Kandev is a self-hostable workspace for organizing software tasks and running multiple AI coding agents in parallel, with Kanban views, change review, and pull request support. Developers use it to coordinate agents from different providers and inspect their work in one place. The catalogue entries extend its agent workflows and development environment.
Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to kdlbs/kandev. Take a copy, put it at the same path in your own repository, and replace the rules that are about this project with yours.
curl -O https://raw.githubusercontent.com/kdlbs/kandev/main/.agents/skills/push/SKILL.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/kdlbs/kandevWrote this? Show the measurements
A badge with what this costs and how it scanned, read live from this page, so it follows the numbers instead of freezing them. Markdown for a README, HTML for a documentation site or a project page.
[](https://agentmods.dev/skills/kdlbs/kandev/push)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/kdlbs/kandev/push"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/kdlbs/kandev/push/github.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" height="20"></a>Or the 80×15 button, for a site that already has a row of RSS and ATOM ones. Only the verdict fits; the numbers stay here.
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/kdlbs/kandev/push"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/kdlbs/kandev/push.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>- NVIDIA SkillSpector warn
SkillSpector: 1 finding, up to high
These are SkillSpector’s own severities. On a checked sample its high-severity flags on skills were ~96% false positives — a documented command, a public API, a “never do X” rule — so we show them as a caution to read, not a verdict. Why →
- high Tool Misuse · line 46 Tool parameters are crafted to achieve unintended or unsafe behavior. Parameter abuse can bypass intended safety checks (e.g. shell=True, --force, dangerous glob patterns).Fix: Validate all tool parameters against an allowlist. Reject dangerous parameter values (shell=True, --force, -rf /) and use safe defaults.
What it costs to keep this loaded
Counted locally with the o200k_base tokenizer, which is exact for GPT models; Claude uses its own tokenizer and its counts differ. Treat this as one consistent yardstick across the catalogue rather than a bill. Prices are per million input tokens.
| Model | Per session | Once invoked |
|---|---|---|
| Fable 5.1 | $0.00028 | $0.01305 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00011 | $0.00522 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00261 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00130 |
Grade A, and why
push scanned grade A with 0 findings against 26 rules in 11 categories — prompt injection, anti-refusal, data exfiltration, privilege escalation, supply chain, agent snooping, system-prompt leakage, SSRF and excessive agency — measured 1mo ago.
A static scan of the body, not an audit. Every finding is printed with the line that produced it so you can judge whether it matters here. A mod is markdown that instructs an agent; that is exactly why what it instructs is worth reading.
Nothing flagged
None of the 26 patterns this scan looks for appear in this file: no shell pipes, no recursive deletes, no credential paths, no hidden text, no instruction-override or anti-refusal phrasing, no agent-config snooping. That is not a guarantee, it is the absence of the things that are checkable.
The source is not reproduced here
Licensed AGPL-3.0
The repository is licensed AGPL-3.0, which this catalogue does not treat as permission to reproduce the file. Read it at the source.
What this file has done since we first saw it
Hashed on every crawl. A supply-chain change to an agent config is a question of when, not whether, so the history is kept rather than the latest state alone.
- 1mo ago Changed · +8 lines 8a05d08fc68f
- 1mo ago First seen · 102 lines · 28 tokens per session scan A f08aeb8cece9
push is a skill published in the GitHub repository kdlbs/kandev (1,026 stars, last pushed today), licensed AGPL-3.0. It adds 28 tokens to every session and 1,305 once invoked, about $0.0001 per session on Opus 5.5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. No closer match exists in the catalogue, so it is treated as the original; first seen 2026-08-30.
Other skills, from other repositories
github-pr-workflow
Prepare a GitHub pull request from a feature branch — branch hygiene, commit shape, title/body, verification notes, screenshots for UI work, and replies to review comments.
review-open-pull-requests
List and analyze all open pull requests across GitHub repositories. Shows review status, CI/CD check results, age, and reviewers. Use when triaging PRs, checking team velocity, or identifying stale reviews that need attention.
merge-queue
Process the Refinery merge queue - collect agent work, detect and resolve conflicts, merge in dependency order, and verify integration.
requesting-code-review
Use when completing tasks, implementing major features, or before merging to verify work meets requirements.
github
GitHub operations via gh CLI: issues, PRs, CI runs, code review, API queries. Use when: (1) checking PR status or CI, (2) creating/commenting on issues, (3) listing/filtering PRs or issues, (4) viewing run logs. NOT for: complex web UI interactions requiring manual browser flows (use browser tooling when available)…
github-automation
GitHub workflow automation, PR management, issue tracking, and code review coordination. Integrates with GitHub Actions and repository management. Use when: PR creation, code review, issue management, release automation, workflow setup. Skip when: local-only changes, non-GitHub repositories.