HTTP Interfaces and External Systems for Cosmetic Intelligence Due Diligence Reports

Data sources for cosmetic intelligence due diligence include the National Medical Products Administration’s public cosmetic filing database

What the Data for This Category Looks Like

Data sources for cosmetic intelligence due diligence include the National Medical Products Administration’s public cosmetic filing database, third-party compliance testing institution reports, and brand official public materials. Data update schedule: Filing information updates in real time after product launch filing is completed. Testing reports update with each batch of product inspection results. E-commerce platform product parameters sync daily. Documentation uses structured tables as the core carrier, with fields including product filing number, product name, brand ownership, production enterprise information, ingredient list, filing status, and validity period. The ingredient list field only lists International Nomenclature of Cosmetic Ingredients (INCI) names, with no additional quantitative annotations. All fields are string or enumeration value types.

Constraints Imposed on HTTP Interfaces and External Systems by These Characteristics

Multi-source heterogeneous data sources require HTTP interfaces to support custom request headers and response parsing templates, to adapt to return formats from different data sources. The unique product filing number as the core identifier requires the interface to support precise query parameters, to avoid data duplication during batch pulling. Differences in update rhythms across data sources require configuring differentiated scheduled synchronization cycles, to distinguish pull frequencies for filing data and testing data. The lack of quantitative annotations in ingredient lists requires the interface to omit content-related request parameters, simplifying the request body structure. Large batch sizes in batch due diligence scenarios require HTTP interfaces to support pagination requests and concurrency control parameters, to avoid single-request overload or triggering interface rate limits.

How to Configure Settings

Configuration ItemRecommended ValueRationale
apiRequestTimeout600 secondsCosmetic due diligence data requires connecting to multi-source interfaces, and a single request includes multiple sets of data source queries. A longer timeout period prevents mid-request interruptions
batchTaskConcurrency5-8Cosmetic data source interfaces are mostly enterprise-level compliance interfaces. Excessive concurrency will trigger rate limits. This value adapts to the call restrictions of most compliance interfaces
requestRetryTimes3 timesCompliance data source interfaces occasionally experience network fluctuations. Limited retries reduce the failure rate of batch tasks
responseParseTemplateMap by filing number, product name, and ingredient list fieldsThe core fields of cosmetic due diligence data are fixed. Template-based parsing unifies structured output formats
batchRequestPageSize10 items per pageExcessive single-page data volume will trigger interface rate limits. This value adapts to the pagination restrictions of most cosmetic filing interfaces
authTypeAPI key authenticationCosmetic compliance data interfaces require identity verification, and API key authentication meets industry compliance requirements

The parameter values provided on this page are common starting points for configuration. Actual values are affected by material form, data volume, and business rules. Specific issues require specific analysis. It is recommended to test on your own samples before finalizing settings.

Three Common Misconfigurations

  • Symptom: Batch execution nodes work normally during online debugging, but tasks do not complete fully when called via API. Cause: The batchTaskConcurrency parameter is not configured. The default concurrency value for API calls differs from that in the online debugging environment, triggering rate limits on data source interfaces.
  • Symptom: After calling the interface workflow, running data is empty in the conversation log. Cause: The field mapping configuration for responseParseTemplate is not enabled. The raw data returned by the interface is not extracted in a structured format, so no valid running data appears in the log.
  • Symptom: The API interface with file upload functionality cannot receive externally uploaded cosmetic filing documents. Cause: The UPLOAD_FILE_ALLOW_EXT parameter is not configured to allow PDF and Excel format filing reports, so external documents cannot be recognized by the interface.

How to Confirm Successful Configuration

  • Initiate an API call for a single cosmetic product. Check that the returned results include the preset core fields, and verify that the field mapping matches the configured responseParseTemplate.
  • Submit a batch task. Check the status code returned by the interface to confirm no 429 Too Many Requests error occurs. Adjust the batchTaskConcurrency parameter to meet the current interface rate limit requirements.
  • Upload a cosmetic filing report document to the API interface. Check that the file is successfully parsed and added to the due diligence data, and confirm that the UPLOAD_FILE_ALLOW_EXT parameter covers the corresponding file formats.
  • Simulate an interface call failure scenario. Check that the retry mechanism configured in requestRetryTimes is triggered, and confirm that the task automatically resumes execution.

Question material comes from public community discussions. Configuration values are common starting points and should be measured against your own samples. Verified on 2026-09-14.