Engineer tests now bait AI tools with plausible-but-wrong answers to grade verification skills
l4rz · x · 2026-09-25
The author outlines an AI-era engineer assessment design: tools are allowed and expected, but every exercise is built so the tool's first answer is plausible yet wrong — e.g., a bad runbook step the AI will happily execute, or a correct-looking but stale env variable name.
The evaluation thus shifts from typing to verification and ownership: can candidates read code they didn't write, test it, and spot a planted bug in an AI-generated pull request, or execute a runbook deployment containing one wrong step?
More from coding & agent
- SkillRL (NeurIPS 2026): 7B model beats GPT-4o by 41% via recursive skill evolution — cihangxie · 2026-09-25
- Weave Code Max offers $50+ of coding model usage for $10/month — ycombinator · 2026-09-25
- Mad science: Jev autopilot lands a plane in a terminal flight simulator — bilawalsidhu · 2026-09-25
- Greptile reviewed 395K PRs at NVIDIA, cutting merge time from 24h to 6h — ycombinator · 2026-09-25
- Open-source Claude skill turns one prompt into stop-motion claymation films in Blender — angrypenguinPNG · 2026-09-25
- Descript launches MCP to edit video from inside Claude, ChatGPT, and Codex — descript · 2026-09-25