The purpose of the exam is to test how well you can use and apply those rules of law to solve a client's problem. USE the facts of the questions, pull out the facts you think are legally relevant and explain how relevant and how they could be argued for one side or the other or both. I think that this is merely a commonplace and mechanical computational arrangement of programs akin to listing names in a phone book alphabetically, as in the Feist case. But merely reciting black letter rules of law in front of the client will not solve the client's problem or give guidance as to how the client should arrange her affairs. The way to shoot yourself in the foot is to ignore the facts and write a few pages of rules of law floating in the air, unanchored by the reality of the client's question to you.
Some questions do ask that.
Many do not. For example, in the essay question on the 1994 Copyright Exam, I asked several specific questions. The call of this question is pointed and specific. Read it carefully and respond to each question in each part. Address yourself to the facts in this problem, not all problems that might happen.