Evaluator generates engineering assessments that score how candidates work with AI. Free plan with 10 cycles; Pro from $33/month billed annually.
Researched and fact-checked by Bartu Cavusoglu · Updated October 26, 2026
Evaluator is a technical assessment platform for hiring engineers. Instead of asking whether candidates used AI, it grades how well they work with it: reading its output, fixing it, prompting it, and overriding it when it is wrong. That score sits next to conventional fundamentals such as code writing and debugging.
The company's position is that every engineer now uses tools like Copilot, Cursor, and Claude Code, so blocking or detecting AI misses the point. Its site argues that the real gap is between people who accept the first answer and people who catch a hallucinated import or rewrite an over-engineered class. Evaluator is built to measure that gap.
A hiring manager pastes a job description or describes the role in one sentence. Evaluator picks up the seniority, stack, and what the person will actually do, then generates a custom assessment across six dimensions, calibrated to the role. The site says generation takes about 100 seconds.
The reviewer shares a link and candidates take the test asynchronously. The result is a scored report with per-question feedback, integrity flags, and, for AI questions, the full transcript of the candidate's session with the assistant. AI is allowed where the section scores its use, and flagged elsewhere.
Each assessment covers AI collaboration, code reading, code writing, debugging, communication, and tradeoffs. The questions change with the role, but the dimensions do not. Communication tasks include pull request descriptions, and tradeoff questions are graded on the argument rather than the answer chosen.
The AI collaboration dimension has five sub-tests: prompt quality, reading AI code, fixing it, critique, and live collaboration. Prompts are scored on context, constraints, edge cases, and acceptance criteria. Critique questions plant flaws such as invented APIs and off-by-one errors, and the final question adds an AI sidebar whose prompts, accepted suggestions, and edits are recorded.
Integrity checks use behavioral analysis, keystroke pacing, paste patterns, and model fingerprinting on non-AI questions. Flags include pure paste, burst typing after long idle periods, and five or more tab switches during a single question.
Evaluator is a technical assessment platform for hiring engineers. It generates role-specific tests and scores how well candidates work with AI, alongside fundamentals like code reading, code writing, debugging, communication, and tradeoffs.
Evaluator has a Free plan at $0 with 10 free cycles. Pro costs $39 per month, or $33 per month billed annually at $399 per year. Extra cycles on Pro cost $0.50 each.
Yes. The Free plan costs $0 forever and includes 10 free cycles with no card required. It has the same scoring as Pro, including all six dimensions, integrity reports, and PDF and CSV export, but assessments carry the Evaluator badge.
Each AI-powered assessment creation or submission grading is one cycle. Creating one assessment and sending it to 10 candidates uses 11 cycles: one for creation and 10 for grading.
On AI collaboration questions, candidates get an AI sidebar and every prompt, accepted suggestion, and edit is logged. On other questions, behavioral analysis, keystroke pacing, paste patterns, and model fingerprinting flag suspected outsourcing.
The site says Evaluator generates an assessment in about 100 seconds. You paste a job description or describe the role in one sentence, and it calibrates the test to seniority and stack.
Evaluator suits engineering managers, recruiters, and founders who hire software engineers and want to measure AI skill alongside core ability. It is built for engineering roles rather than general hiring.
The Evaluator website does not list any integrations. Candidates take assessments through a shared link, and reviewers get scored reports with PDF and CSV export.