Eight companies, eight different AI coding interviews

Max Nyriev — Mon, 12 Oct 2026 23:25:39 +0000

If this is new to you: an AI assisted coding round is a coding interview where you get an AI assistant and, usually, an existing codebase instead of a blank editor. Shopify was already running one in 2025. Meta's pilot in October 2025 made it mainstream, and Google, Amazon, Stripe, DoorDash, Instacart and Coinbase have run their own since. I wrote up what the round is and what it grades separately.

I build a practice platform for these rounds, so I read every candidate thread about them I could find. 85 threads across Amazon, Stripe, DoorDash, Instacart and Coinbase, plus what Google, Meta and Shopify have said in public.

I went in expecting one format with different logos. That is not what the threads show. Here is what each company actually runs.

Company	The round	The assistant	What stands out
Amazon	SDE online assessment: a 40 minute algorithm question, then 60 minutes on a buggy repository	Built into the assessment	It helps you find the file and explains the code, but won't write the fix
Stripe	One coding round, since spring 2026	Inside HackerRank; Gemini Flash and Claude Opus reported	Interviewers push both ways on how much you use it
DoorDash	AI Code Craft, onsite	Your own IDE and AI tools, screen shared	Interviewers push for speed
Instacart	Online assessment, 90 minutes on CodeSignal	Claude in the editor, switched off for the bug fix	Passing the visible tests isn't the whole score
Coinbase	Onsite: a bug, a design question, a timeout to diagnose from logs, a code review, all on an existing service	Inside the IDE, sees the task and your open files	Screen share is mandatory
Google	Code comprehension round, piloted for junior and mid level roles on select US teams	Gemini, the approved assistant for the pilot	Read, debug and optimize an existing codebase
Meta	Piloted since October 2025; candidates report it replaces one of the two onsite coding rounds	Built into CoderPad	Candidates report about 60 minutes
Shopify	AI assisted pair programming, screen shared	Whatever AI tools you use, in your own IDE	Whether you can read the code the AI writes

Three differences matter more than the rest.

Who writes the code

At Amazon, you do. Candidates say the assistant helps you find the right file and explains the code, then stops. One said it refused the moment they got close to the answer. So the hour is yours: find the bug, type the fix, run the tests.

At Stripe, DoorDash and Shopify it is the other way round. The AI writes, and you answer for it. A Stripe interviewer asked one candidate why they were so confident in code the assistant wrote. Shopify's round is explicitly about whether you can read the code the AI produced. A DoorDash interviewer kept urging one candidate to accept a change. They accepted it, had no time to read it, and expected a big deduction.

If you only find out one thing about your round, find out which side of this line it is on. The two sides need different practice.

Where it runs

Amazon, Stripe, Instacart and Meta put you in their sandbox. You get the model they picked. One Stripe candidate's tip was to choose Gemini Flash because the other options were slow. DoorDash and Shopify put you in your own editor with your own tools, screen shared, so your setup is part of what is being watched. Coinbase gives you an assistant inside the IDE that sees the task and your open files, and the screen share is mandatory.

What the score is

Tests are not the score. One Amazon candidate passed four of six and still heard from the recruiter. Another did not pass them all and went straight to the onsite. An Instacart candidate passed every visible test and found out afterwards that there were other tests. Another Instacart candidate scored 650 out of 1000 and was rejected.

What is scored instead depends on the company. DoorDash told a candidate that velocity is a key criterion. Stripe asked a candidate who wrote a skeleton by hand why they were not using AI, and asked the same candidate, when the AI wrote more, why they trusted it. There is no safe amount of AI use at Stripe. There is only whether you can say why.

What I would do about it

Find your company's row first. Generic AI interview prep is the new grind 500 problems. It feels productive and misses the point.
Practice under the round's constraints, not with a better AI. No candidate I read blamed the model. They lost on reading code they didn't write, on tests they didn't run, and on questions they couldn't answer.
Read what you accept, even when pushed. Speed counts. So does knowing what you shipped.
Run tests on what the AI wrote. The one Stripe workflow reported as graded well had the assistant read the README and propose a plan, then the candidate reviewed its work, wrote tests and ran them.
Rehearse the why. Why you trust this code. Why you did not use the assistant here.

Most of this comes from candidate threads, not from the companies, and some rows are thin. Coinbase has three threads. Google's round is a pilot. I keep the full comparison, with a page per company, at nyrion.ai/companies and update it as reports come in.

Disclosure: I build Nyrion, a practice platform for these rounds. If you sat one of them recently and it went differently, tell me in the comments.

DEV Community: Max Nyriev

Eight companies, eight different AI coding interviews

Who writes the code

Where it runs

What the score is

What I would do about it