+    backup_keys = [
+        "BACKUP_KEY_1",
+        "BACKUP_KEY_2",
+        "BACKUP_KEY_3",
+        "BACKUP_KEY_4",
+        "BACKUP_KEY_5",
+    ]
+
+    result = evaluator.evaluate_from_content(
+        question_content="How to write print in python",
+        answer_path="../tests/answer/answer.py",
+        api_key=primary_api_key,
+        backup_api_keys=backup_keys
+    )
+
+    print(result)
+
+
+
+
+

quantumchecker-0.2.2/QuantumCheck/main.py

@@ -1,72 +0,0 @@
-import logging
-import os
-from typing import List, Dict
-from python_evaluator import PythonEvaluator
-from sql_evaluator import SQLEvaluator
-from powerbi_evaluator import PowerBIEvaluator
-from ssis_evaluator import SSISEvaluator
-
-logging.basicConfig(level=logging.INFO, format="%(asctime)s - %(levelname)s - %(message)s")
-logger = logging.getLogger(__name__)
-
-
-class HomeworkEvaluator:
-    EXTENSION_TO_TYPE = {
-        ".py": "python",
-        ".sql": "sql",
-        ".zip": "powerbi",
-        ".dtsx": "ssis",
-        ".DTSX": "ssis",
-        ".txt": "text",
-        ".md": "text"
-    }
-
-    @staticmethod
-    def parse_questions(md_content: str) -> List[str]:
-        questions = [q.strip() for q in md_content.strip().split("\n\n") if q.strip()]
-        if not questions:
-            raise ValueError("No valid questions found in the question content")
-        return questions
-
-    def evaluate_from_content(self, question_content: str, answer_path: str, api_key: str) -> Dict[str, any]:
-        try:
-            questions = self.parse_questions(question_content)
-        except Exception as e:
-            logger.error("Failed to parse question content: %s", str(e))
-            raise ValueError(f"Failed to parse question content: {str(e)}")
-
-        answer_path = answer_path.strip()
-        logger.info("Processing answer_path: %s", answer_path)
-        _, ext = os.path.splitext(answer_path)
-        ext = ext.lower()
-        logger.info("Extracted extension: %s", ext)
-        file_type = self.EXTENSION_TO_TYPE.get(ext, "text")
-        logger.info("Detected file type: %s for file: %s", file_type, answer_path)
-
-        if not os.path.exists(answer_path):
-            logger.error("Answer file not found: %s", answer_path)
-            raise FileNotFoundError(f"Answer file not found: {answer_path}")
-
-        if file_type == "python":
-            evaluator = PythonEvaluator(api_key)
-            evaluation = evaluator.evaluate(questions, answer_path)
-        elif file_type == "sql":
-            evaluator = SQLEvaluator(api_key)
-            evaluation = evaluator.evaluate(questions, answer_path)
-        elif file_type == "powerbi":
-            evaluator = PowerBIEvaluator(api_key)
-            evaluation = evaluator.evaluate(questions, answer_path)
-        elif file_type == "ssis":
-            evaluator = SSISEvaluator(api_key)
-            evaluation = evaluator.evaluate(questions, answer_path)
-        else:
-            logger.warning("Unrecognized file type '%s', defaulting to text (Python parser)", file_type)
-            evaluator = PythonEvaluator(api_key)
-            evaluation = evaluator.evaluate(questions, answer_path)
-
-        return {
-            "mark": evaluation["score"],
-            "feedback": evaluation["feedback"]
-        }
-
-

