Why I built LLMInterview
In 2026 you can be qualified for the job and still have no idea what the interview is. The recruiter email says “LLM Design round” and there is no shared definition of what that means. Two companies use the same words for completely different loops.
So people study everything. They grind algorithms for a round that is actually about evaluation design, and they walk into a production-reliability conversation with a paper they read once. The problem is not competence. It is ambiguity.
This product does one thing: it turns the job, the level, and what your recruiter told you into a ranked read on the loop: the likely rounds, what each one tests, where you are exposed, what to do first, and what to skip. Every ranking says why it is ranked there. When the evidence is not there, it says unknown.
Anderson Duncan is an enterprise account manager and writer. Read more on his website and about page.
The line this will not cross
- No live interview copilot. Not now, not later. Sitting in someone's interview is cheating, and it is a product I do not want to have built.
- No fake, leaked, or “real” questions. No legitimate product has confidential interview questions. If we ever appear to, we are lying to you.
- No invented evidence. No fabricated sources, dates, company facts, testimonials, or usage counts. If the map was built from your job description and recruiter notes alone, it says exactly that.
- No fake precision. Confidence states, not percentages.
I’d rather have the product tell you it doesn’t know than make your preparation worse by sounding certain.
Founder-submitted launch story on AI Business. It is an unpaid Partner Story based on founder answers, not an endorsement or independent review. Read it on AI Business.