1 min lesson
Self-scorecard and final gaps
Use "Use these exercises to find a preparation gap while there is still time to fix it" to describe the practical rule.
Step 1 of 3
Use these exercises to find a preparation gap while there is still time to fix it. They cover role-relevant skills, but they do not claim to reproduce every unpublished technical or onsite activity.
Treat the rubric as a gap finder, not a score to admire. Mark the weakest proof, turn it into one practice rep and keep the artifact you would show an interviewer.
Rate yourself 1–5 on each dimension below from the recordings you just made, not from memory. Treat anything under 3 as your preparation priority and revise the list when recruiting confirms the current format.
Learn more
Advanced table
Score from the recording
- Dimension
- Coding under constraints
- What a 5 looks like
- Correct, clear editor primitive using only the tools confirmed for the round
- Source exercise
- Section 2
- Dimension
- AI judgment, when allowed
- What a 5 looks like
- Review, test and reject bad output while defending every kept line
- Source exercise
- Sections 2 & 4
- Dimension
- AI-systems design
- What a 5 looks like
- Latency, cost, eval and failure modes scoped and defended
- Source exercise
- Section 3
- Dimension
- End-to-end build
- What a 5 looks like
- Working vertical from a small practice brief, with cuts named
- Source exercise
- Section 4
- Dimension
- Product taste
- What a 5 looks like
- An invented opinion on what to build, defensible under pushback
- Source exercise
- Sections 3 & 4
- Dimension
- Mission & team values
- What a 5 looks like
- Specific why-Cursor, clear ownership and evidence-led discussion
- Source exercise
- Sections 1 & 5
| Dimension | What a 5 looks like | Source exercise |
|---|---|---|
| Coding under constraints | Correct, clear editor primitive using only the tools confirmed for the round | Section 2 |
| AI judgment, when allowed | Review, test and reject bad output while defending every kept line | Sections 2 & 4 |
| AI-systems design | Latency, cost, eval and failure modes scoped and defended | Section 3 |
| End-to-end build | Working vertical from a small practice brief, with cuts named | Section 4 |
| Product taste | An invented opinion on what to build, defensible under pushback | Sections 3 & 4 |
| Mission & team values | Specific why-Cursor, clear ownership and evidence-led discussion | Sections 1 & 5 |
Score from the recording. Your lowest row is the next preparation priority.