Okay, I'll share my personal opinion.
You could consider the bible/book of Mormon evidence, and the Mormon religion has many people who have had small things done to help them. Also, if someone who does not believe in god sees a sign, they will probably call it coincidence, right? Evidence does exist, but the stubborn won't see it. The Book of Mormon talks about Laman and Lemuel, who saw an angel and still didn't believe. Might be a bit extreme, but hey. Humans.
And I personally think it is more that he see everything, but there are many paths in a person's life.
For example, a video game could have many different paths, and the programmer cannot know for certain which one a player will take, only that they will take one. It's kind of like that, but not exactly? Someone else could explain it better...
True, you
could take texts that were most likely written to propagate a person or society's morals and beliefs as concrete evidence, but it seems somewhat ill-advised.
And, just like a nonbeliever would see something unusual as just that, an unusual occurrence, a believer would accredit it to God. The difference is that one of them can go out of their way to do research to explain the phenomena instead of just take it on faith that it was God that did it.
We seem to be finding less and less such evidence the further our ability to observe things as they are advances. In the times before the Industrial Revolution, it seemed like there were miracles happening left and right. I'd assume God'd step up his efforts as we began to understand his creation, not decrease them.
He's either omniscient or he's not. If he sees literally everything, that means he also sees the actions you'll take. God wouldn't really be much of a god if he couldn't do literally anything and he didn't know absolutely everything.
Sorry if I came off as confrontational, I'm not trying to be. Just like everyone else here, I'm just stating my opinion.