Your next interview shouldn't be your first practice.
I built HireEdge AI after noticing a simple problem: most candidates spend hours perfecting their resumes but very little time preparing for the interview itself.
There are countless tools that can rewrite a CV, improve ATS scores, or generate cover letters. But when the interview day arrives, candidates are often facing difficult questions, follow-up challenges, and pressure they haven't practiced for.
That's why I built Sarah, an AI interviewer that simulates realistic interviews, asks role-specific questions, challenges vague answers, and provides feedback on communication, confidence, and structure.
HireEdge AI also includes CV tailoring and ATS optimization, but the real mission is helping candidates perform better in interviews. We want job seekers to walk into interviews feeling prepared, confident, and ready to showcase their skills.
After all, your next interview shouldn't be your first practice.
"Your next interview shouldn't be your first practice." is a strong recruiting/coaching tagline. It conveys that candidates should prepare before a real interview opportunity.
Have you tried https://www.skillvee.com/en? Seems to be very similar to your product. I think the interviewing niche is crowded. Why not do something more interseting? For example, make an integrated platform for learning stuff/interviewing/making connnection with other people in the industry? You can make the whole "finding a job" experience much like playing a video game.
The niche seems a bit crowded but I am sure you must have done something to stand out of the crowd. All the best!!!
the resume vs interview prep imbalance is real. everyone obsesses over the cv and then doesn't put the reps in for the actual interview. makes sense why you built this
Most interview prep tools give you a script. The problem is interviews go off-script after the second question. What happens in Sarah when someone gives a vague answer - does she push back or just move on?
Love the idea. CV tools are everywhere, but interview practice still feels surprisingly underdeveloped.
This hits a real gap. Most people overwork the CV and skip actual interview practice, then struggle when pressure kicks in. Curious how Sarah handles follow up questions when the answer is vague or incomplete.
Really like this idea. The "don't let your first practice be the real interview" framing is strong, and an AI interviewer that pushes back on weak answers is a good wedge. So here's the one thing I'd change, and it's a positioning call, not a nitpick.
In your post you say the real mission is interview practice, and that CV rewriting and ATS tools are a dime a dozen. I agree. But your website leads with exactly that commoditised part. The H1 is "Stop applying. Start getting hired," and the hero right under it is "paste a job description, get a tailored CV that beats ATS filters." Sarah, your actual differentiator and the thing you built the company around, only shows up as a feature further down. So the page is selling the part you admit everyone else already does, and burying the part only you have.
I'd flip it. Make Sarah and the interview practice the hero, and let CV tailoring be the supporting "it also does this." Your own post line, "your next interview shouldn't be your first practice," is a sharper and truer headline than "stop applying, start getting hired," which fights reality a bit since people do still have to apply.
Second, readability, because it undercuts that first impression. Your gold accent colour, the warm orange you use for emphasis, fails the contrast check badly. Even on big headings at 32px it comes out around 2.8 where 4.5 is the readable line. So the exact words you chose to grab attention are the hardest ones to read. The muted tan body text is light too. Darkening the gold a few steps for anything that's text would fix most of it, and you can keep the bright tone for backgrounds and shapes.
Quick technical bonus, since I always look: there's no 'main' landmark in the HTML, one of your form selects has no label, and some links aren't real links so search engines can't crawl them, which is part of why SEO sits at 92. All fast fixes.
One question: was leading with the CV and ATS angle a deliberate bet because it converts better, or did the page just grow CV-first while Sarah was the newer idea? Curious whether the order is on purpose.
This is a strong and very clear problem statement — especially the shift from “CV optimization” to “performance in the interview,” which is where most candidates actually struggle.
The positioning of an AI interviewer is compelling because it moves beyond static document editing into behavior simulation, which is much closer to the real pain point.
What stands out most is the realism angle. If the questions feel genuinely role-specific and the follow-ups adapt based on answers, that’s where it becomes more than just another prep tool.
The real challenge in this space is making feedback feel actionable rather than generic. Candidates don’t just need evaluation, they need to understand exactly how to improve their responses in a way that translates to real interviews.
Overall, the direction is strong because it targets execution under pressure, not just preparation materials.
The gap you are describing is real. CV tools are everywhere but actually practicing how to answer under pressure is something most people only do once in the real interview.
Curious whether Sarah adapts based on how the candidate responds or whether it follows a fixed question set regardless of the answers given. That adaptability is usually what separates useful interview prep from something that just feels like a quiz.
Great question. Sarah adapts to the candidate's responses rather than following a fixed question set. If an answer is vague, she'll ask for specifics, examples, or measurable outcomes. The goal was to make it feel more like a real interviewer probing deeper rather than a checklist of predefined questions
Interesting split here.
Most tools in this space optimize the “get interview” stage, while you’re pushing into “perform in interview”.
Those often attract different user expectations than they first appear.
That's exactly what the data showed me. I originally thought CV tailoring would be the main value proposition, but user feedback pushed me toward interview prep. Getting the interview is only half the battle, many candidates struggle most when they're actually sitting in front of the interviewer. That's the gap Sarah is designed to address.
I'd be careful pulling that apart in a comment section.
If you're curious, happy to send over the fuller thought — just drop your email.
Genuinely curious — shall I drop you a DM?
Email would be easier.
Drop your email here and I'll send it over.