No, it is a square. It cannot be anything else, and there's no such thing as "no aspect at all" in astrology. So I am afraid Johan, while very enthusiastic, is not quite correct. Signs are very, very important...well, essential to understanding aspects, but sign alone doesn't define an aspect. Degrees and the actual mathematical angle they form counts too. Major aspects have wider orbs than minor ones, so this does allow from time to time for aspects to form outside of the normal signs difference associated with that aspect.
Let's say you have a square within orb but outside of sign. It is a square - it is within the orb that creates that specific 90 degree tension associated with that square. However, the tension between these two signs would not manifest the same as if you had two signs with the same modality, i.e. cardinal, fixed, or mutable. With the same modality within a squaring, planets are on more even footing. When you have mixed modality, one sign usually has a slight advantage, causing the other sign to be more afflicted by the tension of the square. Normally, fixed succumbs to cardinal, and mutable succumbs to either cardinal or fixed.
However, I need to point out to a couple of nuances to this.
First off, in regards to your square, seeing the 30th degree is also the 0 degree of the following sign, there should be no confusion about this here. You can intrepret this as a square between Leo and Scorpio. You can even include your Pluto, because it is orb conjunct with your Saturn and moon, because conjunct planets act together always, regardless of difference in sign. It's just there will be some Libran influence on that end of this square. Also, there's going to be some amount of "fated" energy due to be the 29th degree (you may wish to do some reading up on that). Seeing that end of this square combines a duo sign influence plus the 29th degree, it will be an atypical square anyhow. Atypical, but still a square.
The other thing -that is not directly related to your chart at the moment, but I wish to clarify, seeing I've brought it up before in other threads - is regarding aspect configurations. Now with a specific type of aspect configuration that relies both on aspects and modality, let's say a mutable t-square, you do need to have both the right orbs and the right modality. In these cases with configurations, modality (or element, as with grand trines, or polarity, as with multiple oppisitions) is perhaps more important that precise orbs. If you have a case where you have a configuration that lacks the right modality, element or polarity, you still would have a configuration - just an atypical one that would not manifest in the same way as the the "standard" configurations.
I know this is a lot of info, but I hope this helps.