Ask an engineer how they spend their week and almost none of them say "writing new code on a blank page." They say reading logs, reproducing a report, bisecting a regression, and untangling something a former teammate left behind.
Then we interview them by asking them to write new code on a blank page.
Debugging is the skill that actually predicts day-to-day performance, and it is the one most interviews never measure.
A from-scratch coding problem rewards recall and speed. It tells you whether someone can produce a known algorithm under pressure.
It tells you almost nothing about:
Those are the behaviors that decide whether a hire is productive or dangerous in a real codebase.
The cleanest way to assess debugging is to hand the candidate a small system that runs but misbehaves, and watch them fix it.
Good broken scenarios share a few traits:
A failing test suite, a service that returns the wrong number, a page that loses state on refresh: all of these force the candidate to read, reproduce, and reason.
The fix matters less than the path to it. Watch how they:
A candidate who says "let me reproduce it, then check the assumption in this function" is showing you exactly how they will behave on your on-call rotation.
Judging debugging from a shared document is hard, because the interesting part is the process, not the final file.
EasyEnv runs the candidate in a real environment with an intentionally broken service, and records the session. You see the terminal, the edits, and the order they happened in. The audit trail turns a fuzzy "they seemed to struggle" into a concrete record of how they diagnosed the problem.
Writing code from scratch is a baseline skill. Fixing code you did not write, under uncertainty, is the job.
Interview for the job.
Run live coding sessions and take-home challenges in real production environments. Watch sessions back, score consistently, and hire with confidence.
More posts you might like
The first infrastructure hire is not a scaled-down platform engineer. Here is what the role really is at that stage, why tool-list interviews mislead, and four scenarios that show whether someone can work inside a system nobody documented.
Time to hire is mostly waiting, not interviewing. Here is where the days actually go, which ones you can remove without lowering the bar, and the two changes that cut the most.
Read more
The Go language is easy to read and hard to run in production. Here is what a Go developer assessment should actually test, four scenarios that separate people who have shipped Go from people who have written it, and why a syntax-shaped test tells you nothing.
Read more
