The interview process was generally smooth, and the interviewers were courteous throughout. The process consisted of four rounds: * Coding / Pseudocode * System Design * Refactoring Legacy Code * Behavioral Interview However, I felt that the evaluation approach followed a very specific pattern of expected answers. If a candidate’s response did not closely align with that pattern, it seemed to negatively impact the outcome. For example, during the system design round, presenting an alternative yet valid solution did not appear to be well received if it differed from the interviewers’ expected approach. Another observation was that, in some cases, a junior engineer led the discussion alongside a senior engineer when interviewing candidates for senior-level roles. At times, this dynamic made the conversation feel less collaborative and more evaluative, rather than an exchange between experienced peers. Additionally, there was significant focus on minor implementation details. Small issues, such as a datatype mismatch or missing validation were highlighted heavily, even when the broader intent was to demonstrate problem-solving ability and modern engineering practices. In the current AI-assisted development era, it felt that the evaluation could have placed more emphasis on architectural thinking, design trade-offs, and overall engineering judgment. During the system design round specifically, the discussion appeared to center strongly on a single preferred solution. This made it challenging to explore or defend alternative designs, even when they were reasonable and technically sound. Overall, while the process itself was organized and the interviewers were professional, the evaluation criteria seemed quite rigid and focused on a predefined playbook rather than encouraging broader technical discussion or diverse solution approaches. I hope for future candidates they look at the overall picture and take a good call rather rejecting people for silly reasons and I got my feedback from the recruiter that, I was not selected and the above reasons were given to me and I did not proactively catch these minor things!

1. Recruiter screen 2. API design with 2 engineers The interview was ok but the interviewers were rushing me. One of them were very friendly. The other guy cut off the interview at time which was super rude. I would not interview here again. Based on my conversations, I didn't feel like it's a good place to work.