I think I would really dig that approach, John.

Especially, the "Ok, sure..."

Something is going to be there. And, that something is livening up the dungeon. And, the DM can make that something a complication (dragging bodies, using torches, time and attention, etc.), but can also have mini-moves specifically for the looting which gives them inspiration for neat treasure items, as well as clues and details about the other stuff in this dungeon as well as stuff that leads to other dungeons.

Hmmmm. Very cool.

From my experience, Operator is the least used.

Yup.

Anyone wanna write up an example of a list? I'm sort of having a hard time imagining these things.

I've pondered "achievement" style leveling before, but it'd be neat to have a frame of reference.

I think I agree on the stat-highlighting being wrong for the game play.

I have added some custom moves to the game I'm DMing to emphasize exploration and discovery:

Discover a New Place
When you discover a new place in the world, mark experience.

Fight a Monster for the First Time
When you fight a monster for the first time, mark experience.

Of course, these are open to anyone.

Michael, that's exactly why I said opening up the move might be a better option. But, as-written, I don't think Loot serves well as a "Search" function.

However, I disagree that Discern Realities doesn't provide the same sort of results.

Let's take your example:

"...had the party poking around in an underground river, pulling out a human skull or something ... yeah!  Found it: The LIMED-OVER SKELETON OF THE ABBOT, in a pool of water, clutching a key to a secret door at location 28 and also host to a sealed scroll tube with a water-damaged map of the dungeon, only portions of which are still legible."

What part of Discern Realities doesn't work with this? Poking around in an underground river is anything but "quick" and closely studying a situation is more appropriate to the "old school" style of actually INVESTIGATING shit instead of hitting you roll and the DM magically giving you the clues.

Remember, to do it, you need to do it.

Players: "We're poking around in the underground river with our pole..."
GM: "Sounds like you're closely studying something. Roll Discern Realities for me."
Players: *dice* "Yeah! 10+"
GM: "What do you want to know?"
Players: "Uh, what is useful or valuable to me here? What should I be on the lookout for?"
GM: "Ah... while stabbing at the water with your pole, you hit something hard, but it's not a rock. It's a human skull. The skull appears to be attached to the rest of it's skeleton and through the water you see it's clutching something. Pulling the skeleton out, you see something useful (a water damaged map) and something else you should be on the lookout for: a key, barely visible as it falls from the skeleton's other hand into the water."

Works fine to me. Why have redundant moves?

Right. So, you are saying that there needs to be something valuable first before looting takes place.

If the goblin heads aren't valuable, there's no looting right? Loot doesn't spring into existence because someone "loots"? There has to be loot that someone is retrieving?

That's what your post seems to indicate.

Let's say the goblin heads weren't valuable in my campaign.

"And with that you slay the last goblin. Their bloody smelly bodies are strewn about the room. What do you do?"
"I'm going to pick over the bodies take whatever's valuable or useful."
"There's nothing of much value here. Dirty goblin rags and crude sticks sharpened to a point."
"Aight. Let's move on."

Sweet. I just didn't want to be screwing my players over if it was supposed to be 10 XP, level, 10 XP, level, 10 XP, level, etc.

Like I said, in some campaigns (where Goblin heads are currency I guess), hacking off extremities could be considered "looting"... ;)