Install
$ agentstack add skill-obra-superpowers-skills-preserving-productive-tensions ✓ scanned · ✓ verified, works with Claude Code, Cursor, and more.
Security review
✓ PassedNo issues found. Passed automated security review. · v0.1.0 How review works →
- ✓ Prompt-injection patterns
- ✓ Secret / credential exfiltration
- ✓ Dangerous shell & filesystem operations
- ✓ Untrusted network calls
- ✓ Known-malicious package signatures
What it can access
- ✓ Network access No
- ✓ Filesystem access No
- ✓ Shell / process execution No
- ✓ Environment & secrets No
- ✓ Dynamic code execution No
From automated source analysis of v0.1.0. “Used” means the capability is present in the source — more access means more to trust, not that it’s unsafe.
Verified badge
Passed review? Show it. Paste this badge into your README, it links to the public security report.
Reliability & compatibility
Declared compatibility
Compatibility is declared by the source manifest. End-to-end runtime verification is coming, see below.
We're building live execution health for every listing: tool-call success rate, median latency, uptime, and last-checked timestamps, measured, not self-reported. It isn't live yet, so we don't show numbers we can't stand behind.
How agent discovery & health will work →About
Preserving Productive Tensions
Overview
Some tensions aren't problems to solve - they're valuable information to preserve. When multiple approaches are genuinely valid in different contexts, forcing a choice destroys flexibility.
Core principle: Preserve tensions that reveal context-dependence. Force resolution only when necessary.
Recognizing Productive Tensions
A tension is productive when:
- Both approaches optimize for different valid priorities (cost vs latency, simplicity vs features)
- The "better" choice depends on deployment context, not technical superiority
- Different users/deployments would choose differently
- The trade-off is real and won't disappear with clever engineering
- Stakeholders have conflicting valid concerns
A tension needs resolution when:
- Implementation cost of preserving both is prohibitive
- The approaches fundamentally conflict (can't coexist)
- There's clear technical superiority for this specific use case
- It's a one-way door (choice locks architecture)
- Preserving both adds complexity without value
Preservation Patterns
Pattern 1: Configuration
Make the choice configurable rather than baked into architecture:
class Config:
mode: Literal["optimize_cost", "optimize_latency"]
# Each mode gets clean, simple implementation
When to use: Both approaches are architecturally compatible, switching is runtime decision
Pattern 2: Parallel Implementations
Maintain both as separate clean modules with shared contract:
# processor/batch.py - optimizes for cost
# processor/stream.py - optimizes for latency
# Both implement: def process(data) -> Result
When to use: Approaches diverge significantly, but share same interface
Pattern 3: Documented Trade-off
Capture the tension explicitly in documentation/decision records:
## Unresolved Tension: Authentication Strategy
**Option A: JWT** - Stateless, scales easily, but token revocation is hard
**Option B: Sessions** - Easy revocation, but requires shared state
**Why unresolved:** Different deployments need different trade-offs
**Decision deferred to:** Deployment configuration
**Review trigger:** If 80% of deployments choose one option
When to use: Can't preserve both in code, but need to document the choice was deliberate
Red Flags - You're Forcing Resolution
- Asking "which is best?" when both are valid
- "We need to pick one" without explaining why
- Choosing based on your preference vs user context
- Resolving tensions to "make progress" when preserving them IS progress
- Forcing consensus when diversity is valuable
All of these mean: STOP. Consider preserving the tension.
When to Force Resolution
You SHOULD force resolution when:
- Implementation cost is prohibitive
- Building/maintaining both would slow development significantly
- Team doesn't have bandwidth for parallel approaches
- Fundamental conflict
- Approaches make contradictory architectural assumptions
- Can't cleanly separate concerns
- Clear technical superiority
- One approach is objectively better for this specific context
- Not "I prefer X" but "X solves our constraints, Y doesn't"
- One-way door
- Choice locks us into an architecture
- Migration between options would be expensive
- Simplicity requires choice
- Preserving both genuinely adds complexity
- YAGNI: Don't build both if we only need one
Ask explicitly: "Should I pick one, or preserve both as options?"
Documentation Format
When preserving tensions, document clearly:
## Tension: [Name]
**Context:** [Why this tension exists]
**Option A:** [Approach]
- Optimizes for: [Priority]
- Trade-off: [Cost]
- Best when: [Context]
**Option B:** [Approach]
- Optimizes for: [Different priority]
- Trade-off: [Different cost]
- Best when: [Different context]
**Preservation strategy:** [Configuration/Parallel/Documented]
**Resolution trigger:** [Conditions that would force choosing one]
Examples
Productive Tension (Preserve)
"Should we optimize for cost or latency?"
- Answer: Make it configurable - different deployments need different trade-offs
Technical Decision (Resolve)
"Should we use SSE or WebSockets?"
- Answer: SSE - we only need one-way communication, simpler implementation
Business Decision (Defer)
"Should we support offline mode?"
- Answer: Don't preserve both - ask stakeholder to decide based on user needs
Remember
- Tensions between valid priorities are features, not bugs
- Premature consensus destroys valuable flexibility
- Configuration > forced choice (when reasonable)
- Document trade-offs explicitly
- Resolution is okay when justified
Source & license
This open-source skill is cataloged on AgentStack and links to its original source — we do not rehost the code.
- Author: obra
- Source: obra/superpowers-skills
- License: MIT
Install and usage instructions live in the source repository linked above.
Reviews
No reviews yet, be the first.
Write a review
Versions
- v0.1.0 Imported from the upstream source.