This is not a full solution, but should get you going with what dkaeae commented above (link here).
First thing that is reasonable to try is setting $n = 2^{2^k} + 1$. However, after applying the $f(n) = \sqrt{n - 1} + 2$ in the recurrence, we get $2^{2^{k-1}} + 2$ which is not going to work for our function $g(k)$ as seen in the domain transform scheme.
Next thing that I did, was determine the base case. You can see 1, 2, and 3 will not work. Thus, we have 4 is the first value where the first application of $f^{-1}$ is increasing. We can get the following sequence after repeatedly applying $f^{-1}$:
$$\{4,\ 5,\ 10,\ 65,\ 3970,\ 15745025,\ 247905749270530,\ \ldots\}$$
What we want is a function $g(k)$ equivalent to the $k$th term in this sequence. However, plugging this sequence into OEIS or wolframalpha.com presents no results. From there I tried to see what repeated application of the function $f(n)$ actually did:
$$\begin{align*}
f(n) & = \sqrt{n - 1} + 2\\
f(f(n)) & = \sqrt{\sqrt{n - 1} + 1} + 2\\
f^{(3)}(n) & = \sqrt{\sqrt{\sqrt{n - 1} + 1} + 1} + 2\\
f^{(4)}(n) & = \sqrt{\sqrt{\sqrt{\sqrt{n - 1} + 1} + 1} + 1} + 2\\
\vdots & = \vdots
\end{align*}$$
The thing to notice here is that each term we have has 2 added on to the end of it. If we can find a function $h(k)$ that fits $f^{(k)}(n) - 2$, then we know $g(k) = h(k) + 2$. Thus, we are now searching for the sequence above, minus 2!
$$\{2,\ 3,\ 8,\ 63,\ 3968,\ 15745023,\ 247905749270528,\ \ldots\}$$
Now when you search this sequence, something does actually turn up. See sequence A003096 from OEIS. Fortunately, there is a closed form (albeit disgusting) for this sequence.
$$h(k) = \lceil c^{2^k}\rceil \quad \text{where } c=1.2955535361865325413981559700593353\ldots $$
Disclaimer: I have no idea how this constant is derived, but this closed form will work for you.
We now know a $g(k) = h(k) + 2 = \lceil c^{2^k}\rceil + 2$. Now try this $g(k)$ with Domain Transform and you should be good to go to apply recursion tree analysis on the transformed domain.
This method will work, but I think the easier way would probably be to upper bound and lower bound the depth of the recursion tree with an easier function.