Comply

The agent drafts Part A. You confirm it. Your assessor signs Part B.

Tamats assembles EU Product Information File Part A — composition, physicochemical and microbiological specification, stability, allergen and undesirable-effects sections — from the formulation, stability studies and cited literature already held in the workspace, and tracks each section through empty, agent-drafted and human-confirmed states. It does not write Part B: the safety assessment and the Cosmetic Product Safety Report require a qualified safety assessor, and the tool refuses to draft one under any phrasing, marking those sections assessor-only instead. The output is a dossier a real assessor can pick up with the ingredient-level regulatory work already done and cited, not a filing you can submit as-is.

A cosmetic product cannot be placed on the EU market without a Product Information File, and assembling one is mostly the tedious work of gathering things you already have: the exact composition, the stability data, the specification, the allergen declarations, the record of undesirable effects. That work is tedious precisely because it lives in five different places. Tamats holds those records already, so it assembles the file from them rather than asking you to re-enter them into a form.

What you do with it

Section-by-section assembly

Each PIF section is drafted from the linked records — composition from the formulation, stability from its studies, undesirable effects from logged feedback. A section with no underlying data stays empty and says what is missing rather than generating plausible prose to fill it.

A state machine, not a text box

Every section carries a state: empty, agent-drafted, human-confirmed, or assessor-only. Confirming a section stamps it and locks it. What a reviewer sees is not just the text but who stood behind it.

Completion and gaps

The dossier shows a completion percentage and an explicit gap list — which sections are unfilled and what record each one is waiting on. A gap is a work item, not a blank page.

Versioned per product and region

Dossiers are scoped to a product and a region and carry a version, so a reformulation produces a new revision rather than silently overwriting the file that was current when the last batch shipped.

What it computes over

• —The product's own formulation records, including phase composition and percentages
• —Stability studies run in the workspace, with their measured timepoints
• —Cited literature and CIR safety records retrieved for the ingredients in the formula
• —Logged post-launch feedback classified as adverse reactions

Where it stops

• No Part B. The safety assessment and the CPSR are not drafted, summarised or approximated — the tool refuses the request rather than producing something that reads like one.
• No toxicological calculation. There is no margin-of-safety, NOAEL or SED computation anywhere in the product.
• Part A only, and only for the EU. There is no equivalent dossier engine for Korean, Japanese or Chinese registration.
• No electronic submission. Nothing files to CPNP; the output is a dossier, not a transmission.

Questions

Can Tamats write my Cosmetic Product Safety Report?

No, and it will not try. The CPSR and the Part B safety assessment require a qualified safety assessor under the EU Cosmetics Regulation, and the dossier tool refuses to draft one under any phrasing — those sections are marked assessor-only. What Tamats does is get the formula to that assessor with the composition, stability, allergen and literature work already assembled and cited, which is the part that normally takes weeks.

Is the assembled Part A ready to submit?

It is ready to be reviewed, not to be filed. Every section carries its state, so nothing reaches a regulator on the strength of an agent draft alone — a human confirms each section, and the safety assessment still comes from an assessor. Tamats does not submit to CPNP or any other portal.

What happens when I reformulate?

Dossiers are versioned per product and region, so a reformulation produces a new revision rather than overwriting the file that was current when the previous batch shipped. The superseded version stays readable.