Every action is a thread.

The code tells you what was built. Teksi shows you the process behind it

Teksi weaves every prompt, edit, terminal command, and AI interaction into a replayable record of how software was built — turning thousands of events into evidence your reviewers can trust.

session · candidate #04821
09:14:02 file_opened src/counter.ts
09:14:44 prompt_sent “build the counter component”
09:14:52 ai_suggestion accepted · 18 lines
09:17:12 test_run 2 failed · 0 passed
09:20:30 agent_created debug agent spawned
09:21:44 file_edit src/counter.ts · manual fix
09:22:01 test_run 3 passed · 1 failed
09:24:10 file_edit src/utils.ts
09:26:33 test_run 5 passed · 0 failed
09:39:17 session_end submitted · 11 commands, 6 saves
Fact

Completed in 6.5 minutes. AI contributed 2 of 17 total actions. Final overall score: 60/100.

Engineering work is woven as it happens — not remembered afterward.

The interview question

“So — how do you usually use AI when you code?”

Told after the walk. Unverifiable. Answered the way that sounds best.

Fact · session #04821

“AI-generated code made up 34% of the final submission, concentrated in boilerplate and test scaffolding.”

Derived from captured events. Every thread traceable back to the session.

The process

How Teksi works

01

Configure the assessment

Design a task and what a strong submission looks like, optionally create a starter git repo and/or give us a Test suite (will run after the final submission and results will be aggregated in the final report)

02

Candidates work, normally

They code in the provided environment. Every prompt, paste, edit, run, and undo is captured as an event — nothing to install, nothing to remember to record.

03

Reviewers get Facts, not footage

Raw events are distilled into a structured report: what was written, what models were used (with token usage), what was accepted as-is, what was reworked, red-green test cycles and more.

Same events, different bar

Scored for what you actually hire for

The six category scores below come from one session on "react-counter-challenge". They don't change — only how they're weighted does.

Overall · Balanced profile60.1/100
Deliveryweighted higher80
Verification65
AI leverage23
Process47.5
Cost efficiency50
Toolbox75

No summaries. No scores you can't trace back.

What a Facts report actually says

1 prompt sent to a single build agent — no multi-agent orchestration.

15 manual edits vs 2 AI-driven actions — candidate favoured direct control.

3 unique files touched with 6 saves, 11 terminal commands.

2 test runs with 1 red-green cycle before passing.

0 errors; session completed and submitted in ~6.5 minutes.

3 agents created (debug, research, review) — toolbox score: 75/100.

Building this with hiring teams, not for them

We're working with a small group of companies to shape the first version of Teksi. Tell us what you evaluate candidates on today, and we'll show you what a Facts report would look like for it.