With the exception of Barhaspatya Sutra, Kamandakiya Nitisara is the only complete work of its class which follows Arthashastra pattern. But it omits the whole material found in Kautilya’s Arthashastra relating to the working of state administration and the branches of law and justice, which evidently did not interest his scholastic taste, Kamandaka was indebted to smriti tradition for some of his basic ideas, notably about the obligation of the king, moral issues of statecraft, authority and sources of law, duties of castes and social order, and so on (11.7.35; 11.7).
Kamandaka advocated protection of people depends upon the king, and their livelihood depends upon protection (1.12-13): without him the law (dharma) would disappear and would perish (11.34). Applying smriti and Arthashastra, the principles of the king’s authority and obligations are discussed by the author (1.9-11, 15-17; 11.20) and he repeats the traditional view of danda (11.37-43) and Saptanga theory of the state (IV.1-2). The same repetitive pattern he has adopted on the principles of government (Canto.111). He deals separately with Kantakasodhana (Canto VI) and the security of king and kingdom (Canto VII).
The chapters on inter-state relations in Kamandakiya Nitisara (Canto VII-IX) contain numerous definitions of the constituents of the state system following different authorities , as well as elaborate lists of the types of peace, war, attack and neutrality, along with a large body of the relevant rules and principles.
Politics of peace and war has been treated by Kamandaka in chapters IX and X of Kamandakiya Nitisara, while he deals with the remaining types of foreign policy in chapter XI. The policy of marching against the enemy is dealt with in greater details by the author in chapter XVI, bearing the title of the proper time for an expedition and the nature of the assailant. In chapter XIX, he discusses treacherous warfare and its alternatives, in which a number of principles conform more or less to Arthashastra pattern. In some chapters, namely VI, IX, X, XIX, XVIII, the author considers the relationship between morality and statecraft.