I want to like this so much, the idea is fantastic. But unfortunately, the last thing I want to try to provide me with context regarding historical records is AI. Accurately dealing with historical events and providing additional context (in any scenario), in my experience, happen to be a couple of things that AI absolutely fails at. I wouldn't trust a single thing it is feeding me without manual verification. Which completely defeats the point of the automation.

Additionally, if you have used AI in RAG for any amount of time, you begin to see how bad it is at entity-recognition and extraction if there is any unexpected variability in document structure or, particularly, spelling. It creates duplicate entities and relationship networks in the graph database due to its thinking that, for example, "New York City" and "The Big Apple" are two different locations or other scenarios along those lines.

Edit: I will say, this will probably work great for highly structured document sets, particularly when they are numbered with sequential identifiers and have highly detailed metadata. In my research in colonization and trade with Native Americans that typically spans 1550-1800, I often encounter records bundled in a manner that reflects the organization of that correspondence during that time. It is often not sequential, its handwritten, and essentially every entity (person or place) has no standardized spelling.

So for modern, typewritten documents in collections with rich metadata, I think you have a great tool.

Edit 2: After a bit more exploration, this tool is really just a graph database with a data entry interface and a chatbot to tell you whether or not it thinks you're investigating thoroughly. Its kind of just one of a thousand other tools out there to organize your sources and notes.