Real Interview Experiences
Learn what to expect directly from candidates and interviewers who've been through it.
Interviewed recently? Share your experience to try it free, or become a member for full access.
“This was an online phychometry test so not real depth tested. More of behavioral traits and you have to choose and say which of the 2 options you more closely associate with.”
“After the online assessment, I got three rounds of interview back to back in one day. The technical question is a simplified version of a hard LeetCode question. The interviewer did not ask me to optimize my answer to use tries, which I believe is the most efficient solution. Instead, I completed the brute force DFS / BFS solution only and the interviewer was satisfied. I was asked to explain my code in depth though, talking through how recursion works and how iterative variations are usually more efficient since it does not include the function call stack overhead. I was grilled hard in the behavioral interview, where I was asked multiple questions. From my experience, the interviewer expected each answer to hit multiple leadership principles.”
“Till now it went well. Let me see feedback. All the rounds were very much aligned to leadership principles. Prepare answers in STAR format and try not to tell any details where you have not worked in depth. ”
“What went well: The technical evaluation was refreshingly practical and closely mirrored real-world software engineering rather than abstract competitive programming puzzles. The coding sessions focused heavily on clean code architecture, defensive programming, edge-case handling, and reasoning through system performance trade-offs. The interviewers actively engaged as collaborative peers, providing helpful hints when exploring complex design decisions. What didn’t go well: Time management during the system design/ML infrastructure round was tight. Spending too much time in the opening minutes clarifying deep architectural assumptions meant rushing through the observability, rate-limiting, and fault-tolerance sections near the end.”
“this was mostly about understanding your process and how u act in different situations and how well do u understand things ”
“The overall interview process was more rigorous than anything I had experienced at other large companies. The recruiter was clear, responsive, and helpful in explaining what to expect, which allowed me to prepare effectively. The interviewers were professional, and the questions gave me a good opportunity to demonstrate my experience through real examples. However, some questions felt repetitive across the different rounds, and a few follow-up questions were more detailed than I expected. Overall, it was a challenging but well-structured and positive experience.”
“The process was pretty clear and straitforward. As long as coding skill is well prepared. You should be fine.”
“It's tougher and more in-depth on the technical aspect. Expect complex examples.”
“There were a lot of probing questions that followed after each question. One good thing was that the hiring manager was pasting each question she asked on the chat, so that I could follow through.”
Preview full access of other recent interview experiences
“The weirdest Anthropic round was the company values interview. It was almost like a therapy session, and honestly if you went to a therapist at some point, you will pass that round much more easily.”
“What was very unusual is they didn’t give me any tooling to draw the system design, so I just sketched it on a piece of paper and talked them through it, then we got into this oddly deep debate about whether hover-over history should count as a recommendation signal.”
