I'm not a manager, or even a senior engineer. But I've also noticed personally that I'm comfortable judging an interviewee's answer to my open-ended questions.

I'm not a manager, or even a senior engineer. But I've also noticed personally that I'm comfortable judging an interviewee's answer to my open-ended questions. I really like concise answers that make it easy for me to dig into specific details. I can have objective standards for answers about specific details. Giving a handwavy answer to an open-ended question may be better than giving a detailed answer that leads to an objectively bad answer. But it leaves me feeling less excited about the candidate. Giving "honest answers" is dangerous. Even if it's diplomatic, the interviewer could decide it's the wrong answer. But you are also interviewing company, so if your answer is something you really care about a wrong answer probably indicates a bad company fit. For instance I remember I was interviewing at a startup, and I was concerned that their core business depended on a project where the deadlines and deliverables were not adjustable, so I asked them about WLB and long-term crunchtime. I was told that they disagreed with the premise of my question, they viewed the work as a marathon, not a sprint. Culturally it was very important to them that the workload and hours in the office were sustainable. I was really impressed with that answer. I also had a phone screen with an early stage startup where long hours were mentioned. And when I commented about it, the interviewer said he had no problem with it because he was really excited about the work and really liked his coworkers as friends. Both things are great to have at your job, but I thought that was a bad answer to a question about long work hours. Those were two completely different cultures, and I'd be fine knowing that the same "honest answer" cost me a job offer from one of those companies.