Evaluate how candidates code with AI.

Candidates solve a coding task in the browser with an AI assistant, and you get a report on how they worked.

Get an access code
The candidate’s page: the AI assistant’s answer with a code sample, the prompt box, the file tree, the editor and a test run in the terminal. Sample data.
  1. 1 / 4The AI assistantThe candidate picks from 290+ AI models and prompts the assistant while coding.
  2. 2 / 4The AI budgetEvery interview has a set AI budget. The candidate decides how to spend it.
  3. 3 / 4The terminal and testsA real terminal to run the tests. Our own tests grade the work after the candidate submits.
  4. 4 / 4The editorEvery prompt and edit is recorded, so you see how the candidate got there.
  • AI assistant · 290+ models
  • A set AI budget
  • Their terminal and the tests
  • Every prompt and edit recorded
A demo session with sample data.

A set AI budget and 290+ AI models to choose from. How the candidate spends it on planning, prompting, coding and debugging is up to them, and we mark the whole workflow.

How a score is made

A binary marking scheme.

Every check in each category passes or fails. Drag or type to set how much each category weighs.

Sample candidate72

  • Correctness
  • Code quality
  • AI process
  • Efficiency

The prompt review

How they Prompted

After the session, we review the candidate’s prompts and write short observations, each quoting a prompt or a recorded step. Advisory, never a score.

Prompting reviewSample
  • StrengthT1 Asked for the change and its constraint together; the proposal kept the public signature.Add a token bucket per API key in limiter.py. Keep the public signature.
  • ConcernT4 Asked to fix the tests without the failing output; the next two proposals missed.fix the failing tests
Our review of the candidate’s prompts. Not a score.

Hire for how engineers code with AI.

We’re onboarding our first customers. Companies join with an access code from the founders.

Demos are arranged directly with the founders.