Four hundred apply. One recruiter.
Every applicant gets a real interview.
Larpy runs the interview out loud, scores every answer against evidence in the transcript, and hands back a ranked shortlist. You still make every call.
The screen itself
Hear where the follow up lands.
This is the room your candidate sits in. It is a spoken conversation, so a thin answer gets pushed on once, in the moment. That is where the evidence comes from, and it is why a pasted answer does not survive the screen.
Walk me through a feature you shipped end to end. What did you actually own, and what did you get wrong?
There were a few things. We iterated and fixed them as we went.
Which one cost you the most time? Give me the decision, not the fix.
We built a bulk import because three customers asked for it. Eleven people used it the first month. I never checked whether the people asking were the ones with the volume. We cut it and shipped a CSV template instead.
"I ran the beta myself, twelve customers, and wrote the launch notes."
88"I cut my own feature after launch when eleven people used it."
84Worked with engineers directly, candidate did not say either way.
71"I have written specs, though a senior PM always presented them."
68"I have not shipped anything myself. I supported the PM who did."
52- Warehouse operations
- Customer success
- Product management
- Supply and logistics
- Software engineering
- Event coordination
- Inside sales
- Clinical intake
- Field service
- Retail management
- Warehouse operations
- Customer success
- Product management
- Supply and logistics
- Software engineering
- Event coordination
- Inside sales
- Clinical intake
- Field service
- Retail management
How it works
Setup is a link, not a project.
Paste the job posting. Larpy reads it and drafts the whole screen: the questions, the knockouts, the traits you are weighing. Try it on the right, on a role you are hiring for.
You edit anything you want asked word for word, approve it, and send one link. Nothing is saved until you say so.
Paste a role you are hiring for and watch it become a screen.
A 10 minute interview. 5 questions, and every candidate is asked the same ones.
We will recommend passing on anyone who:
- Candidate has never owned a feature from idea through launch.
- Candidate has only supported a PM and never owned the call.
Nobody is rejected automatically. They arrive in your queue with the reason and what they actually said, and you decide.
Everyone else is ranked on this, most important first:
- 1Ownership of outcomes
- 2Judgment under ambiguity
- 3Working with engineers
Guardrails
What it cannot do.
Not policy, not a promise in a prompt. These are enforced in the code, and a build that breaks one does not ship.
For engineering roles
Your ticket. Their code. Defended out loud.
Paste something off your own board. Every take-home a candidate has seen before is online with a solution under it, and yours is not. They write it in our editor or in their own, and then they sit a short interview about the decisions in the code they just submitted.
Watch the fourth step. Everything else in this category writes the files and ticks them off. This runs them, and throws the assessment away when a working solution fails it.
$ npx @larpy/screen start 7K2MQ4XPPayments reconciliation · Orrery90 minutesWritten to ~/orrery-takehomeThe task is in TASK.md. Open the folder in whatevereditor you like.Use AI as much as you want. That is the point, not aloophole: the interview afterwards is about the code,so anything you cannot explain will cost you morethan not using it would have.Recording. Leave this running.89:58 left recording · 0 events
Or their own editor
It runs where they already work.
One command, no install and no account. For a longer take-home the task lands in a folder on the candidate’s own machine, and Larpy records what happens in it: the files that change, the changes too large to have been typed, and their prompts where the tool exposes them.
It watches the workspace rather than hooking their tools, which is the difference that matters: there is nothing to install into Cursor or Claude Code, nothing that silently stops working, and an assistant released next month is covered on the day it ships. Their screen and camera record in the browser alongside it.
The math
You already pay for this. Twice.
Once in the hours your team spends on interviews that end in the first four minutes, and again in the people who took another offer while they waited a week for a slot. Move the number below to yours.
Today
168get an interview
232 never speak to anyone. That is 58%.
With Larpy
All 400get one
On their own time, before the date you set.
One recruiter clears about 168 a month: 45 minutes each, 6 hours a day.
Pricing is scoped to the work.
What moves it is volume, how many roles you run at once, and whether you want the coding assessment alongside the interview. Annual terms, never multi-year, and no implementation fee at any size. Most companies start with one role for thirty days.
Stop losing the good ones in the pile.
FAQ
Does Larpy reject candidates?+−
No, and it is built so that it cannot. Your knockout criteria are never sent to the interviewer, so it has nothing to judge against during the conversation. It reports what was said, with the sentence attached, and a person on your team decides. A disqualifier that was asked and never really answered comes back as unclear rather than cleared, because a missed borderline candidate costs you one interview and a wrong rejection costs someone a job.
Can candidates just use AI?+−
On a coding assessment, yes, and we assume they will, because they will be using it on the job too. The assistant is in the editor we hand them, so every question they ask and every suggestion they take comes back to you with the code. Then they defend what they submitted out loud, with questions generated from their own lines. Someone who cannot explain the code they handed in runs out of answers in about ninety seconds.
What stops someone having a friend take it?+−
The spoken half. A stand-in can write the code; the interview afterwards is live, unscripted and built from that specific submission. We do not run proctoring software, we do not watch their face and we do not score their eye movements. Documented false-positive rates for automated proctoring run 15 to 30% and fall hardest on neurodivergent candidates, which is a cost we are not willing to hand you.
Is this legal where we hire?+−
It is built for the rules that already exist. Illinois AIVIA requires notice, an explanation and consent before AI evaluates an interview, NYC Local Law 144 requires notice, the EU AI Act treats hiring as high risk, and Quebec Law 25 governs the recording. Every candidate is told plainly what is happening before anything starts, consent is timestamped and auditable, and they can have their recording and transcript destroyed on request. Criteria that touch a protected characteristic are refused at the point you write them, with the protection named. No biometrics, no facial analysis, no affect scoring, ever.
What if the scoring is wrong?+−
Then you will be able to see it, which is the part that matters. Every number sits above the quote that produced it, and every quote is checked against the transcript before it reaches you. The report also carries a panel saying what it does not know: the disqualifier nobody answered, the load test that observes behaviour and cannot prove thread safety. On day one your knockout verdicts will still vary run to run, which is exactly why every large buyer starts on one role rather than a whole pipeline.
Does it work with my ATS?+−
A screen is a link, so anything that can send a candidate a link already works, which is every ATS. Beyond that there is an MCP endpoint, so the assistant your team already uses can ask who is waiting on you, pull up what somebody actually said, and record a decision, without anyone opening the dashboard. Read only by default. There is no migration and nothing to rip out if you stop.
What do candidates see?+−
Your role and company, not our branding. A voice screen is whatever length you set, usually ten to fifteen minutes; a coding assessment is about seventy-five minutes to write and twelve to defend. They are told it is an AI interviewer, that a human decides, and that they can delete their recording. Unless you turn it off, they also get a short note on what went well and one thing to work on, never a score, because Larpy is an interview practice product first, which is the reason a candidate has any reason to think well of having been screened this way.
How is it priced?+−
Per screen, on an annual term billed monthly, with an included volume and a metered rate above it. The rate falls as volume commits. What moves your number is how many you run, how many roles at once, and whether you want the coding assessment alongside the interview. Nothing is sold as unlimited, so what a contract costs to serve is known before it is signed. We quote on a call rather than publishing a ladder, because the right shape for four roles and for four hundred are not the same product, and almost everyone starts with one role for thirty days.
How long until we are running?+−
Paste a job posting and you have a screen you can edit and send in about a minute, which you can do on this page right now. A pilot is one role for thirty to forty-five days, and it exists so the auto-reject rate is proven on your funnel before it carries anything important.