AI Interaction Evaluator (Codex / Claude Code, up to $200/hr)

Senior AI Interaction Evaluator (Codex / Claude Code) Contract | $50-200/hr | 10+ hrs/week | Project-based Roles open on a rolling basis - apply to join the talent bench and we’ll reach out when one matches. Expect 40+ hrs once a project starts; timing depends on availability, but we move people in at the earliest genuine opportunity. These roles are currently filled but we hire on a rolling basis as new projects open up. Apply now to join our talent bench — qualified candidates will be contacted directly when roles become available. Check out this Loom video for more details! We’re looking for highly experienced software engineer (SR+) to help evaluate the quality of interactions with modern coding agents such as OpenAI Codex and Claude Code. This is not a traditional engineering role. You won’t be writing production code. You’ll be evaluating something harder: whether the model thinks like a great engineer. What This Role Actually Is You will assess how AI coding agents behave in real-world scenarios — focusing on: Whether the response makes sense Whether the preamble and reasoning are useful Whether the output reflects strong engineering judgment Whether the interaction feels right to an experienced developer This role is about engineering taste — not syntax correctness. What You’ll Be Doing Evaluate AI-generated coding interactions end-to-end Judge whether outputs are: Useful Correct (at a high level) Aligned with how a strong engineer would think Assess the quality of explanations and reasoning , not just code Distinguish between different levels of response quality (e.g. what makes something a 2 vs 4 ) Provide clear, opinionated feedback on: What worked What didn’t What felt “off” or misleading Help define what great looks like when interacting with tools like Cursor What We Mean by “Taste” We’re specifically looking for engineers who can answer questions like: Does this feel like something a strong engineer would actually say? Is this explanation helpful, or just technically correct? Is the model guiding the user well, or just dumping output? Would this interaction build or erode trust? You should be comfortable making subjective but rigorous judgments . Who You Are Staff / Principal-level engineer (or equivalent experience) Strong background in one of the below: TypeScript / JavaScript Python Hands-on experience using: OpenAI Codex Claude Code Cursor Deep familiarity with modern AI-assisted dev workflows Able to evaluate code without needing to fully execute or deeply review every line Comfortable giving direct, opinionated feedback High bar for what “good engineering” looks like Nice to Have Experience with tools like Cursor or similar AI-first IDEs Prior exposure to prompt design or evaluation workflows Experience mentoring senior engineers or defining engineering standards Engagement Details US and Canada up to $200/hr EU and Latam up to $150/hr Other locations up to $100/hr Hours: ~10–20 hours/week Duration: Ongoing — project-based Process: Take-home evaluation exercise One behavioral interview Originally posted on Himalayas