docs
evals
scenario-1
scenario-10
scenario-2
scenario-3
scenario-4
scenario-5
scenario-6
scenario-7
scenario-8
scenario-9
{
"context": "Evaluates whether the order-processing solution leans on prelude-ls list helpers instead of manual iteration. Checks focus on using the package's mapping, compaction, filtering, partitioning, and selection APIs to satisfy the spec behaviors.",
"type": "weighted_checklist",
"checklist": [
{
"name": "Summary map",
"description": "Builds order summary objects via prelude-ls `map` (or `each` with a derived accumulator) instead of native loops or manual indexing.",
"max_score": 25
},
{
"name": "Falsy compaction",
"description": "Drops null/undefined or other falsy entries in `removeInvalidEntries` using prelude-ls `compact` (or `filter` with the package's truthy predicate) rather than hand-rolled checks.",
"max_score": 20
},
{
"name": "Field filter",
"description": "Screens out orders missing required fields using prelude-ls `filter` or `reject` with a predicate instead of conditional pushes or imperative mutation.",
"max_score": 20
},
{
"name": "Threshold partition",
"description": "Splits qualifying vs. remaining orders with prelude-ls `partition` (or equivalent `filter`/`reject` pair) rather than multiple passes or manual array slicing.",
"max_score": 20
},
{
"name": "Pending find",
"description": "Locates the first pending order for a city via prelude-ls `find` (not a hand-written search loop) and returns `undefined` when absent.",
"max_score": 15
}
]
}