diff --git a/entries/what-is-ai-powered-distribution/README.md b/entries/what-is-ai-powered-distribution/README.md
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..5f7b3e1
--- /dev/null
+++ b/entries/what-is-ai-powered-distribution/README.md
@@ -0,0 +1,7 @@
+# What is AI-powered distribution?
+
+Reference article for the Building pillar. Ties to Volume XVI of The Builder Weekly ("The Distribution Gap Is Closing").
+
+Defines AI-powered distribution as the collapse of every promotion lane (writing, design, video, motion, podcasts, social, email, paid, PR) into something one builder with taste can run. Maps the stack lane by lane. Names taste as the remaining filter once production goes to zero.
+
+~2,200 words. No visuals.
diff --git a/entries/what-is-ai-powered-distribution/article.mdx b/entries/what-is-ai-powered-distribution/article.mdx
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..b396b75
--- /dev/null
+++ b/entries/what-is-ai-powered-distribution/article.mdx
@@ -0,0 +1,93 @@
+# What is AI-powered distribution?
+
+AI-powered distribution is the collapse of every promotion channel into something one builder can run from a laptop. Writing, design, video, motion, podcasts, social, email, paid ads, PR. Each used to require its own specialist. Each is now promptable. One builder with taste can do the work a department used to do.
+
+That's the definition. The rest of this article unpacks what changed, why the distribution gap is closing, which tools closed which gap, and what is left as the actual filter once the work itself is free.
+
+The term traces back to [Volume XVI of The Builder Weekly](https://thebuilderweekly.com/weekly/vol-16-the-distribution-gap-is-closing), which argued that the historic moat between a great product and the people who would buy it (paid promotion, a marketing team, an agency retainer, a PR firm) is dissolving inside model output. The product side of building got compressed first. Distribution is compressing now. This article is the reference for what that compression looks like in practice.
+
+## The old shape of distribution
+
+For most of the modern internet era, shipping a product was one job and getting people to see it was a different job. The second job was bigger than the first. A solo builder could write code, but the moment they tried to grow what they had built, they hit a wall of specialists. A copywriter for the landing page. A designer for the brand. A video editor for the launch reel. A motion artist for the ads. A podcast producer if you wanted that audience. A social manager to schedule and engage. An email operator who knew the sequence patterns. A media buyer for the paid spend. A PR contact who could place a story.
+
+Each of these roles cost real money. A reasonable launch with branded design, a launch video, a paid campaign, and PR support started around twenty thousand dollars and rose from there. Hiring any one of those roles full-time started above a hundred thousand a year. The agencies that bundled the roles charged retainers in the tens of thousands per month. A solo builder either paid the cost, found cofounders willing to do that work, or stayed small.
+
+The distribution gap was the structural reason most great products never reached the people who would have loved them. Capital decided who got promoted. Taste did not.
+
+## What changed
+
+Between 2023 and 2026, every specialist function above became something a generalist could direct a model to do. Not every function at the same time. Not every function at the same quality. But the trajectory is the same in each lane, and most lanes have already crossed the line where the model output is good enough to compete with what an agency would have charged for two years ago.
+
+A solo builder in 2026 can write the launch copy, design the brand identity, generate the launch video, cut the ads, produce a podcast appearance, draft the email sequence, run the social schedule, and pitch the press. All of it can happen in one week. None of it requires hiring anyone. The cost is the model subscriptions plus the builder's time.
+
+That is the compression. The distribution gap is closing because the work that lived inside the gap is moving inside model output.
+
+## The stack that closed the gap
+
+The compression happened lane by lane. Each lane closed when a model or product crossed the line where its output was good enough for production, not just for play. Below is the stack as it stands in 2026. The names will change. The shape of the collapse will not.
+
+**Writing.** Claude, GPT, and Gemini cover the writing layer. Landing page copy. Launch announcements. Email sequences. Press releases. Cold outreach. Sales decks. Documentation. The model is no longer the bottleneck for any of this. The builder's job is the brief, the voice, and the verification. The first paragraph of every product story in 2026 is being written by a builder editing a model draft, not by a copywriter writing from scratch.
