Two checks, answered from the regulators' own text
Each of your questions, run part by part. Coco read every rule and register that applies, wrote an answer from those and nothing else, then checked each citation back to its source. The numbers in each answer are the sources. Click one to read it.
How the check works
Four steps. Only the last one uses a language model.Identify the ingredient
By structure, CAS number or name, against the substance table. A string that matches nothing is reported as unidentified, not guessed.
No modelRead every rule on it
Every loaded market and product type, straight from the regulator's own list, including the rules on its close structural relatives.
No modelPull the law and the evidence
Statute, regulation, agency statements and peer-reviewed studies, with the law ranked ahead of the literature.
No modelWrite, then verify
A model drafts the answer from steps 1 to 3 only. Every citation it writes is then looked up again in what was retrieved.
Model, checkedWhat the database covers
A market or product type not listed here is reported as not covered, never as clean.Not loaded: Australia (the TGA Poisons Standard), Canada, ASEAN and every other market not shown above. A question about one of them is answered as not covered.
What this does not claim
- The database holds what open sources publish. A rule behind a paywall, or a change since it was last fetched, is absent, and absent is reported as not covered.
- A study is evidence, not a legal position, and the answer keeps the two apart.
- This is the information a decision rests on. Whether to ship is still a decision for a named person on your side.