I think the comments that feedback is hard to write are very surprising. Do you not have to write notes about why you are rejecting or approving a candidate? I

I think the comments that feedback is hard to write are very surprising. Do you not have to write notes about why you are rejecting or approving a candidate? I have never been in a role where interviews are ended with a simple boolean of whether the candidate passed or not. Every company should be keeping detailed notes on the reasons a candidate did well or poorly, even just to be able to compare if the candidate applies again in the future (or makes a claim that they were treated unfairly). Candidates should be rejected or hired for documented, justifiable reasons. Additionally, in a medium to large org, it's impossible to evaluate the efficacy of interviewers if there are no notes. If the recruiting team can't look at the output of an interview and say "Huh, X keeps rejecting candidates because they use tabs instead of spaces in their Python code," how is the company supposed to maintain any hiring bar? The effort to write comments in a way that can be shared externally should not be a huge amount of extra effort. Even if feedback is only shared on request, it should not take a monumental effort to distill some high-level bullet points from interview notes.