Is there an anicca→anatta→dukkha description of the three marks? That is to say, I only remember of the pattern of  anicca→dukkha→anatta (that which is impermanent and unsatisfactory cannot be considered Self, to paraphrase) in the suttas. Is there an argument that progresses from anicca to anatta (and then to dukkha), directly?
No. The idea of anicca→anatta→dukkha is common on the internet, particularly on DW.

The characteristic of 'unsatisfactoriness' ('dukkha') is directly related to impermanence (anicca) given the Buddha asked in SN 22.59: "Can that which is impermanent bring (lasting) happiness?" 


  Yaṃ panāniccaṃ, dukkhaṃ vā taṃ sukhaṃ vā'ti? SN 22.59


Also, the realisations of anicca &amp; dukkha were used to support the realisation of anatta.

Also, the realisation of 'anatta' brings liberation rather than 'dukkha'. 

Therefore, the idea of anicca→anatta→dukkha has no basis in the teachings.

To be free from doubt here, the following suttas which mentioned dukkha with anicca, alone: 


  If they were to ask me this, friend, I would answer thus: ‘Friends,
  form is impermanent; what is impermanent is dukkha (unsatisfactory); what is
  dukkha has ceased and passed away. Feeling … Perception …
  Volitional formations … Consciousness is impermanent; what is
  impermanent is dukkha; what is dukkha has ceased and passed
  away.’ Being asked thus, friend, I would answer in such a way.”
  
  “Good, good, friend Yamaka!
  
  SN 22.85
  
  
  
  Yadaniccaṃ taṃ dukkhaṃ; yaṃ dukkhaṃ tadanattā
  
  What is impermanent is dukkhaṃ. What is dukkhaṃ is nonself. 
  
  SN 22.45 &amp; 46
  
  
  
  Soṇa, when any ascetics and brahmins, on the basis of form—which is
  impermanent, suffering, and subject to change—regard themselves
  thus....
  
  SN 22.49
  
  
  
  Bhikkhus, attend carefully to form. Recognize the impermanence of form
  as it really is. When a bhikkhu attends carefully to form and
  recognizes the impermanence of form as it really is, he experiences
  revulsion towards form...
  
  SN 22.52
  
  
  
  He does not understand as it really is impermanent form as
  ‘impermanent form’ … impermanent feeling as ‘impermanent feeling’ …
  impermanent perception as ‘impermanent perception’ … impermanent
  volitional formations as ‘impermanent volitional formations’ …
  impermanent consciousness as ‘impermanent consciousness.’
  
  Dukkhaṃ rūpaṃ ‘dukkhaṃ rūpan’ti yathābhūtaṃ nappajānāti, dukkhaṃ
  vedanaṃ … dukkhaṃ saññaṃ … dukkhe saṅkhāre … dukkhaṃ viññāṇaṃ ‘dukkhaṃ
  viññāṇan’ti yathābhūtaṃ nappajānāti.
  
  He does not understand as it really is painful form as ‘painful form’
  … painful feeling as ‘painful feeling’ … painful perception as
  ‘painful perception’ … painful volitional formations as ‘painful
  volitional formations’ … painful consciousness as ‘painful
  consciousness.’
  
  SN 22.55
  
  
  
  “Bhikkhu, you should abandon desire for whatever is dukkhaṃ.” … SN
  22.67