The interview process started with a recruiter call, followed by a hiring manager conversation, and then a coding round. I didn’t get past the coding stage. From what I understand, there were probably a couple more rounds after that. The coding interview was on CoderPad and began with two pages of instructions you’re expected to read and absorb upfront. The task involved installing packages, starting a server, interacting with an API through request/response, and fixing a bug. Pretty standard stuff, but the setup felt unnecessarily long-winded for a timed session. I got the code working and answered the follow-up questions. Still, it seemed that asking for a bit of clarification — even on parts buried in the instructions — worked against me. There wasn’t much room for discussion or collaboration; it felt more like a test of how well you could skim and execute under pressure rather than a fair assessment of real-world skills. Overall, the process didn’t leave a strong impression. It felt more like checking boxes than evaluating practical ability in a balanced way.

HR round, then coding round, then a handful of panel interviews that include behavioral, systems design, incident management. Gauging to see how you think Not a bad process. Nothing too bad or crazy