Company details

Paris, France

HEADCOUNT

25-99

ORG TYPE

Startup

SECTOR

Technology & Digital

WEBSITE

https://dust.tt/

About the company

Dust builds an AI agent platform positioned as an “AI operating system” for companies. The product lets teams create and run secure, custom AI agents connected to internal tools and knowledge sources like Slack, Google Drive, Notion, Confluence, and GitHub. Dust markets the platform for cross-functional use cases such as sales, customer support, engineering, data and analytics, IT, and people teams. Dust also positions security and enterprise controls as core features, including access controls and compliance messaging.

Locations and presence

Dust is headquartered in Paris, with a significant presence in San Francisco and roles also appearing tied to New York. Dust describes an office-first setup, with many roles listed as on-site and the company writing explicitly about building in person.

Palpable Score

56.7

/ 100

Dust is more accessible than many startups on hiring transparency because Dust publicly explains what candidates should expect in interviews, including work-sample style assessments. Entry-level access looks limited because most visible hiring is for experienced or “founding” roles, with only a small amount of public evidence of internships. Early-career outcomes are hard to verify beyond a small set of public employee reviews, so the score is capped by missing data.

Pillar 1: Early-career access

Score

8.0

/ 20

The company’s public hiring footprint skews toward experienced and “founding” roles, which limits straightforward first-job entry points.
Dust has at least some public evidence of internship-level hiring via interview entries referencing a Software Engineer Internship process.
The company keeps an open “spontaneous application” route on the careers system, which helps access, but does not substitute for recurring junior-intake roles.

Pillar 2: Hiring fairness and transparency

Score

14.0

/ 20

The company publishes a detailed “Interviews at Dust” write-up that sets expectations for a full-day onsite work-sample and explains how evaluation works for engineering and GTM roles.
Dust’s Glassdoor interview entries describe multi-stage processes (screening, assignment or case study, peer conversations, and founder rounds), which is clearer than many early-stage companies.
The company’s default of a full-day onsite (and, in some cases, take-home work plus presentations) raises the time burden, which can feel less fair for candidates without flexibility.

Pillar 3: Learning and support

Score

11.7

/ 20

The company describes a “DRI” model where engineers own initiatives end-to-end, including user discovery, writing specs, coordinating with design, and monitoring adoption, which can accelerate learning through real responsibility.
Dust writes explicitly about office-first collaboration and points to frequent real-time debugging, cross-team problem solving, and fast iteration as part of day-to-day work.
The company does not publicly outline structured onboarding, mentorship, or a learning budget, which makes early-career support hard to verify beyond cultural claims.

Pillar 4: Pay fairness and stability

Score

12.3

/ 20

The company has public job-post evidence of employer-provided compensation bands for at least some roles, which is a concrete pay-transparency signal.
Dust appears in third-party startup job boards with stated salary ranges and mention of equity as part of total compensation for engineering roles.
The company does not consistently publish compensation and benefits details in an easily verifiable way across roles, which limits confidence for early-career pay fairness and stability.

Pillar 5: Early-career outcomes

Score

10.7

/ 20

The company has a small but very positive public employee-review footprint for the Paris location that highlights constant learning, strong peers, and respect for personal time, alongside “startup pace” intensity.
Dust’s public employee sentiment is not broad enough to confidently judge retention, manager quality for juniors, or whether early-career hires thrive across teams and locations.
The company does not publish promotion rates, internship conversion outcomes, or early-tenure attrition indicators, so outcomes for early-career candidates remain largely unproven publicly.