SENIOR AI INTERACTION EVALUATOR (CODEX / CLAUDE CODE) Contract | $50-200/hr | 10+ hrs/week | Project-based Roles open on a rolling basis - apply to join the talent bench and we’ll reach out when one matches. Expect 40+ hrs once a project starts; timing depends on availability, but we move people in at the earliest genuine opportunity. These roles are currently filled but we hire on a rolling basis as new projects open up. Apply now to join our talent bench — qualified candidates will be contacted directly when roles become available. Check out this Loom video for more details! We’re looking for highly experienced software engineer (SR+) to help evaluate the quality of interactions with modern coding agents such as OpenAI Codex and Claude Code. This is not a traditional engineering role. You won’t be writing production code. You’ll be evaluating something harder: whether the model thinks like a great engineer. WHAT THIS ROLE ACTUALLY IS You will assess how AI coding agents behave in real-world scenarios — focusing on: * Whether the response makes sense * Whether the preamble and reasoning are useful * Whether the output reflects strong engineering judgment * Whether the interaction feels right to an experienced developer This role is about engineering taste — not syntax correctness. WHAT YOU’LL BE DOING * Evaluate AI-generated coding interactions end-to-end * Judge whether outputs are: * Useful * Correct (at a high level) * Aligned with how a strong engineer would think * Assess the quality of explanations and reasoning, not just code * Distinguish between different levels of response quality (e.g. what makes something a 2 vs 4) * Provide clear, opinionated feedback on: * What worked * What didn’t * What felt “off” or misleading * Help define what great looks like when interacting with tools like Cursor WHAT WE MEAN BY “TASTE” We’re specifically looking for engineers who can answer questions like: * Does this feel like something a strong engineer would actually say? * Is this explanation helpful, or just technically correct? * Is the model guiding the user well, or just dumping output? * Would this interaction build or erode trust? You should be comfortable making subjective but rigorous judgments. WHO YOU ARE * Staff / Principal-level engineer (or equivalent experience) * Strong background in one of the below: * TypeScript / JavaScript * Python * Hands-on experience using: * OpenAI Codex * Claude Code * Cursor * Deep familiarity with modern AI-assisted dev workflows * Able to evaluate code without needing to fully execute or deeply review every line * Comfortable giving direct, opinionated feedback * High bar for what “good engineering” looks like NICE TO HAVE * Experience with tools like Cursor or similar AI-first IDEs * Prior exposure to prompt design or evaluation workflows * Experience mentoring senior engineers or defining engineering standards ENGAGEMENT DETAILS * US and Canada up to $200/hr * EU and Latam up to $150/hr * Other locations up to $100/hr * Hours: ~10–20 hours/week * Duration: Ongoing — project-based * Process: * Take-home evaluation exercise * One behavioral interview