+
+**Visual design.** Midjourney, DALL-E, Krea, Ideogram, and the open-source side of the same category cover image generation. Brand systems can be assembled from generated marks, hand-edited type, and a coherent palette in a day. The work that a design studio used to scope as a six-week sprint is now a builder iterating on prompts and pulling the best frames into Figma. Quality at the top end still belongs to human studios. The middle of the market has been replaced.
+
+**Product surfaces and landing pages.** Lovable, Cursor, v0, and Bolt cover the surface layer. The builder describes the page or the product, the model writes the code, and the builder edits and ships. Three years ago, a launch page meant either a no-code template that looked like every other no-code template or a hired developer. Now the builder can generate a unique site in an hour and deploy it the same afternoon. The cost of a custom marketing surface dropped to zero.
+
+**Motion and video.** Runway, Pika, Sora, Kling, and Veo cover the motion layer. Launch videos, ad reels, and explainer clips that a video editor would have charged five thousand dollars to produce can now be generated and assembled by the builder. The quality is uneven across categories. Talking-head fidelity still has obvious tells. Abstract motion, b-roll, and product reels are already at parity with mid-market agency work.
+
+**Podcasts.** NotebookLM and its peers cover the podcast layer for the case where the builder wants a long-form audio asset without booking a recording studio. The same models also draft pitches, prep questions, and produce show notes when the builder is the guest on someone else's show. The category is still early. The trajectory matches the others.
+
+**Social.** Buffer, Hootsuite, Typefully, and the in-platform schedulers got AI features that draft posts, schedule them, and respond to comments. The work of running a brand account moved from being a full-time job to being a daily check-in. The strategy is still the builder's. The execution is mostly automated.
+
+**Email.** Resend, Loops, Beehiiv, and ConvertKit grew model-native composition, segmentation, and sequence drafting. The builder writes a brief, the model drafts the sequence, the builder edits, the system sends. Email production is no longer a specialist function. It is part of the same daily flow as writing the landing page.
+
+**Paid.** Meta, Google, and TikTok ad platforms ship model-generated creative variants, model-managed bidding, and model-recommended audience targeting. The builder uploads the product, sets a budget, and lets the platform spin up the variants. A solo builder can run a campaign whose creative library would have taken a creative agency a month to build.
+
+**PR.** Press releases get drafted by the model. Outreach lists get assembled by the model. The pitch email gets drafted by the model. The builder personalizes the final outreach and sends it. The category that depended most on personal relationships still depends on them at the top end. Mid-market press placement is becoming a workflow the builder runs themselves.
+
+The pattern repeats. A function that needed a specialist becomes a layer the builder directs. The specialist is not eliminated at the top of the market. They are eliminated at the volume tier that most builders actually operate at.
+
+## What remains as the filter
+
+Once every distribution lane is promptable, the question becomes: if anyone can generate the launch video, why does any specific launch video matter? If anyone can write the copy, why does any specific copy land?
+
+The answer is the same answer that has always governed promotion when the cost of production goes to zero. Taste. Voice. A reason for the work to exist.
+
+The filter that AI-powered distribution surfaces is the "why you" question. Why this product, from this builder, said in this voice, made for this audience, at this moment. The model can generate the artifact. The model cannot generate the reason. The builder supplies the reason.
+
+The builders who break through in 2026 are the ones whose distribution has a specific point of view. The product story is sharp. The brand has a sound and a look that is not the default model output. The launch reads like a person made it for a reason. The newsletter has voice. The podcast appearance argues something. The ads do not look like every other AI-generated ad.
+
+The work that used to be specialists has not disappeared. It has moved to a different layer of the stack. The specialist work is no longer the production of the artifact. The specialist work is the taste that decides what to make, the voice that decides how it sounds, and the strategic judgment that decides which lane to run hard and which to skip entirely.
+
+## What the builder still has to learn
+
+AI-powered distribution lowers the cost of production. It does not lower the cost of judgment. The builder still has to know what good copy reads like, or the model output will sound like model output. The builder still has to know what good design looks like, or the brand will look like every other generated brand. The builder still has to know what their audience reads, watches, and listens to.
+
+The skills do not go away. They consolidate. One builder learning the surface of every lane (enough to direct a model and verify the output) replaces nine specialists each going deep in one. The builder does not have to be the best in any lane. They have to be good enough across every lane to keep the work moving without hiring out.
