Remote Freedom

Go Engineer, AI Code Reviewer

G2i

Work from anywhereContractyesterday

See how well you match this role

Upload your résumé — we'll score your fit and check off the skills you already have. Free.

Requirements

  • Staff or Principal-level software engineer (or equivalent experience)Must
  • Strong background in TypeScript or JavaScriptMust
  • Strong background in PythonMust
  • Hands-on experience using OpenAI CodexMust
  • Hands-on experience using Claude CodeMust
  • Hands-on experience using CursorMust
  • Deep familiarity with modern AI-assisted development workflowsMust
  • Evaluate code and AI responses without needing to fully execute or deeply review every lineMust
  • Give direct, opinionated feedback on engineering quality and AI interactionsMust
  • High bar for evaluating what constitutes good engineeringMust
  • Experience with Cursor or similar AI-first integrated development environments
  • Prior exposure to prompt design or AI evaluation workflows
  • Experience mentoring senior engineers or defining engineering standards

What you'll do

  • Evaluate AI-generated coding interactions end-to-end for quality and correctness
  • Assess whether AI outputs reflect strong engineering judgment and reasoning
  • Judge the quality and clarity of explanations provided by AI coding agents
  • Distinguish between different levels of response quality with rigorous criteria
  • Provide clear, opinionated feedback on what worked, what did not, and what felt misleading
  • Define and articulate what great engineering interactions with AI tools look like

Keywords

AI coding agent evaluationEngineering taste and judgment assessment

About the role

Senior AI Interaction Evaluator (Codex / Claude Code) Contract | $100–$200/hour | 10–20 hrs/week | Start ASAP (through early May) 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 • Rate: $100–$200/hour • Hours: ~10–20 hours/week • Duration: Through early May (with possible extension) • Start: ASAP • Process: • Take-home evaluation exercise • One behavioral interview Originally posted on Himalayas

Sourced from Himalayas. Confirm the details and apply on the employer's site.