[gt384u]

I feel like completely specifying the problem does everyone in an actual engineering interview a disservice and isn't a good analogue to actual engineering problem-solving. That said, it might be acceptable or even encouraged for the purposes of this site.

In the case that you mention, if someone asked me "Can I short sell?" I'd be happy that they considered the order of events there and were trying to explore the problem. I'd certainly remember it in my interview feedback. My response as an interviewer would be more or less "That's an interesting thought. To simplify the problem, let's say we're risk averse and prefer a finite loss potential. Go ahead and just consider purchase before sale."

One of the biggest criteria I looked for from junior engineering candidates was that they didn't just jump into implementation and asked clarifying questions. That's hard to do with the sort of site this is so maybe in this case more complete specification is useful, but any way that a bit of ambiguity can be introduced means that you can have a meaningful conversation with an engineer about representation, the shape of the problem, the inputs, what the criteria for success are, what is truly necessary to solve a problem. I want working code in the end, but hearing the things a person does or does not consider about a problem is interesting and valuable to understand a potential teammate and how they think.

[stygiansonic]

I don't have a problem with a vague question and in fact a candidate asking clarifying questions is indeed a Good Thing.

However the way the question was phrased just makes it seem like the person who phrased it doesn't understand how trading works in real markets.