This can superficially sound elitist, but for what it's worth I've seen plenty of conventional programmers, for whom this is their full time job, get this wrong, or spend weeks/months doing the work necessary to get it right. It isn't about the programmers being better people or something, it's really about the idea that you can not in general take something that professionals in their wheelhouse find a hard time doing and hand it off to people doing it part-time with no experience and get the same results.

Locally we're playing with "no code" but we're very much making sure it's "leaf node" sorts of tasks, that consume other services but don't provide them.

I think no-code should probably be contextualized in the context of other professions in the business. Would you take a no-accounting solution and hand it off to the programmers? Simplify away the double-entry bookkeeping (too hard for non-accountants, which, I mean, that's not sarcasm, it's really quite close to the truth), simplify all the accounting details, and then let the programmers run the finance department? What would the expected result be? Why would it be any different if you took a no-lawyer system and handed it off to sales to try to run the legal department?

There's a place for such tools nevertheless. Expense reporting software is essentially a "no accounting" accounting tool, for instance. But you keep it carefully fenced in to where it makes sense, you don't go trying to turn your expense reporting tool into the accounting software for the whole firm. I think no code has a valid place in the business but you need to make sure you're not doing the equivalent of claiming it can run accounting for the whole business.