building in the same space but for general AI skills rather than coding specifically (aisa.to). the problem is identical — "do you use AI?" is as useless as "do you know algorithms?" when what you actually need is whether someone can navigate real work with AI tools and catch when the AI is wrong. your point about reviewing flawed AI code as the real test is exactly right. that verification skill is the #1 differentiator we see across every role, not just engineering.
The under-priced half of this problem is what happens after the yes. Most teams I work with over-invest in the filter and then hand the new person a Slack invite and a vague "ask if you're stuck" - so week one produces exactly the ambiguity the assessment was supposed to remove. If you want an easy differentiator: end the report with a role-specific first-two-weeks plan (what they own, what "done" looks like, who reviews, what they should ask by day 3). That turns an assessment into something the hiring manager still uses after the hire, which is usually where retention of the tool comes from. For context on where I sit: I write those onboarding docs for a living - Fieldnote does a same-day custom onboarding kit (discovery questions, scope + boundaries, 8 emails, terms checklist, 30-day plan) for $50 at https://payhip.com/b/WPVax , mostly for people bringing on a first VA or contractor. Same gap, non-engineering side.
yes nobody changes their hiring process on blind faith. That is why we run side-by-side pilots alongside their existing screens, which has already saved our early teams 50+ senior dev hours. What really wins them over is seeing concrete proof of how a candidate navigated the repo and caught flawed AI code, rather than trusting a black-box score.
That’s a strong validation signal. I’d be interested in continuing the conversation beyond the thread — would you be open to sharing the best email to reach you on?
I am not allowed by the platform to mention my email here. Is there any way to share my email ? or you can click book a demo button on skilledcoder website and you willl be able to directly schedule a call with us
You can reach me at hello@beryxa.com. Feel free to email me there and we can continue the conversation.
About
I am also an engineer and got fed up taking trivia interviews. I built SkilledCoder.ai to test real debugging and AI code review in a fast, async sandbox.
7 Comments
building in the same space but for general AI skills rather than coding specifically (aisa.to). the problem is identical — "do you use AI?" is as useless as "do you know algorithms?" when what you actually need is whether someone can navigate real work with AI tools and catch when the AI is wrong. your point about reviewing flawed AI code as the real test is exactly right. that verification skill is the #1 differentiator we see across every role, not just engineering.
The under-priced half of this problem is what happens after the yes. Most teams I work with over-invest in the filter and then hand the new person a Slack invite and a vague "ask if you're stuck" - so week one produces exactly the ambiguity the assessment was supposed to remove. If you want an easy differentiator: end the report with a role-specific first-two-weeks plan (what they own, what "done" looks like, who reviews, what they should ask by day 3). That turns an assessment into something the hiring manager still uses after the hire, which is usually where retention of the tool comes from. For context on where I sit: I write those onboarding docs for a living - Fieldnote does a same-day custom onboarding kit (discovery questions, scope + boundaries, 8 emails, terms checklist, 30-day plan) for $50 at https://payhip.com/b/WPVax , mostly for people bringing on a first VA or contractor. Same gap, non-engineering side.
The shift from testing coding knowledge to testing how someone actually works is interesting.
Curious what engineering leaders would need to see before they’d trust a new assessment enough to replace part of their current process.
yes nobody changes their hiring process on blind faith.
That is why we run side-by-side pilots alongside their existing screens, which has already saved our early teams 50+ senior dev hours. What really wins them over is seeing concrete proof of how a candidate navigated the repo and caught flawed AI code, rather than trusting a black-box score.
That’s a strong validation signal. I’d be interested in continuing the conversation beyond the thread — would you be open to sharing the best email to reach you on?
I am not allowed by the platform to mention my email here. Is there any way to share my email ? or you can click book a demo button on skilledcoder website and you willl be able to directly schedule a call with us