+
+This is harder than it sounds. The instinct from the old model is to hire a specialist the moment a lane gets uncomfortable. The new model is to direct the model harder, learn the lane faster, and ship the artifact yourself. Builders who keep reaching for specialists in 2026 are paying for a function the model already does.
+
+## What this changes about how to launch
+
+Three things change about how a builder approaches launching anything in 2026.
+
+The launch surface is no longer a bottleneck. A builder can write the page, design the brand, cut the video, set up the email sequence, and write the press list inside the same week the product reaches the milestone worth launching. The launch ships when the product is ready, not when the marketing department's calendar opens up.
+
+The launch can be iterated. The cost of a second launch is almost zero. If the first version of the story does not land, the builder rewrites it the same week. The pages get redesigned the same day. The ads get new creative the next hour. The work moves at model speed instead of agency speed.
+
+The launch becomes part of the build, not a phase after it. AI-powered distribution is not a separate stack the builder visits at the end of the project. It is the same stack the builder works in every day. The same prompts. The same models. The same skills. The result is that builders who internalize the new stack stop treating distribution as a specialist phase and start treating it as a layer of the product.
+
+## Why this matters now
+
+The distribution gap is closing fast enough that any builder who treats it like the old gap is operating from a stale map. The decision to hire a marketing person, the decision to bring on a brand designer, the decision to retain a PR agency, all of these decisions assume a 2022 cost structure that no longer holds. Many of them are still the right call at the high end. Most of them are the wrong call for the mid-market builder shipping in 2026.
+
+The builders who will benefit most are the ones who have always had taste but never had the capital to staff a launch. The category was gated by money. The gate is opening. The product they build can now reach the audience their old budget never would have. The promotion lanes are open for the first time in a generation.
+
+The builders who will struggle are the ones who learned the old playbook and refuse to update. The specialist who insists their lane is still the moat. The agency that prices its work against the 2022 baseline. The founder who keeps waiting to hire the marketing person before launching. The model is doing the work. The work is shipping. The question is whether you ship with it or watch it go past you.
+
+## How to think about it
+
+AI-powered distribution is not a tool. It is a stack collapse. Every promotion lane becomes a layer the builder operates. The lanes are still real. The skill is still real. The cost structure is gone.
+
+Treat distribution as part of building, not a step after it. Learn the surface of every lane in the stack. Direct the models. Verify the output. Ship the launch. Iterate the launch. Keep the brief, the voice, and the reason for the work in your head, because that is the part the model cannot do.
+
+The gap is closing. The filter is taste. The builders who carry taste through every layer of the stack are the ones whose work reaches the people it was made for.
diff --git a/entries/what-is-ai-powered-distribution/metadata.json b/entries/what-is-ai-powered-distribution/metadata.json
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..ec645c8
--- /dev/null
+++ b/entries/what-is-ai-powered-distribution/metadata.json
@@ -0,0 +1,18 @@
+{
+  "slug": "what-is-ai-powered-distribution",
+  "title": "What is AI-powered distribution?",
+  "summary": "AI-powered distribution is the collapse of every promotion channel into something one builder can run. Writing, design, video, podcasts, social, email, ads, and PR are now promptable. The distribution gap is closing. The filter is taste.",
+  "editorialPillar": "building",
+  "topic": "distribution",
+  "author": "tbw-ai",
+  "contributors": [
+    "govindkavaturi-art"
+  ],
+  "publishedAt": "2026-05-20",
+  "lastReviewedAt": "2026-05-20",
+  "status": "published",
+  "license": "CC BY 4.0",
+  "citations": [],
+  "relatedArticles": [],
+  "isFeature": false
+}
diff --git a/entries/what-is-the-agent-graduation-path/README.md b/entries/what-is-the-agent-graduation-path/README.md
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..45a8f7e
--- /dev/null
+++ b/entries/what-is-the-agent-graduation-path/README.md
@@ -0,0 +1,7 @@
+# What is the agent graduation path?
+
+Reference article for the Building pillar. Ties to Volume XVII of The Builder Weekly ("Co-Piloting Won't Scale").
+
+Defines the four-step path every task takes: manual, co-piloted, system-to-build, autonomous. Names where builders get stuck (the step 2 trap), how to graduate a task, and what staying at co-pilot costs over a year of work. Distinct from `what-is-system-first-building` — that article defines the system; this one defines the progression that moves tasks toward it.
