Accelerating secure, AI-assisted data engineering with Claude Code on Amazon SageMaker and Amazon Bedrock

hero image
  • Insight
  • 9 minute read
  • September 07, 2026

Josh Peters

Associate, PwC US

Sony LNU

Senior Engineer, PwC US

Hector Villagomez

Director, PwC US

Adam Hood

Principal, PwC US

Key takeaways

  • Claude Code runs inside the client’s AWS account on Amazon SageMaker Studio and Amazon Bedrock, helping preserve existing security controls.
  • The initial pilot reduced routine pipeline changes by ~75% and took ten-table onboarding from roughly 12 hours to under 3.
  • Reusable skills codify team knowledge for PHI/PII detection, table entry insertion, DDL generation and DMS configuration.
  • SSO, IAM Identity Center, CloudTrail, CloudWatch, cost limits and peer review keep the environment governed and auditable.
  • Early stakeholder engagement, deliberate image scope, skill review and upfront tracking help organizations prepare for broader rollout.

Across industries, the accelerating pace of technology change is often placing sustained pressure on data and engineering teams. Platform modernization programs and the push to make data usable for AI and analytics are adding work faster than teams can absorb it, increasing the demand on technical teams whose headcount remains largely fixed. The result is a widening gap between what the business should deliver, and the capacity to deliver it.

AI coding assistants speak directly to this constraint, helping teams write code faster and accelerate delivery. For organizations in regulated industries such as healthcare and financial services, however, adopting these tools is rarely straightforward. The source code, data schemas, and surrounding context that makes AI coding assistants powerful are often sensitive, and most AI coding tools are not built with the residency, privacy, and governance requirements these organizations require. As a result, many of the teams that stand to benefit most from AI-assisted development are among the slowest to adopt it. For technology leaders, the question is no longer whether to adopt these tools. It is how to do so without compromising the controls that keep data secure.

PwC set out to address this question with a large healthcare payer by bringing Claude Code, Anthropic's agentic coding tool, into the organization's existing AWS environment. Through this implementation, Claude Code runs entirely within the organization's security perimeter on Amazon SageMaker Studio and Amazon Bedrock. In an initial pilot, the implementation of this tool helped the cloud data engineering team reduce the time spent on routine pipeline changes by ~75%, and saved several hours of effort on exploratory development work. The AI-generated output remained subject to the team's existing peer-review process, while also preserving established security controls and configurations.

In this post, we walk through the implementation approach and how it works inside an AWS environment, describe how the team applied it across two data engineering use cases in a focused pilot, and identify the challenges to plan for when performing similar implementations.

Why the usual responses aren't enough

Faced with this challenge, most organizations land on one of two responses. The first is to prohibit external AI coding tools. While this helps safeguard data and keeps security strong, the underlying capacity problem does not go away. Teams are still faced with the same backlog of work, increased demand, and reliance on patterns and ways of working that were not designed to handle the scale and capacity that the industry is demanding.

The second is to enable the use and adoption of external AI coding tools, but without a clearly defined governance model. While an optimistic solution, this path tends to surface risk and issues only after they have been materialized, and can leave businesses exposed and vulnerable.

Both of these responses treat security and speed as a tradeoff, when in reality, they do not need to be. The constraint is not whether an AI coding assistant can be trusted with sensitive work, but rather if the environment and controls around it can guarantee that sensitive work is secure from day one. This is not a decision of policy, but rather a question of system design and architecture; one that PwC set out to answer with Claude Code on AWS.

Solution overview

The solution helps address the capacity and governance problem through three components: where the tool runs, how team knowledge gets applied, and how adoption is rolled out.

Environment

Claude Code runs inside the client's AWS account. Amazon Bedrock provides model access and Amazon SageMaker Studio provides the development environment. There is no public internet path, and outbound access is restricted to an allowlist of approved tools and MCP servers. Developers authenticate through the organization's existing SSO and AWS IAM Identity Center, with no direct AWS console access required. Because the tool operates entirely inside the client’s existing perimeter, code, prompts, and outputs do not leave the already secure environment.

Codified team knowledge

Team knowledge, ways of working, and domain-specific process rules are codified into reusable skills instead of remaining tribal knowledge. Activities such as classifying sensitive fields, structuring configuration files, and applying team-specific naming and formatting conventions are written once as a skill, rather than existing only as unwritten context that different developers apply inconsistently or incorrectly. This turns practices that previously depended on informal, person-specific knowledge into a standard that is applied the same way each time, by any developer, automatically.

Pilot-first rollout

Our team began with a focused pilot instead of skipping ahead to a broad rollout. A small group of developers used the tool on real production work, covering both a repeated, monotonous task and an exploratory development one. Pilot results were verified before tool access was expanded to the broader development team. This gave the organization a way to assess the security model and the productivity results against actual outcomes before committing to scale.

Solution architecture

Claude Code is deployed inside the client's AWS account and VPC. There is no public internet path, and outbound access is restricted to an allowlist of approved tools and MCP servers. The environment has no direct database access.

Developers authenticate through the organization's existing SSO and AWS IAM Identity Center. Direct AWS console access is not required to use the tool. Each action is tagged to the individual user and captured in AWS CloudTrail and Amazon CloudWatch, giving the organization a complete audit trail of each session.

Claude Code cannot commit, merge, or deploy code on its own. Each change still goes through the team's existing pull request and peer review process before it reaches an environment, so that humans remain in the loop.

Cost is tracked at instance, user, and team level, giving the organization visibility into spend before it scales. Hard cost limits and alarms are also configured to help the team of developers working with the tool from inadvertently overusing and overspending on consumption, shutting down instances and blocking access to models calls once cost thresholds are met.

