# HotTea Sample Reviewer Packet

This is the Markdown version of the live reviewer packet for a Hatchways-style invite-regression assessment.

## Candidate

- Candidate: Alex Chen
- Role: Senior Backend Developer
- Assessment: Fix invite acceptance regression
- Status: submitted
- Submitted: 2026-04-30T18:31:44.000Z

## Reviewer Score

- Rubric score: 9/10
- Suggested score: 9/10
- Reviewer confidence: usable evidence packet
- Verification: observable
- AI collaboration: observable in recorded AI session evidence

## Evidence Captured

- 1 AI session transcript(s)
- 1 Claude JSONL export(s)
- 0 external AI evidence upload(s)
- 2 git snapshot(s)
- 1 test run(s)
- 6 VM recorder event(s)

## Evidence Checks

3/3 passed
- [x] Expiry check placed before retryable-member branch in diff
- [x] All 4 test cases pass (4/4 in test output)
- [x] Regression coverage added for expired invite retry path

## AI Fluency

- Sessions: 1
- Total turns: 6
- Assistant turns: 3
- Tool calls: 8
- Read calls: 4
- Write/Edit calls: 2
- Bash calls: 2
- Models: claude-sonnet-4-5
- Parse note: parsed 6 JSONL lines across 1 session(s)

## Process Analysis

Candidate directed the AI with precise, narrow prompts ("find the smallest fix", "what edge cases should I preserve") rather than open-ended delegation, showing awareness of AI over-reach risk. They verified the fix independently by running all four test cases and reviewing the branch-order change before submitting, rather than accepting the AI-suggested output without validation. Redirection quality and verification habit are both strong signals for senior-level independent judgment.

## Post-Interview Transcript Review

No interview transcript artifact stored.



## Final Evidence

- Tests: npm test -> 4/4 tests passed. HotTea runner -> 4/4 checks passed.
- Diff: Moved invite expiry validation before the retryable membership-error branch and added regression coverage for expired retryable invites, revoked invites, valid pending invites, and already-active members.
- Notes: Kept the production change small. Verified the valid pending path still passes after changing branch order.

## Reviewer Note

```
HotTea reviewer note
Candidate: Alex Chen
Assessment: Fix invite acceptance regression
Score: 9/10 (rubric) · Suggested: 9/10 (AI fluency + verification)
Reviewer scores: not yet scored
Evidence captured: 1 AI session transcript(s), 1 Claude JSONL export(s), 0 external AI evidence upload(s), 2 git snapshot(s), 1 test run(s), 6 recorder event(s)
Summary: Kept the production change small. Verified the valid pending path still passes after changing branch order.
Verification observed: observable
AI fluency observed: observable in recorded AI session evidence
Post-interview transcript review: no transcript artifact stored
Report: https://hottea.ai/report/sess_hatchways_sample?token=rpt_sample
Suggested follow-up questions:
1. Walk through the highest-impact change and why that was the right first move.
2. Explain one tradeoff or shortcut from the assessment and what would change in production.
3. Describe how AI was used, what was accepted or rejected, and how the result was verified.
```

## Proof URLs

- HTML packet: https://hottea.ai/report/sess_hatchways_sample?token=rpt_sample
- Markdown packet: https://hottea.ai/report/sess_hatchways_sample.md?token=rpt_sample
- JSON evidence: https://hottea.ai/api/sample-evidence
- GitHub Action adapter: https://hottea.ai/github-action.yml
- Hatchways buyer packet: https://hottea.ai/hatchways/packet.md
- Hatchways integration guide: https://hottea.ai/hatchways/integration.md