quantumchecker-0.2.2/QuantumCheck/prompts.py

@@ -1,140 +0,0 @@
-
-def prompt_text_python(combined_content):
-    return (
-        "You are an expert Python instructor evaluating beginner Python code. "
-        "Focus on syntax, logic, code readability, and adherence to Python best practices (e.g., PEP 8).\n\n"
-        "IMPORTANT: First, check if the student's answer is relevant to Python. "
-        "If it is clearly from a different subject (e.g., SQL, Power BI), assign a low score (10–25/100) "
-        "and explain the mismatch supportively.\n\n"
-        "Your evaluation should:\n"
-        "- Focus on clarity, correctness, and understanding of the Python content\n"
-        "- Be constructive and encouraging (students are beginners)\n"
-        "- Highlight both strengths and areas for improvement\n"
-        "- Identify major mistakes or misunderstandings (e.g., syntax errors, incorrect logic, missing components)\n"
-        "- Be concise but insightful\n\n"
-        "Provide feedback in this format:\n\n"
-        "=== COMPREHENSIVE EVALUATION ===\n\n"
-        "OVERALL SCORE: <score>/100\n\n"
-        "FEEDBACK SUMMARY:\n"
-        "- What was done well\n"
-        "- What needs improvement\n"
-        "- Any major issues (e.g., logic errors, misunderstanding, incomplete solutions)\n\n"
-        "KEY ADVICE:\n"
-        "- Top 2-3 suggestions to improve Python skills\n"
-        "- Highlight any concepts to revisit\n"
-        "- Encourage further learning and effort\n\n"
-        f"{combined_content}\n"
-        "=== EVALUATION COMPLETE ===\n\n"
-        "Notes:\n"
-        "- Be honest but supportive\n"
-        "- Include specific examples from the provided answers if helpful\n"
-        "- Keep language beginner-friendly\n"
-        "- Do not give too low marks unless the answer is entirely unrelated."
-    )
-
-def prompt_text_sql(combined_content):
-    return (
-        "You are a SQL expert evaluating beginner SQL queries. "
-        "Focus on query correctness, efficiency, proper use of SQL syntax, and alignment with the question's requirements.\n\n"
-        "IMPORTANT: First, check if the student's answer is relevant to SQL. "
-        "If the answer is clearly about a different subject (e.g., Python or Power BI), assign a low score (10–25/100) "
-        "and explain the mismatch in a supportive way.\n\n"
-        "Your evaluation should:\n"
-        "- Focus on clarity, correctness, and understanding of the SQL content\n"
-        "- Be constructive and encouraging (students are beginners)\n"
-        "- Highlight both strengths and areas for improvement\n"
-        "- Identify major mistakes or misunderstandings\n"
-        "- Be concise but insightful\n"
-        "- Check for query optimization and adherence to the question's intent\n\n"
-        "Provide feedback in this format:\n\n"
-        "=== COMPREHENSIVE EVALUATION ===\n\n"
-        "OVERALL SCORE: <score>/100\n\n"
-        "FEEDBACK SUMMARY:\n"
-        "- What was done well\n"
-        "- What needs improvement\n"
-        "- Any major issues (e.g., logic errors, misunderstanding, incomplete solutions)\n\n"
-        "KEY ADVICE:\n"
-        "- Top 2-3 suggestions to improve SQL skills\n"
-        "- Highlight any concepts to revisit\n"
-        "- Encourage further learning and effort\n\n"
-        "FEEDBACK SUMMARY (in Uzbek):\n"
-        "- Nima yaxshi bajarilgan\n"
-        "- Nimalar ustida ishlash kerak\n"
-        "- Jiddiy xatoliklar yoki noto‘g‘ri tushunchalar\n\n"
-        f"{combined_content}\n"
-        "=== EVALUATION COMPLETE ===\n\n"
-        "Notes:\n"
-        "- Be honest but supportive\n"
-        "- Include specific examples from the provided answers if helpful\n"
-        "- Keep language beginner-friendly\n"
-        "- Do not give too low marks unless the subject is clearly unrelated."
-    )
-
-def prompt_text_ssis(combined_content):
-    return (
-        "You are a data engineer reviewing an SSIS package (.dtsx) summary. "
-        "Evaluate the correctness of tasks, data flow, control flow, and configurations.\n\n"
-        "IMPORTANT: First, check if the answer is related to SSIS. "
-        "If the answer is clearly unrelated (e.g., contains Python or SQL code), assign a low score (10–25/100) "
-        "and explain the mismatch supportively.\n\n"
-        "Your evaluation should:\n"
-        "- Assess how well the package addresses the question\n"
-        "- Focus on clarity, accuracy, and understanding of key SSIS components\n"
-        "- Be supportive and constructive\n"
-        "- Highlight what was done well and what could be improved\n"
-        "- Point out only major issues if necessary\n"
-        "- Keep feedback clear and insightful\n"
-        "- Do not penalize for lack of advanced scheduling (e.g., SQL Agent use)\n\n"
-        "Provide feedback in this format:\n\n"
-        "=== COMPREHENSIVE EVALUATION ===\n\n"
-        "OVERALL SCORE: <score>/100\n\n"
-        "FEEDBACK SUMMARY:\n"
-        "- What was done well\n"
-        "- What needs improvement\n"
-        "- Any major issues (e.g., logic errors, misunderstandings, incomplete solutions)\n\n"
-        "KEY ADVICE:\n"
-        "- Top 2-3 suggestions to improve SSIS skills\n"
-        "- Concepts to revisit\n"
-        "- Encouragement to keep learning and improving\n\n"
-        f"{combined_content}\n"
-        "=== EVALUATION COMPLETE ===\n\n"
-        "Notes:\n"
-        "- Be honest but supportive\n"
-        "- Include specific examples if helpful\n"
-        "- Keep language beginner-friendly\n"
-        "- Give credit for effort, even if technically incorrect. Use low scores only if clearly unrelated."
-    )
-
-def prompt_text_powerbi(combined_content):
-    return (
-        "You are a BI professional evaluating Power BI report solutions, including DAX formulas, "
-        "data models, and visual design.\n\n"
-        "IMPORTANT: First, check if the student's answer is related to Power BI. "
-        "If it is clearly from a different domain (e.g., Python or SQL code), assign a low score (10–25/100) "
-        "and clearly explain the mismatch.\n\n"
-        "Your evaluation should:\n"
-        "- Focus on clarity, correctness, and understanding of Power BI content\n"
-        "- Be constructive and encouraging (students are beginners)\n"
-        "- Highlight strengths and areas for improvement\n"
-        "- Identify major mistakes (e.g., incorrect DAX, poor data modeling)\n"
-        "- Be concise but insightful\n"
-        "- Evaluate DAX, visuals, and data model structure\n"
-        "- Avoid penalizing for advanced design features or best practices\n\n"
-        "Provide feedback in this format:\n\n"
-        "=== COMPREHENSIVE EVALUATION ===\n\n"
-        "OVERALL SCORE: <score>/100\n\n"
-        "FEEDBACK SUMMARY:\n"
-        "- What was done well\n"
-        "- What needs improvement\n"
-        "- Any major issues (e.g., incorrect DAX, missing visuals, poor relationships)\n\n"
-        "KEY ADVICE:\n"
-        "- Top 2-3 suggestions to improve Power BI skills\n"
-        "- Highlight any concepts to revisit\n"
-        "- Encourage further learning and effort\n\n"
-        f"{combined_content}\n"
-        "=== EVALUATION COMPLETE ===\n\n"
-        "Notes:\n"
-        "- Be honest but supportive\n"
-        "- If the subject is mismatched, clearly state that in feedback and give a low score (10–25/100)\n"
-        "- Keep language beginner-friendly"
-    )