Life Sciences: Adverse Event Triage with Claude Code: Build vs Buy Decision
A production playbook for adverse event triage in life sciences operations using Claude Code: build vs buy decision, run-scoped inputs, logs, typed results, and artifacts.
Audience: Pharmacovigilance teams
The problem
Pharmacovigilance teams need adverse event triage to run repeatedly against case narratives, intake forms, medical history, and reporting rules. In life sciences operations, the pain is not one good answer; it is repeatability, auditability, exception handling, and evidence that survives handoff.
Implementation path
Compare the work required to operate adverse event triage: sandbox lifecycle, provider credentials, input injection, logs, artifact delivery, retries, and result validation.
Tradeoffs and failure modes
Building gives total control; buying the runtime compresses the path to a customer-facing workflow. For adverse event triage, the practical test is whether a second run can be debugged, retried, and consumed by a product without reading the raw agent transcript.
Decision table
Build internally if you need bespoke infrastructure primitives.
Use Argo if you need adverse event triage as a product workflow: inputs, Claude Code, logs, result JSON, and artifacts.
Use both if a specialized sandbox must sit behind a stable run contract.
Run this on Argo