Inspiration
Coming back to a project should mean continuing the work. Instead, it often means rereading proposals, specifications, meeting notes, and test reports to recover what happened. The files are still there, but the reasoning behind the decisions is scattered.
Atlas-NAS grew from a simple question: could a NAS help preserve a project's context as well as its documents?
What it does
Atlas-NAS is a context recovery Skill for UGREEN's Uliya assistant. It is designed to reconstruct project decisions, changes, reasons, and unresolved questions from an authorized folder, producing a reusable brief with evidence for each finding.
The workflow is straightforward:
- Choose a project folder and ask what changed and why.
- Review a brief that distinguishes proposals, approved decisions, superseded information, and conflicting claims.
- Follow the source references to check the findings.
- Optionally approve saving the reviewed brief to a chosen destination.
An optional historical cutoff supports questions such as “What had been approved by this date?” Repeat use lets newly documented changes update the brief.
How I built it
I authored the Skill using UGREEN's official Uliya Skill kit. Its instructions coordinate the registered file, document, and knowledge experts for discovery, reading, and approved report saving. The package contains one SKILL.md entry point and four supporting Markdown references.
I also built a local development harness with Python and pypdf to extract synthetic PDFs, record source provenance, and verify saved report contents. Node.js and Playwright rendered test documents and the proposal PDF.
OpenAI Codex assisted with development, evidence review, and drafting. The core Atlas-NAS workflow was newly authored for this hackathon.
Challenges
The hardest problem was deciding what the documents actually establish. A newer file can repeat an outdated assumption. A proposal can resemble an approved decision. An objection can remain unresolved even when a status note sounds final.
The Skill requires evidence of adoption and explicit supersession, preserves disagreements, and identifies missing reasons or resolutions. Other challenges included unreadable sources, partial coverage, refreshing context without treating generated reports as independent evidence, and verifying that saved text matches the reviewed brief.
What I learned
Useful project memory depends on preserving relationships between claims: what was proposed, what was approved, what replaced it, and why.
A dependable brief also makes uncertainty and coverage visible so the user can judge how much to trust it.
Accomplishments
Version 0.3.0 completes the local MVP and Round 1 package. Seventy automated tests passed, alongside a seven-scenario local rehearsal covering initial history, refresh, historical cutoff, unreadable input, declined saving, filename collision, and empty scope. The Skill passes the official static checker.
The rehearsal uses synthetic documents and replays reviewed analysis only when source and extracted-text hashes match. UGREEN NAS execution and native expert behavior still require validation on the assigned device.
What's next
Validate the complete workflow on the assigned UGREEN NAS, check source citations, demonstrate approved saving and repeat use, and evaluate whether someone unfamiliar with the project can use the brief to resume work confidently.
