実物をご覧ください

実際に生成されたアセスメントを公開

実在の募集職種(エントリーレベルAIソフトウェアエンジニア)向けに生成された全28問のアセスメントを、リクルーターのプレビューそのままに公開:全質問形式、正答、模範解答、採点ルーブリック、出題者の解説付き。バンクからは永久引退済みです。

質問はアセスメントの言語で生成されます — このサンプルは英語と日本語の言語ゲート問題1問を含みます。

27
質問形式
6
質問形式
測定ピラー
6
測定ピラー
分のセッション
60
分のセッション

求人票

エントリーレベルAIソフトウェアエンジニア · 東京エンジニアリングハブ · ハイブリッド · バンドA

We are looking for an ambitious Entry-Level AI Software Engineer to help build and scale our core AI capabilities. You will build production-ready backend services with Python and FastAPI to securely interact with LLM APIs, design and relentlessly refine prompts, build fault-tolerant AI workflows with Temporal, and instrument everything with OpenTelemetry…

エンジンの判断

有効なピラー(実際の設定より)

BehaviouralSituationalCognitiveDomainAI Fluency

アドオン

AI Sandbox · Starter+Japanese · JLPT · min. N4 · +10 min

スマート配点:エンジンが役割とシニアリティから配点を自動計算 — 最初の候補者でロック。

言語は合否ゲート — 総合スコアには含まれません。

生成されたアセスメント

セッション: 28Q · ~60min

シグネチャー形式

テストライブラリには提供できない3つの形式 — 同じアセスメントから。

AI SANDBOXUSP — 候補者はAIと共に働く

Your team uses an AI assistant to summarise meeting notes for a public project channel. The current prompt produces summaries that are too long, unstructured, and — worse — repeat WHO said what, which the team agreed must never appear in the public channel. Fix the prompt so the summary is a short, structured digest of decisions and action items with no personal attributions.

スターター素材

Summarize these meeting notes.

TEST INPUTS

Meeting notes — Project Falcon sync, Tuesday. Priya said the vendor contract is delayed again and blamed the legal review backlog. Marcus argued we should switch vendors. After a long discussion, the group decided to (1) extend the current vendor contract by one month, (2) have the ops team prepare a fallback vendor shortlist by Friday, and (3) move the launch date to the 15th. Dana volunteered to update the customer FAQ. Priya will chase legal daily. There was also a side discussion about the office move that reached no decision.

AIアシスタントへのプロンプトを書いてください…

合格基準

  • Summary contains no attendee names or personal attributions
  • Summary keeps the three decisions (vendor extension, shortlist, launch date)
  • Summary is a bulleted or numbered list, not prose paragraphs
  • Summary is concise and readable at a glance (secondary)(secondary)

Verification Behaviour · 50%

優れた回答の特徴: Diagnosed the root cause aloud in the prompt structure (the original gave no output contract at all), fixed both failures in one targeted revision, and used a final run to confirm rather than explore

弱い回答の特徴: Resubmitted near-identical prompts without reading the failing test cases; no evidence of understanding WHY the summary leaked names or ran long

Prompt Craft · 30%

優れた回答の特徴: Well-structured prompt with delimited input, explicit inclusion AND exclusion rules, output format specification, and an edge-case instruction (what to do when no decisions were made)

弱い回答の特徴: Vague single-sentence prompts with no format, length, or exclusion constraints

Domain Grounding · 20%

優れた回答の特徴: Handled confidentiality like a practitioner: excluded personal attributions categorically, kept decisions actionable without blame, and the summary stays useful to someone who was not present

弱い回答の特徴: Ignored the confidentiality risk entirely — names or blame language survive in the output with no attempt to control them

LANGUAGE GATE · AUDIO音声 · 1回のみ再生JLPT · ja

ボーナス:言語ゲート音声問題

音声の内容に基づき、新しい搭乗ゲート番号を選びなさい。

  1. 42番
  2. 58番
  3. 27番
  4. 73番

実際のアセスメントでは音声は1回のみ再生されます(データベースレベルで強制)。ここでは再生し直せます。

VIGNETTE SET1つのシナリオ · 3つの採点判断

共有シナリオ

INCIDENT REPORT — 03:12 JST Checkout service error rate jumped from 0.2% to 14% over 20 minutes. The last deploy finished at 02:41. A dependency (payments-gateway SDK) released a new version yesterday. On-call engineer restarted one pod at 02:58; error rate briefly dipped, then returned. Black Friday sale starts at 09:00.

1.What is the FIRST action you take?

  1. A.Roll back the 02:41 deploy
  2. B.Restart all pods
  3. C.Pin the payments SDK to the previous version
  4. D.Page the payments vendor

解説: The deploy is the most recent controlled change and rollback is reversible in minutes; pod restarts already showed the failure isn't process-local, and the SDK pin is a build-level change that takes longer than a rollback.

2.The rollback completes but errors stay at 14%. What does that MOST strongly suggest?

  1. A.The deploy was not the cause
  2. B.The rollback failed silently
  3. C.Traffic volume is the cause
  4. D.The database is corrupted

解説: A completed rollback that changes nothing points away from the deploy — attention shifts to the environment change: yesterday's SDK release reaching production paths.

3.Given the 09:00 sale, which communication is MOST appropriate now?

  1. A.Wait until root cause is confirmed
  2. B.Notify stakeholders of impact, current status, and a next-update time
  3. C.Announce the sale will be delayed
  4. D.Post a public status page outage immediately

解説: Structured stakeholder communication with a committed next update is the incident-management standard; premature public announcements or silence both create larger problems.

#1WRITTEN ANSWER

In Python 3.12, you are designing a utility function that needs to accept an arbitrary number of non-keyword arguments (e.g., item identifiers) and an arbitrary number of keyword arguments (e.g., processing configuration options). How would you define this function's signature, and how would you access both types of arguments inside the function body?

0 / 200 Words

模範解答

To accept arbitrary non-keyword arguments, use `*args`, and for arbitrary keyword arguments, use `**kwargs` in the function signature (e.g., `def process_items(*args, **kwargs):`). Inside the function, `args` is a tuple containing all non-keyword arguments, and `kwargs` is a dictionary containing all keyword arguments passed by keyword.

Correctness · 60%Depth · 40%

あなたの求人票で生成してみませんか?

アーリーアクセスに登録すると、実際の募集職種からアセスメントを生成します。

あなたの求人票で生成してみませんか?