Maximum Nesting Depth of the Parentheses
A easy-tier problem at 84% community acceptance, tagged with String, Stack. Reported in interviews at Intel and 0 others.
Maximum Nesting Depth of the Parentheses is an easy problem that shows up in assessments, and Intel has asked it. With an 84% acceptance rate, most candidates who see it pass, but the ones who blank on the core insight are the ones who didn't recognize what "nesting depth" actually means. You're counting parentheses depth as you scan left to right, tracking the maximum depth you hit. It's straightforward once you see it, brutal if you don't. If this problem surfaces during your live OA and you freeze, StealthCoder surfaces a working solution in seconds, invisible to the proctor.
Companies that ask "Maximum Nesting Depth of the Parentheses"
Maximum Nesting Depth of the Parentheses is the kind of problem that decides whether you pass. StealthCoder reads the problem on screen and surfaces a working solution in under 2 seconds. Invisible to screen share. The proctor sees nothing. Made by an Amazon engineer who watched the leaked-problem repo become an industry secret. He decided you should have it too.
Get StealthCoderThe trick is simple: iterate through the string, increment a counter when you see an opening parenthesis, decrement when you see a closing one, and track the maximum value your counter reaches. You don't need a stack data structure despite the topic tag. The stack label exists because this type of problem teaches the same mental model as stack problems, but the actual solution is a single pass with one integer. Common mistake: candidates overthink it and try to validate parentheses or build a data structure. The obvious failure case is trying to match pairs instead of just counting depth. If you understand what the problem is asking, this takes 30 seconds to code. StealthCoder is the safety net for the candidate who reads "nesting depth" and second-guesses themselves into solving the wrong problem during the live assessment.
Pattern tags
You know the problem.
Make sure you actually pass it.
Maximum Nesting Depth of the Parentheses recycles across companies for a reason. It's easy-tier, and most candidates blank under the timer. StealthCoder is the hedge: an AI overlay invisible during screen share. It reads the problem and surfaces a working solution in under 2 seconds. Made by an Amazon engineer who watched the leaked-problem repo become an industry secret. He decided you should have it too. Works on HackerRank, CodeSignal, CoderPad, and Karat.
Maximum Nesting Depth of the Parentheses interview FAQ
Is this problem still asked at major companies?+
Intel has asked it. With an 84% acceptance rate and easy difficulty, it's typically a warm-up or early screen problem. Not a blocker question, but one you should handle cleanly to build confidence before harder problems.
Do I actually need a Stack data structure for this?+
No. The Stack topic tag is there because the problem teaches the same pattern as stack problems, but the solution is just a counter variable. You scan left to right, increment on '(', decrement on ')', and track the max counter value. That's it.
What's the trick most people miss?+
Thinking they need to validate or match parentheses pairs. You don't. You're just counting depth: how many open parentheses are active at any point. Maximum depth is the answer. Ignore the matching problem entirely.
How does this relate to harder stack problems?+
This teaches the intuition that parentheses problems track state as you scan. Harder versions require actual validation or bracket-type handling. This one strips that down to pure depth tracking. Master the pattern here, then apply it to harder variants.
What's a realistic runtime and space complexity?+
Single pass through the string, one integer counter: O(n) time, O(1) space. If you're allocating a stack or extra arrays, you're overengineering. That's the sign you've misread the problem.
Want the actual problem statement? View "Maximum Nesting Depth of the Parentheses" on LeetCode →