How I evaluate recruiting AI tools

When you're sitting through yet another AI recruiting demo, it's hard to tell whether the tool will actually help your team or just add noise. Here I break down the questions I use to stress-test products, beyond what shows up in a sales deck. The aim is to make evaluation more concrete and tied to how your recruiting work really runs.

All views are my own. Examples are generalized or anonymized and do not reflect any single employer's confidential data, systems, or metrics.

Back to Home
Overview

How I evaluate tools

Most tools fail for boring reasons: weak inputs, unclear ownership, no audit trail, outputs nobody trusts, and workflows that don't match how recruiters operate.

This is the checklist I use to get past demos and into "will this work in practice?"

Start here

What I check first (before features)

  • Use case: What job does the tool do? Outreach messages, job descriptions, interview guides, scorecards, scheduling, screening notes, candidate Q&A. One job per tool.
  • Inputs: What does it need to produce a good output? Where does that data live today?
  • Workflow fit: Who touches it, when, and how often? If it adds steps, adoption drops.
  • Proof: What does "good" look like, and how will we measure it?
Rubric

The rubric

Score each line 1-5. Anything under a 3 is a risk you will pay for later.

Output quality (in real workflows)

  • Outputs are usable without a human rewriting everything.
  • Results are consistent across similar inputs.
  • The tool behaves predictably when information is missing.

Control and transparency

  • You can see what influenced the output (inputs, rules, prompts, settings).
  • You can reproduce an output later if someone asks, "why did it say that?"
  • You can override, correct, and re-run without breaking the workflow.

Data handling and access

  • Clear answer to: what data is sent, stored, retained, and where.
  • Easy export of logs and outputs for review.
  • Permissions make sense (recruiter vs hiring manager vs admin).

Compliance and risk

  • You can explain how it's used in the process, in plain language.
  • There is an audit trail for decisions or recommendations.
  • Guardrails exist for sensitive content (protected class references, medical, compensation, etc.).

Integration and friction

  • It fits your ATS/CRM reality, even if the integration is imperfect.
  • It removes work instead of relocating it to another screen.
  • It doesn't require constant babysitting to stay accurate.

Adoption and ownership

  • A clear owner exists (not "the team").
  • Training is short and specific.
  • The system survives process changes without collapsing.
Demos

Demo questions that expose problems fast

Ask these in the first 10 minutes. The answers tell you more than the product tour.

  • "Show me the exact input the tool uses."
  • "Where do outputs live after I generate them?"
  • "Can I export logs for an audit?"
  • "What happens when the input is incomplete?"
  • "Where is human review required, and how is it enforced?"
  • "What does 'good' performance mean here, and how do you measure it?"
Risks

Red flags

  • "It learns from your data" with no clear retention boundaries.
  • No exportable history of outputs.
  • Results can't be reproduced.
  • The tool nudges high-risk decisions without governance (screening decisions, rejection rationale).
  • Claims that replace recruiters instead of supporting workflows.
Close

Pressure-test fast

Use the demo questions above against your real workflow. If you can't see the exact inputs, export outputs, and reproduce results, you're buying demo theater.