CoderPad Candidate Report Explained: Code Playback, Execution History, and Interviewer Notes

CoderPad Interview playback and Screen candidate reports are different review surfaces. Interview reconstructs activity in a shared live pad; Screen reports cover an assessment's questions and results. Neither should be described as an unlimited recording of everything on the candidate's computer. Start by identifying which product hosted the session.

The distinction here matters after the session, when a recruiter or interviewer reviews code history, execution, and notes.

Interview versus Screen: what can be reviewed?

Feature	CoderPad Interview	CoderPad Screen
Setting	Shared live interview pad	Candidate assessment
History	Playback of participants' editor activity	Playback for supported question types in the candidate report
Execution evidence	Runs and editor changes in playback; shell caveat below	Run/submit events on the question timeline
Additional feedback	Interviewer notes and team feedback	Assessment results and report details
Candidate access	Do not assume access to internal notes or playback	Detailed employer report is distinct from candidate feedback

Sources: Interview Playback Mode, Screen code playback, and Screen candidate reports.

A shared pad records the interviewer's edits too

Interview playback tracks each participant's changes. That matters when the interviewer supplies a function signature, fixes a typo, or adds a failing test. A reviewer should distinguish the candidate's contribution from the interviewer's assistance rather than attributing the final file entirely to one person.

For example, suppose the interviewer adds a test for duplicate timestamps and the candidate changes the ordering logic afterward. Playback can establish the sequence. It cannot, by itself, establish whether the candidate would have identified that case without a prompt. That conclusion requires interview context.

Execution history has a specific limit

The Interview documentation says code changes in the editor are recorded, but code run in the shell, including REPL commands and package installation, is not displayed in playback. Do not promise that a reviewer can reconstruct every shell command from that view.

Screen's supported programming, game, and free-text questions have their own playback. Its documented timeline distinguishes writing, pasting, leaving, and running/submitting. Reviewers can inspect the approach rather than only the final answer. These events are not a universal numerical interview score.

Paste markers need context

CoderPad's Interview documentation cautions that flagged behavior needs interpretation. Content pasted from outside the editor can be marked, including content from built-in AI Assist. A paste marker alone therefore does not establish that prohibited outside assistance occurred.

Follow the rules stated for your session. If a reference or AI feature is explicitly permitted, be prepared to explain how you used and checked it. Do not try to manufacture an impressive edit history; a correct explanation of an imperfect first attempt is more useful than staged keystrokes.

Interviewer notes are separate from candidate feedback

CoderPad describes private interviewer notes that can be kept private or shared with colleagues. Their existence does not imply that a candidate receives them. Nor should the final code file be treated as a complete record of the interviewer's assessment.

For Screen, CoderPad warns that detailed reports contain assessment content and should not be shared with candidates. A feedback email can be much narrower. This is a product/report distinction, not proof that a recruiter ignored the code.

Ask for feedback that can be acted on

Instead of requesting a private replay link, ask for a concise assessment of the evaluated skills:

Could you share whether the main gap was problem decomposition, correctness, testing, or communication? If an editor or connection issue affected the session, I can provide its approximate time and what the interviewer observed.

For a technical incident, identify the time and affected participant, especially if the interviewer could still edit while you could not. For preparation, focus on testing and explaining changes in a shared environment. This report guide does not claim that all employers use the same evaluation rubric.

Sources and Further Reading

Documentation checked: September 6, 2026.

• Interview Playback Mode
• Screen code playback
• Screen candidate reports
• private interviewer notes