Interactive demo

One submission, three layers of evidence

This is the view your hiring committee actually uses: orchestration score, percentile vs. your team, integrity signals, and a step-by-step session replay. Scroll down to explore Alex Chen's pagination submission.

Canned submissionSame view as reviewersNo login required

The reviewer experience

Everything in one defensible view

Scores alone don't survive a hiring debate. SkillFoundry ties every number to evidence — and every signal to a human review step.

1

AI orchestration score

Did they command the AI pair engineer well — delegate clearly, verify before accepting, catch the planted defect?

OrchestrationPanel + session replay

2

Team benchmark

How does this result compare to your calibrated backend cohort — overall, by dimension, and on AI orchestration?

CohortBenchmarkPanel

3

Integrity review

Are there behavioral signals that warrant human review — cadence shifts, pastes, cross-session mismatches?

IntegrityPanel

Demo mode

This page uses a canned submission with the same production panels reviewers see. The session replay loads from the public demo-replay endpoint when available.

Sample submission

Implement pagination for user list API

Alex Chenalex.chen@example.com6/28/2026, 2:55:00 PM

Overall score

84/100

Assessment signals

Status
reviewed
Tests
14/14

AI Orchestration

Competent orchestrator
Orchestration score82/100
Delegation quality:78%
Verification discipline:85%
Failure recovery:90%
Judgment:80%
  • Rejected the flawed proposal after running tests and identified the off-by-one boundary.
  • Requested a targeted revision with specific feedback before accepting the fix.

Model: gpt-4 · Scenario v3

Integrity review

Decision-support signals only — not an accusation and never an auto-reject. Confirm or dismiss each signal with a documented reason. Consider a verified live round or appeal path when appropriate.

Authorship fingerprint v2.1 computed 6/28/2026, 3:10:00 PM.

5 cadence/timing features · cross-session threshold 0.72

Signals for review (2)

Cadence shift

Editing rhythm changed sharply mid-session. This can indicate external help or a context switch — review the evidence trail before drawing conclusions.

Medium
Status: Needs reviewEvidence refs: evt_1042, evt_1043

Large paste after idle

A large paste followed a long idle gap. This may indicate copied work — confirm with session replay and other signals.

High
Status: Needs reviewEvidence refs: evt_1088

Team benchmark

vs your team (12 engineers)

Overall

82nd

Overall score84/100 · 82nd

Score dimensions

Code quality74th percentile
Correctness88th percentile
Test coverage68th percentile
Behavior79th percentile

AI orchestration

AI orchestrationexceeds 10/12
Delegation quality78th percentile
Verification discipline88th percentile
Failure recovery90th percentile
Judgment80th percentile

Decision-support only — percentiles compare this candidate to your calibrated engineering team, not a pass/fail bar.

Evidence trail

Copilot Command replay

Every orchestration score traces back to specific delegations, diffs, test runs, and decisions. Watch Alex reject the planted off-by-one bug and accept only after a corrected fix.

Demo replay unavailable.

This is one submission. Imagine 40 per month.

SkillFoundry runs, evaluates, and reports — your team reviews the shortlist with evidence already assembled.