Real, anonymous reports from people who interviewed for Software Engineer at Abnormal AI, newest first and distilled into what to expect across the loop.
After a recruiter call, I moved into a hiring manager screen where I walked through my background and the projects I’d worked on, and talked about what I was specifically hoping to learn from the team. Everyone I interacted with felt welcoming and responsive, and the process itself felt fairly structured with clear handoffs between rounds.
My technical interview centered on AI-assisted coding. I was dropped into a fairly large existing codebase and asked to first make sense of it using AI tooling, then use that understanding to implement a new feature with AI support and finish by writing tests for the changes. It felt less like a pure algorithm check and more like seeing whether I could translate a task into working code while leaning on the AI in a controlled way. The round itself was challenging mainly because the workflow was so dependent on how the AI would interpret the codebase and my intent.
The interview process typically begins with a recruiter screen, followed by a hiring manager discussion, and then a series of technical rounds that include coding exercises, system design, and project discussions. Candidates noted that the timeline felt reasonable, with many experiencing a smooth and organized flow, though some faced unexpected delays or additional rounds.
Candidates reported that technical interviews heavily focused on the use of AI tools throughout the coding process, requiring them to demonstrate their ability to integrate AI into their workflow while solving real engineering problems. This emphasis on AI was consistent across multiple rounds, distinguishing the process from traditional coding interviews.
Many candidates encountered take-home assignments that required them to build projects using AI tools, often with tight deadlines and expectations for video explanations. Some found these assignments challenging and felt that the lack of feedback on their submissions contributed to a negative experience.
Candidates experienced mixed interactions with hiring managers, with some feeling that the discussions were supportive and focused on their experiences, while others found the tone to be critical or dismissive. This inconsistency impacted their overall perception of the company culture.
Communication issues were a common theme, with some candidates reporting poor follow-up from recruiters and a lack of clarity regarding next steps or outcomes. This led to frustration and feelings of being undervalued throughout the process.
The overall difficulty of the interview process was generally perceived as average, but many candidates expressed disappointment over the lack of constructive feedback after rejections, leaving them uncertain about their performance and the evaluation criteria used.