FOR TA LEADERS HIRING ENGINEERS
Your technical candidates all look the same on paper now.
AI rewrote every stage of how candidates show up, from resume to screen to assessment. The signal you used to read is buried under all of it now.
WHAT'S ACTUALLY HAPPENING
Three things your hiring managers are already telling you
You don't need a trend report to see this. It's in the feedback you're getting from the engineering side.
01 The score doesn't hold up
Someone passes the test and falls apart in the live round.
The code compiled. The score looked fine. But they can’t walk through what they wrote, and you can’t fully explain why.
02 The test is drifting
You're testing for work your team doesn't really do anymore.
Your engineers spend their day with Cursor and Claude open. Your test still asks candidates to code from a blank file.
03 You can't tell them apart
Two candidates turn in the same answer. You can't see who actually wrote it.
Some candidates really work with AI. Some just paste from it. Your current test doesn’t show you the difference until it’s too late.
The engineers you're hiring don't write code the way your assessment tests for it
of engineers now use agentic AI coding tools like Claude Code, Cursor, and Codex
have shipped production code partially or primarily generated with AI in the last six months
would hesitate to hire someone who can't use these tools
The shift didn't sneak up on anyone. Hiring just hasn't reflected it yet.
WHAT’S ON THE PLATFORM
How CodeSignal measures the work
Engineering work has more layers now. The right assessment depends on the role you're hiring for and how your team works today.
Coding assessments
Candidates demonstrate engineering fundamentals without AI assistance. Algorithms, debugging, refactoring, performance.
Use it when:
- The role demands strong fundamentals
- Your team hasn’t fully embraced AI-powered workflows yet
- You’re screening at the top of the funnel where fundamentals are the floor
AI-Assisted assessments
Candidates work with Cosmo, CodeSignal’s AI assistant, embedded next to the IDE. They prompt, evaluate output, decide what to use. You see every interaction.
Use it when:
- You want to see how candidates think with AI
- The role involves AI-supported work
- You need consistent AI access across candidates to compare fairly
Agentic coding assessment
Candidates use real agentic tools (Claude Code, Cursor, Codex) inside the IDE. They scope, delegate, review the output, and defend the choices they made.
Use it when:
- Your team has fully embraced AI-powered workflows
- The role requires fluency at orchestrating AI to build real things
- You want to see how candidates manage what AI produce
hours of I/O psychology research behind every Certified Assessment
programming languages supported, plus every major AI coding tool
reduction in hiring time, on average, for customers
One more thing
Technical hiring is where this problem hits hardest. It's not where it stops. If you're hiring sales, CS, analysts, or ops too, CodeSignal measures how they actually work now, across every function.
The best way to get what we mean is to see it for yourself
Book twenty minutes and we’ll take you through the whole thing, so you’ll know fast whether it’s right for your team.