I expect that this is the choice that Omega will be most likely to take; one of the easiest ways to do this is by ignoring the spirit of the constraints and taking the exact literal meaning.

The constraints aren't constraints on Omega; the constraints are constraints on the reader--they tell the reader what he is supposed to use as the premises of the scenario. Omega cannot cheat unless the reader interprets the description of the problem to mean that Omega is willing to cheat. And if the reader does interpret it that way, it's the reader, not Omega, who's violating the spirit of the constraints and being hyper-literal.

what do you think Omega would do?

I think that depending on the human's intentions, and assuming the human is a perfect reasoner, the conditions of the problem are contradictory. Omega can't always predict the human--it's logically impossible.