> if the Chinese Room reliably delivers context-specific correct results in unique contexts, then what more do we require of intelligence?

First, I'm not sure I grant the premise (esp. "reliably"), but even so the answer seems glaringly obvious: we require intelligence to extend the range of what is known so that it can be looked up / delivered by systems like libraries, search engines, and LLMs. The conflation of knowledge indexing and knowledge creation (and, more specifically, that some people don't seem to be able to distinguish them) may be the core of the issue.

> BTW Killing Me Softly wasn't written/sung/anything by Carly Simon

Yeah, I probably hallucinate that. :P

I agree that there is some 'higher' intelligence that is about knowledge creation; say, mathematical inventions like RSA, or new philosophy, or coming up with interesting mathematical problems. But I only asked what is 'required' of intelligence, and we should admit that the vast majority of people, even among those who have above-average intelligence, do not create new knowledge of the grand sort. Most people acquire knowledge in education and then apply that knowledge in their vocation, and their improvements are optimizations or remixings that we already see AI capable of making.