Commenting on the side note here.
Yes, in Stencyl's marketing materials, Design Mode is considered as "not code," and so that's mirrored on other sites that talk about Stencyl. My personal opinion is closer to yours, though. I think that calling Stencyl a no-code engine when the blocks are in fact an almost 1:1 representation of a programming language is a bit of a stretch. If you really want to call it "no code", you'd have to constrain yourself to pre-made behaviors, which would be rather limiting.
On the other hand, that's the perspective of somebody who knows what's going on. To a beginner, the idea of "coding" a game may seem impenetrable, and the idea of "no code" can be a welcome sign. And what Stencyl offers in that regard is, as you mentioned, a higher-level language, a little bit closer to natural language, that allows the designer to think about the game logic rather than the syntax of the code.
For some subset of Stencyl's users, this faux "no code" programming language may serve as a gentle introduction to programming, even if they're not aware that that's what it is. Plenty of people have taken what they learned from Stencyl's Design Mode behaviors, and used that as a stepping stone on their way to text-based programming languages.
So while I agree that calling it "no code" is inaccurate, if it's looked at from the perspective of a potential Stencyl user, especially somebody with no prior experience programming, I think it can be a helpful label.