Development is no longer tied to a local machine or VDI. Compute is provisioned in minutes and sized to the task at hand. Each developer works from the same governed image. Instance sizing, usage limits, and cost tracking are easily configurable for the team or per developer. The tooling that developers use does not change, only where and how they access it.

When a developer authenticates through SSO, an event-driven process spins up a SageMaker Studio space using the organization's approved base image, so compute is available within minutes of signing on. The same automation runs in reverse: inactive spaces are automatically identified and cleaned up on a set schedule, so unused environments don't sit idle and accumulate cost. This keeps the environment self-managing at scale, without requiring a manual start up and tear down process to be managed.

Use cases from the pilot

Repeatable workflow: Onboarding new source tables

This use case involved onboarding new source tables into the data pipeline, a task that team members perform dozens of times each year. This effort involves the same series of steps each time: writing table configuration entries, applying rules for masking sensitive fields, and checking the result against the target schema. This kind of work enabled us to demonstrate where Claude Code adds value on tasks that are repeated often and follow an established pattern. To facilitate this workflow, the team built a series of reusable skills and modules:

  • Protected Health information (PHI) & Personally Identifiable Information (PII) detection skill: Classifies source table fields against the organization's PHI and PII guidelines and produces a structured list of masking decisions for developer review
  • Table entry insertion skill: Triggers a supporting Python module, built with Claude Code's help, to insert the approved table entry into the source system configuration, handling type conversion, schema generation, and code formatting
  • Data Definition Language (DDL) generation skill: Generates a versioned staging table DDL schema file for each new table request
  • Database Migration Service (DMS) configuration skill: Adds table entries into DMS configuration files based on source and load type, enforcing configuration standards

In this instance, Claude Code took the effort of onboarding a batch of ten new source tables from roughly 12 hours of manual effort down to under 3, while producing output consistent with that of developer's manual efforts. As with the output from the pilot, each generated skill, configuration, and piece of output was reviewed by humans, treating it with the same level of scrutiny as any other change committed to the codebase. This use case demonstrated significantly high value in removing the time and inconsistency that comes with re-applying the same rules by hand, turning a task that used to depend on careful manual repetition into one where a developer's time is spent reviewing and confirming decisions rather than producing them from scratch.

Exploratory development: Migrating and modifying legacy schemas

This use case involved reconstructing how a legacy system was built across scattered files and stored procedures. This kind of work enabled us to demonstrate where Claude Code can add a different type of value than automating repeatable tasks. Rather than following a fixed pattern, the tool read across a codebase, traced dependencies between files, and surfaced relevant context that could otherwise take a developer hours to piece together manually.

In this instance, Claude Code helped a senior level developer remove several hours of discovery effort by mapping how existing schemas and procedures were structured, and saved additional hours through the assistance in writing stored procedures, stage DDLs, and overall debugging. This work was held to the same review standard as the rest of the pilot. The value here was less about speed on a known task and more about helping developers compress the time it takes to understand a new system or hunt for unfamiliar code, turning a slow, manual process into one where a developer can move quickly into making changes with confidence.

Lessons learned

The following lessons reflect our learnings from the broad experience enabling Claude Code for the client, and should be considered when approaching future Claude Code enablement work:

Before any environment work begins, take the time to gather requirements directly from the teams that will ultimately be impacted. Cloud operations, the AI platform team, and security each bring a different view of what the environment should support, and each surfaced requirements and ideas to us that the others did not anticipate. Involving each relevant stakeholder early, during discovery, rather than after the environment is built, helps confirm that guardrails are properly mapped to what the organization requires from day one, avoiding rework or reconfiguration later in the timeline.

The skills, plugins, and tools available inside the development image should reflect work that your team should get done. What gets included or restricted affects both the image security and what developers can actually accomplish. It is essential to perform an evaluation on what tools, skills, plugins, and other additions to the instance are required for development, while also evaluating what should be restricted. This helps equip developers with the tooling they need from the start, and the team is not having to reactively update the image as work is trying to progress.

The most effective early use cases are workflows with established conventions, high repetition, and clear inputs and outputs, as consistency there is easy to prove and measure. Identify these workflows first, and treat them the natural candidates to be turned into Claude Code skills. Early wins on well-chosen use cases build the credibility required to justify broad tool adoption and use.

This standard of reviewing AI generated output applies to skills themselves, not just generated code. A skill that is outdated or incorrect will often produce the wrong output each time it is used. If a single skill is applied across many tasks, the risk compounds quickly. Each piece of AI generated code should go through the same human review standard before it is deployed or reused, and skills should be periodically reviewed for performance drift.

No matter how capable the tool is or how much perceived value it delivers, real, tangible results are what stakeholders should see to justify continued investment. Time savings and productivity gains are only as credible as the baseline they are measured against. Define upfront what can be tracked, how it can be captured, and by whom, before developers start using the tool. Without this in place from day one, impact can only be estimated after the fact rather than demonstrated with data.

Conclusion

The capacity gap facing data and engineering teams will likely not go away on its own, and AI coding assistants like Claude Code offer a way to help close this gap. Organizations today know it is not a matter of if they should leverage these tools, but how. They require an environment that can assure them security and control from day one.

By running Claude Code inside their own AWS environments, organizations can adopt AI-assisted development within the security and governance controls they already have in place. PwC and AWS worked together to bring this approach to life for a large healthcare payer, and the results have shown that security and speed do not have to be a tradeoff when using these tools. Organizations facing similar demand and capacity constraints should look to their own AWS environments to enable AI-assisted development, rather than relying on external tools that sit outside controls.

PwC and AWS accelerate AI-assisted development

Securely scale AI-assisted data engineering

Contact us

Josh Peters

Associate, PwC US

Sony LNU

Senior Engineer, PwC US

Hector Villagomez

Director, PwC US

Adam Hood

Principal, PwC US

Follow us