Presence answers one question.
A file record can show that a document was uploaded. Record its name, product link, upload date and version. Where possible, keep a checksum to identify the exact file. These facts help traceability; they do not establish the meaning or adequacy of the contents.
For example, a document called “assessment.pdf” may be present while its product scope, author or current status remains unknown.
Completeness needs its own check.
A reviewer can record whether the file contains the expected sections or information for the task. Use states such as not checked, incomplete and complete. Write down missing information rather than relying on the state alone.
Completeness is relative to a defined task. A complete upload does not mean every regulatory question has been answered.
A specialist decision needs context.
Keep the reviewer, decision date, product revision and findings together. Record what was reviewed and what was outside scope. If changes are requested, make the follow-up tasks specific.
Avoid using “approved” as a general product claim when the reviewer checked only one piece of evidence.
Revisit decisions after a change.
A changed formula description, ingredient list or supporting file can affect the context of a previous decision. Preserve the old review in the history and make it clear that the current record has changed.
CosmeBeacon creates a new revision when product details or evidence change. A fresh review request connects the next decision to that revision.
Try one synthetic product in the sample workspace, or download a blank organiser from the resources library.
Open the resources library →