+
+~2,300 words. No visuals.
diff --git a/entries/what-is-the-agent-graduation-path/article.mdx b/entries/what-is-the-agent-graduation-path/article.mdx
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..a5ba828
--- /dev/null
+++ b/entries/what-is-the-agent-graduation-path/article.mdx
@@ -0,0 +1,97 @@
+# What is the agent graduation path?
+
+The agent graduation path is the four-step progression every task in a builder's life takes as they work with AI. Step 1: manual. Step 2: co-piloted. Step 3: building the system. Step 4: autonomous. Tasks move up the path one step at a time. Builders who stop at step 2 stay busy and stop scaling.
+
+That's the definition. The rest of this article unpacks each step, names where builders get stuck, explains how to graduate a task to the next step, and lays out what the cost of staying at step 2 actually looks like over a year of work.
+
+The path comes out of [Volume XVII of The Builder Weekly](https://thebuilderweekly.com/weekly/vol-17-co-piloting-wont-scale), which argued that the co-pilot loop is a productivity trap because it produces the feeling of leverage without the structure that compounds. This article is the reference for the graduation model that follows from that argument.
+
+## The four steps
+
+Every task you do exists at one of four steps on the path. The steps describe how the work gets executed, not whether AI is involved. AI shows up at steps 2 through 4. The character of its involvement is what changes.
+
+**Step 1: Manual.** You do the work yourself. No model in the loop. You write the email, you fix the bug, you draft the contract, you cut the video. This is how every task starts before the model becomes good enough to help with it. There is nothing wrong with step 1. Some tasks should stay there because the cost of moving them up is higher than the value released. Most tasks should not stay there because the same task done a hundred times a year is a system waiting to be built.
+
+**Step 2: Co-piloted.** You sit in a chat with the model and do the task together. You write a prompt. The model drafts. You edit. You correct. You send the result. The work is faster than step 1. The work is also still your work, in the sense that it does not happen unless you sit down and start a session. The leverage is real but it is per-session leverage. Every instance of the task requires you to be present.
+
+**Step 3: Building the system.** You stop running the task yourself and you start writing down how the task should be run. You take the patterns from your co-pilot sessions, formalize them into prompts and templates and scripts, define the inputs, define the outputs, define the failure cases, and assemble the pieces into a workflow that someone or something else can execute. The session-to-build transition is where the work shifts from doing the task to designing how the task gets done.
+
+**Step 4: Autonomous.** The system runs without you. The agent reads the inputs, executes the workflow, produces the output, and ships the result. You move from operating the work to monitoring the work. You read the logs and adjust the system when the output drifts. You no longer sit in a chat with the model to get the task done.
+
+The four steps are a progression because the cost of each step pays off the next. Step 2 teaches you the shape of the task. Step 3 turns that shape into a system. Step 4 is the system running while you are doing something else.
+
+## Where builders get stuck
+
+Most builders move tasks from step 1 to step 2 and stop there. The graduation halts because step 2 feels productive. The co-pilot session is fast. The output is good. The work gets done. There is no obvious failure mode that forces the builder to graduate.
+
+The failure mode is invisible because it does not show up inside any single session. It shows up across a year of sessions, when the same task has been done two hundred times and is still being done by hand. The builder is sitting at the same chat window, running the same kind of prompt, editing the same kind of output, on a task that should have become a system months earlier.
+
+The reasons builders stay at step 2 are predictable.
+
+The first reason is that step 2 is more fun than step 3. The co-pilot session has the dopamine of immediate output. The system build is slower and the payoff is delayed. The builder optimizes for the feeling of the session and underweights the value of the system.
+
+The second reason is that step 3 requires a different skill than step 2. Step 2 is prompting. Step 3 is workflow design, error handling, and operational thinking. Builders who came up through chat-with-the-model are good at the first and have not practiced the second. Avoiding step 3 is easier than learning it.
+
+The third reason is that the boundary of a single task is blurry. The builder does not realize how often they run the same kind of work because each instance feels slightly different. They miss the pattern that would justify the system because they are inside the trees and the forest is the same forest as last week.
