I was given a fairly extensive technical assignment as part of the interview process. I put considerable effort into it — aiming to demonstrate clean backend architecture, solid coding practices, and even added a simple frontend UI to make the backend functionality more testable. To improve efficiency, I used modern tools (including AI-based assistants) to handle repetitive parts of the implementation — such as boilerplate queries and UI scaffolding — while focusing my time on the core logic and structural design. Unfortunately, the feedback focused primarily on the uniformity of code and raised questions about how much of it I personally authored. I was also told that I submitted "too much code," which surprised me given the scope and open-ended nature of the task. What stood out to me was that I wasn't given an opportunity to walk through my approach or explain my design decisions. There was no technical discussion — the evaluation appeared to be based solely on surface-level impressions. This experience was disappointing, as it seemed to reflect a limited perspective on how modern developers work — especially in 2025, when tool-assisted workflows are common and productive. I had hoped for a more open and conversation-driven process that looked at ability, intent, and problem-solving skills.