docs: clarify definition of GitHub Actions

[DanielDerefaka]

What

Clarified the definition of "action" in the Understanding GitHub Actions guide.

Why

The previous definition incorrectly described actions as "a set of jobs or code," which is misleading. Actions are custom applications used as steps within jobs, not collections of jobs themselves.

Changes

• Updated line 82 to accurately define actions as "custom applications for the GitHub Actions platform"
• Removed the inaccurate "set of jobs" phrasing

[welcome]

Thanks for opening this pull request! A GitHub docs team member should be by to give feedback soon. In the meantime, please check out the contributing guidelines.

[github-actions]

How to review these changes 👓

Thank you for your contribution. To review these changes, choose one of the following options:

• Spin up a codespace
• Set up a local development environment

A Hubber will need to deploy your changes internally to review.

Table of review links

Note: Please update the URL for your staging server or codespace.

The table shows the files in the content directory that were changed in this pull request. This helps you review your changes on a staging server. Changes to the data directory are not included in this table.

Source	Review	Production	What Changed
actions/get-started/understand-github-actions.md	fpt ghec ghes@ 3.18 3.17 3.16 3.15 3.14	fpt ghec ghes@ 3.18 3.17 3.16 3.15 3.14

Key: fpt: Free, Pro, Team; ghec: GitHub Enterprise Cloud; ghes: GitHub Enterprise Server

🤖 This comment is automatically generated.

[Sharra-writes]

@DanielDerefaka Thanks for the PR! This looks like a good update, with one little tweak to make it more general. We have a deploy freeze for GitHub Universe this week, but I'll get this merged once that's lifted.

[Sharra-writes]

@DanielDerefaka An engineer came and weighed in on this, and they aren't in favor of the change in definition, feeling that it would be confusing to use "application" when we also have GitHub and OAuth apps, and also that the term itself was too broad. It's possible the definition could use an update, but after their breakdown of what they didn't like about this definition, I can see why it is what it is. We would need one of our engineers to work with a writer to rewrite it so they could help pick and choose specific terminology that's not being used extensively elsewhere to mean other things.

All that is to say, I'm afraid I'm going to have to reject this one after all. I'm sorry about that! Some of the other people on my team are very familiar with Actions, so I thought it would be enough to ask them, but our actual engineers had the opposite opinion.