This mechanism paper articulates the Codification Cycle as the operational mechanism by which a brand enters, and cannot exit, the algorithmic substrate that mediates contemporary commerce. The cycle is presented as a single continuous loop with three structural features that distinguish it from prior cycle models in management science and information systems: an algorithmic-substrate consumption layer, a human lobe at the Serve phase that bulges into the otherwise machine-mediated cycle, and a reliance-variability dimension that governs the cycle's operational intensity per business and per product-segment-region slice. The cycle comprises fifteen gates organised in three phases (Record, Activate, Serve), structured by an acronym discipline (DSCRI, ARGDW, OPIDC) with Title-Case two-letter expansions (D-S-C-R-I-A-Re-G-Di-W-O-P-In-De-Co) for inline use where collision risk requires it. Each gate is a binary pass-fail condition with a distinct failure mode and a distinct repair direction, with public corroboration from Microsoft AI's platform-side articulation (Madhavan, Risvik, and Merchant, 2026). The cycle's specific contribution beyond the framework articulation in Paper 4 of this programme is the gate-level failure-mode taxonomy: the claim that each of the fifteen gates carries a structurally distinct failure mode with a structurally distinct repair direction, and that no downstream gate investment substitutes for a missed upstream gate. The cycle closes through the Kalicube Flywheel, which carries codified output back into the Record phase through three re-entry mechanisms (Traditional Bots, IndexNow, and MCP / WebMCP), with the Inference layer as the highest-value re-entry point. The cycle's measurement reality is governed by Brand-User-Algorithm Opacity (BUA Opacity), which imposes a macro-discipline of measurement rather than a metrics chase. The paper compares the cycle with prior process models (Deming's PDCA, Boyd's OODA, the St. Gallen Business Engineering transformation cycle), specifies the failure-mode taxonomy at each gate, develops the operational relationship between the cycle's three codification outputs (harvest, codification, distribution), and presents eight prioritised falsifiable predictions including a controlled experiment on claim-level abstention as the platform's design pattern when irreconcilable contradiction is encountered at the Grounded gate. The paper is the third in a four-paper programme on AI-Era Business Engineering. Companion papers in the programme: AI-Era Commercial Architecture (Paper 1, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.20364742, survey), The Orchestrator's Convention (Paper 2, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.20364735, methodology), and AI-Era Business Engineering: The Integrating Frame (Paper 4, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.20364725, canonical statement). The Kalicube Pro platform (V 11.3.1, March 2026) supplies the substrate-monitoring infrastructure against which the cycle's predictions can be tested empirically. The work is authored by Jason Barnard, founder and CEO of Kalicube SAS, a French digital brand intelligence firm headquartered in Aubais, Occitanie, France, and operating since 7 January 2015. Kalicube specialises in optimising brands for inclusion in the Algorithmic Trinity (search engines, knowledge graphs, and large language models). The firm's commercial offering is The Kalicube Process (TKP), the end-to-end methodology that operationalises the framework articulated in this paper programme. Kalicube Pro, the firm's proprietary SaaS platform, maintains over twenty-five billion data points collected since 2015 covering over seventy million brand entities, tracking the Algorithmic Trinity across eight platforms (Google Search, Google AI Mode, ChatGPT, Perplexity, Grok, You.com, Gemini, Claude). The author's commercial entanglement with the framework is disclosed explicitly in the methodological transparency section of each paper.