A bit contra, but this is a bit like asking fish how to catch them and the fish saying, "send more worms!"
I'm pretty senior as an architect in my field and I ask things in interviews like when their last round was, staff size, runway, revenue - basically like I'm an investor, because at this stage of my career that's exactly what I am doing. If that sounds funny, consider that there are LPs participating in seed and A rounds for less than the value or revenue a key hire can deliver. Obviously, I'm not an investor, but consider treating senior talent like somone who is investing in your company and they may open up. You don't have to kiss anyone's ass, and arguably a lot of perks are kind of patronizing above a certain level, so just treat recruiting as a business deal and not a patronage application. A lot of recruiting processes optimize for finding people who don't know what they are worth, and often at the expense of finding the people who really are worth a lot.
Also, this is for finding exceptional talent for near term outcomes in the growth phase of a company. Once your major growth phase is behind you (e.g. an D-F round to get you over the line to an IPO or an acquisition, or you are an institution) I'd recommend moderate and steady hands who can manage and scale jr's, and not a fireteam of tactical operators. Consider whether you just need better mid level managers who can really leverage a team better instead of more experienced IC's. A good IC is gold, but a good manager is a refinery.
Someone who is still an IC after more than a decade in the field is going to be motivated by solving interesting problems that actualize them, so perhaps lead with your hard problems. Someone senior understands organizations and starts with second order thinking, so tip some of your strategy and business model to them to let them apply their experience.
Individuals who are really, really good at something are usually good at it because they were optimizing against a constraint. As in anything, technique is an artifact of constraints, so consider that the very best technical talent is likely going to have an albatross of some sort. Look for minor contradictions, inconsistencies, and rough edges that created a situation where they have to be at least 2x better than anyone else in a specialty just to sit at the table. Their value has to offset their roughness for them to survive, and whether its conscious or not, that's often how they signal it. Many of them are more outdoor cats than indoor cats, as all the strategic sr. indoor cats are already managing directors and SVPs somewhere running people and not machines, so maybe see if you can lure someone out of a successful consulting run with some recognition and respect, and let them meet your execs. Post exit or significant culture change they will attrit out, but it's to mutual benefit.
Just a few ideas, but being attractive isn't a transaction, it's demonstrating that you are growing and how someone can be a part of that trajectory, so really attracting talent is the effect of showing promise.