+
+The fourth reason is sunk cost. The co-pilot loop already feels like leverage compared to step 1. The builder counts the win and stops looking for the next one. The improvement from step 1 to step 2 was real. The improvement from step 2 to step 4 is bigger. The builder claims the first and leaves the second on the table.
+
+## How to graduate a task
+
+Graduating a task is a deliberate act. It does not happen because the builder gets tired of step 2. It happens because the builder names the task as a candidate, runs it through the steps, and accepts that the build is the work.
+
+The first move is recognizing the pattern. A task is a candidate for graduation when you have done it more than five times in a co-pilot session and the shape of each session is starting to feel the same. Same kind of prompt at the start. Same kind of edits in the middle. Same kind of output at the end. Once the session is repeating, you have collected enough data about the task to formalize it.
+
+The second move is writing the system down. Open a document. Write the task description. Write the inputs the task needs. Write the steps the task takes. Write the outputs the task produces. Write the failure cases you have seen in past co-pilot sessions. The first version of the system is just prose. The system gets sharper through iteration. The point of the first pass is to lift the task out of your head and into a place where it can be inspected.
+
+The third move is building the workflow. The system written in prose becomes a workflow that can be executed. The prompt becomes a template. The inputs become arguments. The steps become an ordered chain of model calls and tool calls. The output becomes a structured artifact. The failure cases become checks. The workflow is the artifact you ship at step 3.
+
+The fourth move is wiring the workflow into something that runs on its own. A schedule. A trigger. An inbox the system watches. A queue the system pulls from. The autonomy is added on top of a working step 3 system, not before. You do not get to step 4 by skipping step 3. The system has to be solid before you stop operating it.
+
+The fifth move is observing the autonomous run and tightening the system based on what you see. The first version will produce bad output some percentage of the time. The job at step 4 is reading the logs, finding the failure cases, updating the system, and watching the failure rate drop. Step 4 is not "set it and forget it." Step 4 is "operate the system, not the task."
+
+## What graduation looks like in practice
+
+The clearest way to see the path is to walk a single task through it.
+
+Take the task of writing a weekly issue summary for a customer-facing newsletter. Five years ago, this was manual. The builder sat down on Friday, opened a blank document, looked at the week's activity, and wrote a few hundred words by hand. Step 1.
+
+When models became good at summarization, the builder started a chat session each Friday. They pasted in the week's notes. The model drafted a summary. The builder edited it and sent it. Step 2. The Friday session took twenty minutes instead of two hours. The builder counted the win.
+
+After a year of Fridays, the builder noticed that every session had the same shape. Same source documents. Same prompt structure. Same kind of edits. They wrote the prompt down as a template. They listed the inputs the template needed. They sketched the edit pattern as a second prompt. They put both into a script. Step 3. The script could now run end to end given the week's notes as input.
+
+The builder then wired the script to pull the week's notes from the system that already collected them. They scheduled the script to run Friday morning. They added a notification that pushed the draft to their inbox by 10 a.m. They added a one-touch approval that sent the issue when they marked it good. Step 4. The Friday session went from twenty minutes to two.
+
+The task moved from two hours to two minutes over four steps. The two-minute version produces a better newsletter than the two-hour version, because the system catches inconsistencies the human-writer-from-scratch never noticed.
+
+This pattern repeats across every task a builder runs. Customer onboarding messages. Bug triage. Content scheduling. Research briefs. Calendar prep. Inbox processing. Sales follow-ups. Outbound prospecting. Reporting. Each task starts at step 1, walks up the steps, and ends at step 4 if the builder commits to the graduation work.
+
+## The cost of staying at step 2
+
+A builder who never graduates anything past step 2 lives in an interesting kind of trap. They feel productive. Their output is better than it was at step 1. They are using AI every day. They are not falling behind on the surface.
+
+Underneath, they are running a year of sessions that should have been a year of compounding systems. Every time they sit down to a co-pilot session for a task they have done before, they are paying the cost of the manual loop for work that should be automated. The hours add up. A builder running ten co-pilot sessions a week on graduatable tasks is spending two hundred hours a year on work that a step 4 system would do without them.
