How so? Given the status quo bias, writing meaningless tests is worse than writing none at all. It gives the illusion that something is well-tested and may even lead people to write code in order to accomodate the test. That causes real damage on a team. Being able to cargo-cult to provide the illusion of competency should get no credit.

This was a hypothetical test scenario, it just proves he knows those stuff and we do not need to teach those to him. Perhaps he is weak in logically deciding what exactly needs to be tested but writing good tests doesn't come easy either. Many can fail in that given time constraint and other management pressure.

   > Perhaps he is weak in logically deciding what exactly 
   > needs to be tested but writing good tests doesn't come  
   > easy either. 

True, but we were looking for "senior" engineers. In that role, the candidate is expected to have a taste for these things, do code reviews, and even help junior engineers acquire that taste.

   > Many can fail in that given time constraint and other 
   > management pressure.

I forgot to mention it, but this was a take-home assignment. So there really was no time constraint or interview pressure.