Verified:Website 𝕏@julianobarbosa GitHub

ApertureOscillation

Oscillate design decisions across tactical and strategic frames to expose divergence.

Updated Aug 23, 2026

Search Tags:#feature design #architecture decisions #prompt workflow #system coherence #scope oscillation #design tensions #tactical vs strategic

Ready to run

npx skills add https://github.com/julianobarbosa/.claude --skill apertureoscillation

💬 Prompt for ChatGPT / Claude Chat▼

Please help me install this Agent Skill.
Skill: ApertureOscillation
Source: https://github.com/julianobarbosa/.claude/tree/main/skills/ApertureOscillation
Command: npx skills add https://github.com/julianobarbosa/.claude --skill apertureoscillation

SYSTEM DOCUMENTATION & REQUIREMENTS

What problem does it solve?

ApertureOscillation helps you avoid building the “right” thing in the “wrong” scope by revealing where local (tactical) design logic conflicts with system-level (strategic) requirements.

Core Features & Use Cases

3-pass scope oscillation: frames the same question at a narrow/tactical level, then a wide/strategic level, then synthesizes the divergence into actionable tension points.
Two-input coherence check: requires a distinct tactical target and strategic context to surface misunderstandings that single-scope analysis hides.
Design tension output: produces scope recommendations, divergence findings, and coherence/fit assessment suitable for architecture decisions, feature design, and pre-commit review.

Quick Start

Ask the AI: “Run aperture oscillation for this tactical target using this strategic context, and return the design tensions plus recommended scope decisions.”

Frequently Asked Questions about ApertureOscillation

High-intent search queries and answers about installing and using this skill.

FAQPage Schema

How do I resolve design misalignment between local implementation choices and broader system goals?▼

Design misalignment is resolved by oscillating a single decision across narrow tactical and wide strategic framings to expose divergence. This reveals specific design tensions and scope recommendations ensuring local choices satisfy broader goals.

What is the best way to check system coherence before committing to an architecture decision?▼

Checking system coherence requires a two-input check comparing a distinct tactical target against strategic context. This process surfaces hidden misunderstandings that single-scope analysis misses, yielding a coherence and fit assessment for pre-commit review.

How do I run a scope oscillation analysis for feature design?▼

Running a scope oscillation analysis involves a fixed three-pass workflow: frame the question narrowly, then strategically, then synthesize the divergence. You must provide both the tactical target and strategic context to generate actionable scope recommendations.

When do I need to use tactical versus strategic framing for scope negotiation?▼

Tactical versus strategic framing is needed when local implementation logic conflicts with system-level requirements during scope negotiation. Oscillating between these framings exposes design tensions that indicate where a feature fits the wrong scope.

Can I use this approach for pre-commit review of feature design without external dependencies?▼

Yes, the approach operates without external dependencies to perform pre-commit reviews of feature design. It synthesizes tactical and strategic inputs to produce divergence findings and scope recommendations directly.

Why does single-scope analysis hide misunderstandings in architecture decisions?▼

Single-scope analysis hides misunderstandings because it evaluates architecture decisions from either a local or global perspective, missing the divergence. Oscillating across scopes exposes where tactical implementation choices fail to satisfy strategic requirements.