Cursor
Software Engineer, Research Tools
About this role
Build full-stack tools for Cursor's reinforcement-learning platform that enable researchers and vendors to create, review, and monitor training environments and tasks. You'll own the complete workflow from task submission through acceptance, designing both reviewer interfaces for quality inspection and authoring tools for rapid task creation.
What you'll do
- Design and build vendor task creation, submission, and iteration workflows
- Develop review tools for inspecting rollouts, transcripts, and quality signals
- Create environment-health, failure-search, and versioning experiences for training data management
- Establish and maintain a shared component library for self-serve task creation interfaces
- Own end-to-end review and acceptance workflows with quality checks and fraud prevention
- Collaborate with researchers and domain experts to translate requirements into reliable products
What they're looking for
- Full-stack development with TypeScript and React
- Backend experience with Node, Python, or Go
- Building dense, data-facing UIs (transcript viewers, diffing, dashboards)
- Design systems and component library development
- Data quality assessment and inspection
- Workflow design for review, QA, and moderation systems
- System design for complex product workflows
- Rapid iteration under ambiguity
Opens the application — the Jobs AI extension fills it for you. Set up autofill
Opens the official application on the employer’s site. No login required.
Cursor
Cursor builds an AI-driven code editor used by millions of developers to transform how software is built. The company is hiring for infrastructure engineers, ML systems specialists, enterprise platform builders, security engineers, and customer success roles focused on driving adoption within large organizations.
- Website
- cursor.com
Likely interview questions
- Describe a time you built a dense, data-facing tool—how did you approach rendering and interacting with complex structured data?
- Tell us about a review or acceptance workflow you designed where users had incentives to circumvent checks. How did you keep the system honest?