It could be too strict, someone else said it is too simple and linear and had no problems finishing the game, and actually complained it was too easy. As of what makes a good or bad puzzle game it is also subjective, for me creativity is not necessarily good for a puzzle, many puzzles I enjoy are simply logical, and challenging the ability to calculate the best action and therefore the solution (rubik’s cube, chess, etc…) in those there is little to no creativity (you could argue that finding a brilliant move is creative… but still it is just better calculations), yet Chess is the most popular game in human hystory. As of the Incremental tag, the definition given by the subreddit is: “games that feature an incremental mechanism, such as unlocking progressively more powerful upgrades, or discovering new ways to play the game”. In chronobot you incrementally become stronger by discovering and unlocking upgrades, so I think it definitely counts as one, then, you can say it is experimental, as it has some incremental mechanics but mixing them with other genres like indeed puzzle games. As for the not getting any compensation when you fail, that is the biggest critique we are receiving, and we will try to make it better in the next update and maybe make it feel more like a proper incremental game :)
I don't know much about the sub's definition, i personally always go from itch.io's description of the tag. As for your point of chess, a game with over 1300 different openings and variants, being an uncreative game, is hilarious to me. Wouldn't every game be exactly the same, if you only calculated the best action each turn? Heck, not even your example of Rubik's Cubes works, because there every new game is random - unless you only follow a set of moves to "randomize" it, that is.
A puzzle game has a set of solutions, by definition. Chess is not yet solved as it is very very complex, but simpler puzzle games like tic tac toe are solved (and are therefore uninteresting to replay after playing out the solved state a couple of times). The same could be applied to chess, once a solution will be found with enough computing power, and Rubik’s cube as well there is always a solution to just execute in fastest Time. I am not saying they are not impressive, I am a huge fan and avid player of chess, and I am intrigued by how amazing it is to solve Rubik’s cube, for me they are insane display of calculating and executive abilities, if you consider them also expression of “creativity” in the sense of finding a not so clear path to the solution, I can agree with that, but they are still pathfinding to the best solution on the graph of game states :)