On Sale: GamesAssetsToolsTabletopComics
Indie game storeFree gamesFun gamesHorror games
Game developmentAssetsComics
SalesBundles
Jobs
Tags

I do think that using EXAMINE and SEARCH as separate verbs makes gameplay a bit of a chore.

Essentially examine and search play the role of revealing something hidden, and if it is clear that SEARCH needs to be used sometimes, it forces the player into EXAMINE ing and SEARCH ing for every object in the game. I think it's reasonable to examine most objects once, to get a clue, but SEARCH ing is essentially a deeper examine, that may or may not have a custom response. It places a huge burden on the player to do everything twice.

MOVE, PUSH, PULL, TALK, SWIM, THROW, LIGHT, ... all of these are individual actions, but requiring a deep examine isn't really an act of creativity by the player. It just forces the player to type EXAMINE OBJECT then SEARCH OBJECT, and with some players not expecting to search at all.

I'll write something in the rules about this, but if you have a game that absolutely requires search, then it'll be permitted.

I see what you mean... what if the first examine command reveals in its description a second potential item to examine.... for instance 
EXAMINE TABLE
THERE LOT'S OF BROKEN POTTERY HERE
EXAMINE POTTERY
YOU FOUND SOME MOLDY CHEESE!
The pottery doesn't become a found object but it is reveal as a secondary item for the player to examine? Would that be ok/better?

Yes, this approach is better. Make sure you create the pottery as a listed object too (scenery). You can also play the : success; command to give an audio clue that the player made some progress.

Actually reviewing my game. I've only got two places where the Search command is used without the back up of Examine. So a short rework will fix that, so its not a big deal for me to take Search out of the game. Makes things simpler to be honest. ;)

Separate point, but be sure to select "MENU / SAVE FILE" regularly. Also set up the game_information / game_name field as soon as you can too.