panelynx

Product tour

Follow one hire through Panelynx.

From a pasted job description to a signed offer. Every screen along the way, for one role: Senior Backend Engineer at an 80-person fintech.

SBSenior Backend Engineer · 80-person fintech

Watch

The whole hire in 50 seconds.

Step 01 · Plan

Paste the JD. Get a structured plan.

We paste the job description for the Senior Backend Engineer role. Panelynx reads it and drafts a question plan against the rubric, grouped into timed sections, each question tagged by difficulty and the skill it tests. We tweak two, drop one, and the panel is ready to interview.

app.panelynx.com/plans/new
Pasted job descriptionjob-desc.txt
Senior Backend Engineer · Payments

You will own distributed systems and API design for our ledger, with hands-on rate limiting, Redis, and Postgres at scale.

Comfortable on-call; partners closely with product on trade-offs.

Generated plan8 questions · 60 min
Design a rate limiter for a public APIHard
Walk through a system you scaled recentlyMed
Debug a latency spike in productionMed
Tell me about a disagreement with a PMEasy
+Add from question bank
1

Paste any JD. Panelynx extracts the must-have skills and maps them to rubric criteria.

2

Auto-drafted questions arrive grouped into timed sections, each tagged by difficulty and skill.

3

Edit freely. Pull from the question bank, reorder, or swap a question in one click.

Interview, Score, and Decide reuse this same template: annotated mock, three pins, first-person narration.

Step 02 · Interview

Score live, with the co-pilot beside you.

Maya joins the call. As she works through the rate-limiter question, we score against the rubric in real time while the co-pilot captures evidence and offers the follow-up we might have missed.

app.panelynx.com/interviews/live
MKMaya KrishnanSenior Backend Engineer06:12 / 08:00

Q4 of 8 · System design

Current question

Design a rate limiter for a public API. Walk through the approach and trade-offs.

Live score12345
AI CoachLive

Strong on trade-offs. Try probing: “Where does this break under load?”

Rubric check: “failure handling” not yet covered.

1

Per-question timing keeps the panel on plan, with a gentle nudge when a question runs long.

2

Score as the answer unfolds. Strengths and concerns attach to the exact question.

3

The co-pilot suggests the follow-up, you decide whether to ask it.

Step 03 · Score

See where the panel agrees, and where it does not.

Three of us interviewed Maya independently. Panelynx lines our scorecards up side by side, so the one place we disagree is obvious, and we reconcile it before the debrief instead of after the offer.

app.panelynx.com/candidates/maya-krishnan/compare
Question
ARArjun
LMLena
TSTheo
System design
4
4
4
Coding
4
3
4
Debugging
4
4
5
Behavioral
5
5
5
1 divergence on Coding to reconcile before the debrief
1

Every panelist's scores sit in one view, attributed and locked on submit.

2

Divergence is flagged automatically, so a four-versus-three never slips by unnoticed.

3

Reconcile the gap in the debrief, with the evidence right there to settle it.

Step 04 · Decide

Move to offer with the whole panel behind you.

Scores roll up into a clear recommendation. We send the offer, it routes through the approval chain, and once Maya signs we keep tracking how the hire performs.

app.panelynx.com/pipeline
Screening12
Diego Fuentes
Backend Engineer
Priya Nair
Platform Engineer
Interviewing5
Rahul Mehta
Sr. Backend Eng
Offer1
Maya Krishnan
Senior Backend Eng
Strong hire · 4.4 avg
Offer approved · CFO
Hired8
Sofia Almeida
Backend Engineer
1

Scores roll up into a single recommendation the whole panel can stand behind.

2

Offers route through your approval chain, with sign-off tracked at each step.

3

Outcome tracking closes the loop, so you learn which signals actually predicted the hire.

After ten hires

What you know after 10 hires.

The same structured data that runs each interview rolls up into a picture of how your hiring actually performs.

Time-to-hirelast 5 cohorts
21 days−38% vs. start
34d
Q1
30d
Q2
26d
Q3
23d
Q4
21d
Now
Panelist agreement
88%

88% of panels now agree on the same candidate, up from 61% before shared rubrics.

Question effectivenesssignal score
Rate limiter design4.6
Scaling story4.1
Debug a latency spike3.7
Culture-add prompt2.8