@tolviere It's a good point. When players get frustrated, they start to tune out, and they're less able to solve puzzles, especially ones like these that require some lateral thinking, so it's a vicious cycle. Personally, I feel like brute forcing causes players to tune out more than letting them give up with a cheat button. One is mind numbing, the other a deliberate decision. But your mileage may vary here.
I was terrible at solving video game puzzles as a child, to the extent that I played most of Zelda Wind Waker with a walkthrough by my side. Maybe my expectations are colored by this experience. Was my appreciation of the game worsened by how easily I gave up and cheated? I'm not sure. I think I enjoyed it just as much, but then again I had no counterfactual.
On a more meta level, I prefer a cheat button or a walkthrough for a short form game like this because it's explicitly portrayed as a cheat, i.e. almost extrinsic to the game experience, whereas the frustration is perhaps an intended, intrinsic part of the game. In other words, maybe it lets players bypass parts of the game they don't like, even though those parts have a reason to be in the game.
We do want to elaborate this game more, into a 2-ish hour experience maybe, which will require rethinking this approach. I don't think it would make sense to include a cheat button in a full Steam release!
Your randomization idea gave me an interesting idea. Maybe some of the more tutorial-like levels could be adjusted to not damage the player at all, allowing for experimentation or brute-forcing, but these are bookended by more challenging boss levels that test if the players truly understood the puzzles. Then we could randomize the tutorial-like levels to encourage even more experimentation if players fail at the boss levels.