Ledger
One review surface for a candidate's repository, demo, evidence, and score.
- Year 2026
- Client Exercise · concept
- Role Design · Front end
- Role: Design · Front end
- Client: Exercise · concept
- Year: 2026
Project highlights
0
external tabs to reach a verdict
5
material checks, scored apart
2
interface modes, light and dark
A submission review layer for hiring. Every candidate's repository, live demo, screenshots and walkthrough live in one reviewable surface, with scoring that separates what a candidate shipped from what they merely claimed.
Agentic AI · Design SystemsDesign · Front end · Exercise · concept
Ledger gives a reviewer one place to understand a submission, inspect the evidence behind it, and make a fair decision. The repository, live demo, walkthrough, and scorecard stay together.
The old workflow split each candidate across browser tabs. Reviewers had to remember the work while scoring it somewhere else.
The prototype runs beside the evidence and scorecard. A reviewer can check what shipped, score it, and move forward without losing context.
Review a candidate, inspect the evidence, and take the shortlist to a handoff.
Back to top↑The decision I would defend hardest is separating whether a submission is complete from whether it is good. Those two questions arrive at the same moment and a single star rating collapses them, so a candidate who shipped strong work with no README scores like a candidate who shipped nothing. Pulling them apart cost a column of screen and made every score afterwards mean something narrower and more honest. The one I would revisit is the anchored rubric. Writing behavioural descriptions for every point on every criterion is the reason a reviewer can score consistently at submission nineteen, and it is also the heaviest thing on the page. I would want to watch somebody use it for an hour before defending the weight.
Next project Obin→ A verification workspace for AI-written venture debt memos. The agent drafts in minutes... Back to top↑