1. It seems like she has a pretty massive disclaimer there: "Based upon the information that has been provided to me, I am authorized to certify, on behalf of the Office of Donald J. Trump.."
She's not saying she conducted a search. She is not even saying you reviewed the document search methodology and found it reasonable. Technically, with the tortured sentence structure, she isn't even saying that she received information regarding the search, only that she received information that she is authorized to make an affirmation that a search was done per the bullet points. I can see where it would be considered non-responsive by the government and possibly piss of a judge. But, I don't think it is something that would end her up in jail or even end her career. She signed a meaningless statement.
2. Your second point, about correcting the record, is interesting to me. If she later found out that not all the records were returned, I imagine she would have an obligation to inform the government. Making her an informant. Sure, she could inform the government through formal filings, still advocating for her client and obscuring the details. But, it's not just the affidavit, it's an on-going crime. And it's unlikely Trump would agree with the more official ways of correcting the record. Continuing to do Trump's bidding could cost her career and possibly her freedom.