2 min lesson
The automation / tooling round
Use "The automation / tooling round" to tell the two cases apart, then say what tips the choice.
Step 1 of 3
The automation / tooling roundfix the class, not the ticket
Cursor wants TSEs who build the automations that scale support. You'll likely design or lightly build something that removes toil: a triage bot, a log parser, a macro or an LLM-assisted draft. Bring a concrete example of a tool you've shipped that killed repetitive work, with the before/after.
Interactive diagram. Tab through its regions; each focused region shows its detail in the panel below.
Both resolve the user; only one shows the engineering-flavored support Cursor is hiring for.
Learn more
Full explanation
A tiny log parser that turns a class of tickets into one signal
import re, sys
# Class of problem: "requests time out" tickets. Parse the user's pasted log
# and tell support which known failure mode it is, instead of reading by hand.
PATTERNS = {
"proxy_block": r"ETIMEDOUT.*api2\.cursor\.sh",
"auth_expired": r"401|token expired",
"rate_limited": r"429|rate limit",
}
def classify(log: str) -> str:
for label, pat in PATTERNS.items():
if re.search(pat, log, re.I):
return label
return "unknown_needs_human"
if __name__ == "__main__":
print(classify(sys.stdin.read()))When they hand you a single hard ticket, answer it and then zoom out: "This is the third proxy-timeout pattern this week, so I'd ship a log classifier that auto-tags these and a doc that lets the user self-serve." Closing the ticket shows competence. Killing the class of ticket shows the engineering-flavored support Cursor is actually hiring for.
QThe automation round gives you one recurring support problem. What separates a strong answer from a merely competent one?