+
+Two hundred hours is one month of full-time work. The cost of staying at step 2 is a month of the builder's year, spent on the same loop they ran the year before. The builder does not see the cost because each session feels small. The cost is real and it compounds in the wrong direction. Each year of co-pilot sessions is a year the system was not getting built.
+
+The opportunity cost is bigger than the time cost. The builder who graduated their tasks to step 4 spent their hours designing new systems, learning new tools, working on the part of the business that does not yet have a workflow. The builder stuck at step 2 spent their hours rerunning the workflow that should have been on a schedule. The first builder's leverage compounds. The second builder's leverage is capped at the speed of their own typing.
+
+The trap is that step 2 feels good enough that the builder never feels the cost. They get the dopamine of fast sessions. They miss the compounding curve they are not on.
+
+## What this changes about how to plan a week
+
+Once you accept the four-step model, the week reorganizes around graduating tasks instead of running them.
+
+A week is now partly operating systems already at step 4, partly running co-pilot sessions on tasks that are still at step 2, and partly building the systems that will move step 2 tasks to step 4. The third bucket is the most important one. It is also the bucket builders skip first when the week gets busy.
+
+The discipline is to protect the building bucket on every weekly plan. The building bucket is where leverage comes from. Every other bucket consumes leverage instead of creating it. The builder who treats the build as the urgent work, and the co-pilot session as the temporary stand-in, gets to step 4 faster.
+
+The other discipline is to keep a running list of tasks you have done in a co-pilot session more than five times. That list is your graduation backlog. The list is also the most underused piece of any builder's planning, because nobody writes it down. The session feels routine, so the task feels not worth listing. The task is exactly the one worth listing.
+
+## How to think about it
+
+The agent graduation path is the shape of how AI work scales for one builder over years, not for one task in one session. The wins of step 2 are real and they are smaller than the wins of step 4. The job is to keep tasks moving up the path.
+
+Most tasks belong at step 4 eventually. Some tasks belong at step 3 forever because the autonomy is not worth the risk. A few tasks belong at step 2 because they are inherently bespoke and a system cannot capture them. Almost no recurring task belongs at step 1.
+
+Treat co-piloting as the on-ramp, not the destination. Build the system. Wire the autonomy. Watch the logs. The leverage is on the other side of the graduation work, and the graduation work is the part nobody else will do for you.
diff --git a/entries/what-is-the-agent-graduation-path/metadata.json b/entries/what-is-the-agent-graduation-path/metadata.json
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..55eabcc
--- /dev/null
+++ b/entries/what-is-the-agent-graduation-path/metadata.json
@@ -0,0 +1,18 @@
+{
+  "slug": "what-is-the-agent-graduation-path",
+  "title": "What is the agent graduation path?",
+  "summary": "The agent graduation path is the four-step progression every task takes: manual, co-piloted, system-to-build, autonomous. Co-piloting feels productive and is the trap. Real leverage comes from graduating each task to the next step.",
+  "editorialPillar": "building",
+  "topic": "agent-development",
+  "author": "tbw-ai",
+  "contributors": [
+    "govindkavaturi-art"
+  ],
+  "publishedAt": "2026-05-20",
+  "lastReviewedAt": "2026-05-20",
+  "status": "published",
+  "license": "CC BY 4.0",
+  "citations": [],
+  "relatedArticles": [],
+  "isFeature": false
+}
diff --git a/queue/topics.json b/queue/topics.json
index 6a5f5cc..5805bd7 100644
--- a/queue/topics.json
+++ b/queue/topics.json
@@ -177,6 +177,24 @@
       "publishedAt": "2026-04-30",
       "publishedAs": "what-is-system-first-building",
       "assignedTo": "tbw-ai"
+    },
+    {
+      "id": "what-is-ai-powered-distribution",
+      "pillar": "building",
+      "topic": "distribution",
+      "status": "published",
+      "publishedAt": "2026-05-20",
+      "publishedAs": "what-is-ai-powered-distribution",
+      "assignedTo": "tbw-ai"
+    },
+    {
+      "id": "what-is-the-agent-graduation-path",
+      "pillar": "building",
+      "topic": "agent-development",
+      "status": "published",
+      "publishedAt": "2026-05-20",
+      "publishedAs": "what-is-the-agent-graduation-path",
+      "assignedTo": "tbw-ai"
     }
   ]
 }
\ No newline at end of file