@Carlos Cordova Knowledge graph — I would skip it here. Graphs earn their keep when you need relationships across many entities (who owns what, which SOW ties to which contract). A status log just needs to not drop facts, which is a smaller problem than a graph solves. Markdown-ifying — yes, but not for graph-readiness. It's that Word/PPT/Excel give you inconsistent structure to search against. Flat text lets your workflow grep for exactly what it needs instead of relying on the model to notice it inside formatted Office content. The real fix is splitting extraction from synthesis. Right now your delta workflow probably reads the new content and writes the updated log in one pass, so "what matters" gets decided in the same breath as the narration — that's where a fact slips. Add a step between them: pull facts into fixed buckets first (decisions, blockers, dates, dollar/scope changes, named owners, whatever your log actually tracks) as a structured intermediate file, then write the log from that file instead of the raw source. Filling a named slot loses far fewer facts than free narration does. And since your full-build workflow already works — don't re-narrate the whole customer history on every delta. Run the same bucket-extraction against just the new content since the last log, then merge into the existing file. Smaller surface, fewer places for something to fall out.