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 went through a fairly clean, clearly explained sequence: a hiring manager screen, then a technical round, and eventually a virtual onsite. What stood out immediately was how much the process leaned into real work and “how you use the tools” rather than classic leetcode-style problems. The recruiter had been upfront about the steps, and things moved with good pacing between rounds.
My process started with a recruiter screen and moved quickly into a manager conversation. The recruiter was friendly and very clear about the interview plan and even shared a salary band up front. That part made me feel comfortable going in.
The interview process typically begins with a recruiter screen, followed by a hiring manager conversation, technical rounds, and sometimes a take-home assignment. Candidates noted that the pacing between rounds was generally efficient, though some reported inconsistencies in scheduling and follow-up.
Technical interviews often focus on practical problem-solving using AI tools rather than traditional algorithmic questions, with some candidates experiencing live coding sessions that shift from collaborative discussions to solo coding under time pressure. The difficulty level is generally moderate, but candidates noted that small missteps could lead to rejections.
Some candidates encountered take-home assignments that required them to build applications while documenting their use of AI tools, with tight deadlines that kept them engaged. However, feedback on submissions was often lacking, leading to frustration when candidates received rejections without clear explanations.
Interviews with hiring managers tended to focus on past experiences and project outcomes, but some candidates reported dismissive attitudes or a lack of collaboration, which created a stressful atmosphere. Positive interactions were noted, but inconsistencies in tone and engagement were common.
Candidates frequently highlighted issues with communication throughout the process, including delays in responses, lack of clarity on next steps, and insufficient feedback after interviews or assignments. This led to feelings of uncertainty and frustration regarding their performance and the overall process.
The overall candidate experience varied significantly, with some describing a structured and respectful process while others felt the environment was hostile or unfair. The inconsistency in interviewer attitudes and the perceived filtering approach contributed to mixed feelings about the company's culture.