A useful interviewer cannot behave like a conventional assistant.
If every response begins with “Great answer,” the simulation loses credibility quickly.
More importantly, excessive encouragement can hide the exact thing the candidate needs to see.
The interviewer needs to maintain uncertainty.
If ownership remains unclear, it should probe ownership.
If a candidate says a project was successful without explaining why, it should ask for evidence.
If an answer appears to avoid the question, the interviewer should not quietly move on.
This does not mean making the interviewer hostile.
The distinction we are working toward is:
skeptical, not adversarial
specific, not aggressive
persistent, not repetitive
A good follow-up should exist for a reason.
The interesting technical problem is therefore not simply generating questions.
It is maintaining a model of what the candidate has and has not actually demonstrated.