Definitely noticed the same thing GoodGuyGames did--part of the problem inherent in a guessing game that involves zeroing in on an answer is that your guesses start to get pretty similar ("necklace", "bracelet"...) and so the commonalities it finds are also pretty similar, which means you're not getting more information.
And while everything it gave me was associated with the answer, it wasn't always particularly associated with things I typed in. ("nosering": "Often polished"? Is it? "bread": "Frequently gifted"? I can't remember the last time someone offered me a gift-wrapped baguette.)
And GGG isn't wrong that it being an AI game makes it less appealing: not because I hate AI (which I do), but because it means that no thought has gone into any given day's game, because an AI cannot think. You clearly put thought into making the game, and kudos for that, but at the point at which an AI takes over, there's no guarantee any more that there will be a good path from the starting point to the solution, which is the kind of thoughtfulness that a game or puzzle designer will put into a round or level.
I might give it another go tomorrow, to see whether it exceeds my expectations. But I have to admit I'm not optimistic.