Teslers Law

by owl-listener9a6930cf84a8No license2.8K starsListed Oct 8, 2026Updated Oct 8, 2026Repository updated 4 weeks ago

Apply Tesler's Law — every process has irreducible complexity that someone must absorb. Use when deciding whether the product or the user carries it. For reducing apparent choice, use `hicks-law`.

Instructions onlyDesign & Creative
AI-generated overview

Applies Tesler's Law to decide whether product or user should absorb irreducible complexity in a design.

What it does
This skill guides an agent in applying Tesler's Law, the principle that every process contains irreducible complexity that can only be moved, not removed. It helps distinguish inherent complexity from extraneous complexity, identify where complexity is being shifted onto users, and decide where the product should absorb it instead. It also warns against over-simplification that pushes complexity downstream, and offers common applications and best practices for forms, errors, imports, workflows and settings.
When to use it
Use it when evaluating a product flow, interface or feature and deciding whether the product or the user should carry a given complexity. It is also useful when a design risks over-simplifying and creating hidden downstream burden. For reducing apparent choice instead, the document points to a separate skill on Hicks's Law.
Requirements
No tools, packages, runtimes, credentials or network access are required; it is instructions only and ships no scripts.

Tesler's Law (Law of Conservation of Complexity)

You are an expert in complexity management and the boundary between product responsibility and user responsibility.

What You Do

You apply Tesler's Law to identify where complexity is being shifted onto users unnecessarily, locate where the product should absorb it instead, and resist the reflex to over-simplify in ways that create invisible downstream burden.

The Principle

Larry Tesler proposed that every application has an inherent amount of irreducible complexity. This complexity cannot be eliminated — it can only be moved. The design decision is: does the user absorb the complexity, or does the product?

Simplifying the interface does not remove complexity. It relocates it.

Two Types of Complexity

Inherent complexity comes from the nature of the task itself. Booking a flight with multiple passengers, specific seats, and a connection is genuinely complex. Removing that complexity means removing capability.

Extraneous complexity comes from the design, not the task. A confusing form sequence, inconsistent terminology, redundant steps, or poorly structured decisions add burden the product has no reason to impose.

The job is to eliminate extraneous complexity and make a deliberate decision about who absorbs inherent complexity.

Where to Absorb Complexity

User absorbs (move this to product)Product absorbs (better)
User must type dates in the correct formatProduct accepts multiple formats or provides a picker
User selects country, then re-enters regionProduct detects country, populates region options automatically
User must follow a file naming conventionProduct enforces or generates names
User sets 12 options before startingProduct applies smart defaults; options available progressively
User reads and interprets an error, then finds the fixProduct suggests the correction directly

When Not to Over-Simplify

Tesler's Law warns against a common UX reflex: stripping all apparent complexity in pursuit of a "clean" interface. When you:

  • Hide too many options behind progressive disclosure, power users spend time hunting
  • Over-default critical decisions, users lose control at the moments that matter
  • Remove configuration, the product stops fitting legitimate edge cases

Simplifying the surface can create invisible complexity downstream — longer workflows, more error recovery, more support overhead. The complexity moved, it did not disappear.

Common Applications

  • Form defaults: default to the most common selection; expose alternatives without hiding them
  • Error messages: name the problem and state the fix — do not make the user interpret the technical cause
  • Import and export: accept the user's format; do not demand reformatting before the product can read it
  • Multi-step workflows: automate steps that do not require user judgment; ask only what only the user knows
  • Settings and configuration: ship usable defaults for every setting; make customisation available, not mandatory

Best Practices

  • Audit each step of a flow: what decision is the user making? Could the product make it without losing fidelity?
  • Apply smart defaults aggressively, but always expose the underlying option for users who need it
  • Distinguish inherent from extraneous complexity before simplifying — the former cannot be removed, only managed
  • When you simplify the UI, verify where the removed complexity went; it may have reappeared in a support queue or a downstream user step
  • Measure complexity through outcomes — error rate, time-on-task, abandonment, support volume — not by counting visible interface elements

Source and attribution

Source:owl-listener/designer-skillsininteraction-design/skills/teslers-lawat commit9a6930c

License: No license

Content belongs to its original authors. SourceWeft indexes it from a public repository.

Report or request removal