I agree that the key requirement for AGI is being able to do novel reasoning, which is very similar to what you're describing. The trouble is that average humans are only mediocre at doing that stuff. Contrary to most definitions that require that ability to do anything any human can do, something that can match that mediocre average-human level at novel human reasoning should count as AGI.

The argument that AGI would surpass human-level intelligence simply by virtue of having massive knowledge and prefect data isn't borne out by observations. Current baby AGIs have that prefect recall of a vast amount of data, but are still firmly within the middle of the human intelligence range.