Science doesn't work that way. Successful theories are ones that lead to productive lines of research. Competitive theories are obligated to explain everything covered by the current best theory and explain additional evidence.
ID does this only in the sense that it explains everything that could possibly happen. that is not science. ID will have to predict some data points that are not yet known.
Theories that invoke some sort of intelligent action are by their nature not going to be predicting very many specific data points. As I said in another post, if we find a signal through SETI, there's likely going to be some theorizing as to whether or not it's of intelligent origin. The answer may not be absolute, it may involve merely a high probability in one direction or the other. But the theory that it's of intelligent origin is going to be unlikely to predict much, even if it is valid, because sentient intelligence by its nature isn't held down to hard-and-fast rules.