← STUDIO TOOLS / PIB
PRIVATE PILOT
Catch repository damage in the PR

Stop Unity project integrity failures before merge.

Project Integrity Bot reviews the Unity-specific failure modes general linters miss—meta/GUID problems, serialized reference breakage, Git LFS mistakes, and dependency drift—and points to the exact files involved.

FIRST SCOPE
One repository / target
FIRST RESULT
Within one week
DEPLOYMENT
Your existing CI
EXAMPLE REPORT / PIB
PROJECT INTEGRITY BOTPR #931 · refactor/combat-itemsUnity 2022 LTS · 46 files changed
BLOCKED
3
Review signals found

Only policy-relevant changes are raised.

!
Orphaned meta fileAssets/Items/Sword.prefab.meta
DEFINITE
Missing GUID targetAssets/Scenes/Arena.unity:2841
HIGH
L
LFS pointer replacedAssets/Audio/Arena.bank
18.2 MB
Package lockmanifest.json ↔ packages-lock
MATCH
POLICY / studio-default.ymlEXAMPLE OUTPUT
INPUTS+ Git diff+ Unity YAML+ Packages manifest & lock
THE OUTPUT

A quiet PR check that comments only on definite and high-confidence findings, with the evidence and repair path beside each one.

01 / REVIEW SURFACE

The signals worth stopping for.

The first pilot uses the subset that matches your workflow. The rest stay out of the way until they earn their place.

01

Meta & GUID integrity

Find missing, orphaned, duplicated, or unexpectedly regenerated Unity meta identifiers.

02

Serialized references

Inspect changed YAML for references that point to removed or unavailable project objects.

03

Git LFS enforcement

Catch large binaries committed directly, missing pointers, and tracked-file rule drift.

04

Package consistency

Review manifest and lockfile changes together and call out unresolved or surprising dependency movement.

05

Merge-risk patterns

Detect high-signal changes to scenes, prefabs, and project settings that deserve explicit review.

06

Actionable evidence

Every finding includes a path, reason, confidence level, and suggested next check.

02 / FIRST WEEK

A narrow pilot, built around your real pipeline.

No platform migration and no quarter-long rollout. We start with one decision your team currently has to make without enough evidence.

DAY 01

Choose the review point

Agree on one repository, target, baseline, CI job, and the signals that should be visible.

DAY 02–05

Connect the artifacts

Wire a read-only analysis step into the current workflow and produce an example report.

DAY 05–07

Review the evidence

Run it against representative changes, tune noise, and decide whether the next scope is justified.

03 / PRACTICAL QUESTIONS
Why not use a generic repository linter?+

Generic tools understand Git and file formats, but not the relationships between Unity meta files, GUIDs, serialized objects, and package state. The pilot focuses on those engine-specific edges.

Will this flood every PR with warnings?+

The default gate is deliberately conservative: definite and high-confidence findings only. Lower-confidence rules can be reported separately after the team decides they are useful.

What can be ready in one week?+

A first check on one repository covering an agreed rule set, posting to your current pull-request surface. We validate it against representative historical failures before treating anything as a gate.

Project Integrity Bot

Bring us the workflow
you cannot see clearly.

We will tell you what a useful one-week pilot can cover—and what it cannot.

outreach@xesoft.dev