I don't know if it's intentional, but I do see Spell Attacks in the Attack Actions section of my character sheets, specifically for Eldritch Blast and Fire Bolt. I'm guessing because they have attack to-hit rolls. However, I'm not sure what the official ruling is. I'll explain.

I am a little conflicted as to rules as written vs rules as intended in regards to spell attacks being attack actions. I can see both sides of it, as the Player's Handbook says (in the "Making an Attack" section) that the to-hit portion of a spell attack is an attack, and any spell that requires a to-hit is an attack, and the "Attack Action" section says to use the "Making an Attack" section to define what an attack is, specifically in the context of what an attack action is. It even mentions that these attacks can be used again with the Extra Attack class feature. 

Meanwhile, Crawford has stated elsewhere that casting a spell is technically using the "Cast a Spell" action, not the "Attack" action. Meaning, even if you are a Lvl 5 Fighter and Lvl 3 Warlock, you cannot cast Eldritch Blast twice in a turn without some other mechanism at play (such as Quickened Spell, Illusionist Bracers, or similar). 

So, considering I'm conflicted, I'm not sure whether this is a mistake or intended mechanics. Does the character sheet imply that, say, Eldritch Blast, can be used a second time in a turn with Extra Attack? 

Quote from CharnelMansion >>

Does the character sheet imply that, say, Eldritch Blast, can be used a second time in a turn with Extra Attack? 

 No. I assume It is just a function of the sheet, for this site, intended to streamline rolls that have the attack roll function. Casting a Spell and the Attack action are separate from one another, their only intermingling for the purpose of what you're asking is the roll required "to hit".

If you're casting a spell you're using the Cast a Spell action, and sometimes those spells require attack rolls to generate a hit. If you're attacking with a weapon, or unarmed, or whatever, it's an Attack action. Plain. Simple. Rollable. Bust out the d20 and hope for a crit!

I appreciate your opinion, but if it's just a spell, it wouldn't be weird or confusing or less convenient for it to just be in the list of spells. To include it in the Attack Actions list while it isn't an Attack Action is really confusing, especially with the wording of the Player's Handbook not matching with Crawford's input later. So, yea, it's not streamlining so much as a misplacement if that's the case. 

Also, spells don't get a crit. Or, they don't get crit damage at least. Cheers!

Quote from CharnelMansion >>

Also, spells don't get a crit. Or, they don't get crit damage at least. Cheers!

 That's actually incorrect.... well partially incorrect; spells that acquire Attack Rolls do get critical hit damage (e.g. fire bolt). Spells that require a Saving Throw do not (e.g. sacred flame).

You can test this yourself in the character sheet - use any attacking spell or cantrip, spam rolling at advantage until you get a natural 20 - you will notice the damage dice will change for that one roll :)

Eldritch blast is unique that it has multiple bolts if your character is over level 5. Its only 1 instance of [Tooltip Not Found] but each bolt requires a To Hit. It can get confusing when you're asking about classes or subclasses that have the Extra Attack feature if you're using EB as your reference point since no matter what EB is going to make more than 1 attack roll anyways (over level 5).

As for why some of these spells are showing up on the Action tab, you can set most any spell to display on it's appropriate Action tab (regular, bonus, reaction, other) if you customize it to display there. Whether it displays something useful or not is entirely dependent on the spell. The spells you're referencing just have this option turned on by default.

So your actual is problem is that you are, quite erroneously, thinking that the attacks listed there means it's the "Attack Actions" section.

This is not correct.

The section you are observing is simply "Actions". It lists the actions you can do. Attacks are listed for convenience but it does not indicate if they are Attack Actions or Cast a Spell actions. They're just attacks listed because you can attack using Attack Action or using Cast a Spell action. 

You'll note it does detail further down other non-attack things you can do, like "Actions in Combat - Attack,  Cast a Spell, Dash, Disengage, Dodge, Grapple, Help, Hide, Improvise, Ready, Search, Shove, Use an Object"

-

So, you're reading the sheet wrong. But in any case if it is confusing then for any spell attacks just click them, click customise and uncheck "display as attack". 

Quote from Cyb3rM1nd >>

So your actual is problem is that you are, quite erroneously, thinking that the attacks listed there means it's the "Attack Actions" section.

This is not correct.

The section you are observing is simply "Actions". It lists the actions you can do. Attacks are listed for convenience but it does not indicate if they are Attack Actions or Cast a Spell actions. They're just attacks listed because you can attack using Attack Action or using Cast a Spell action. 

 

 Not quite wrong, you can select the "Actions" tab, and then select the "Attack" sub-tab - which could be inferred to contain Attack Actions.

It's best to just ignore that detail though. As a player I much prefer having all my "attack" rolls accessible in one place - it makes it much easier to see what options are available without needing to flick between several tabs.

Quote from Farling >>

Quote from Cyb3rM1nd >>

So your actual is problem is that you are, quite erroneously, thinking that the attacks listed there means it's the "Attack Actions" section.

This is not correct.

The section you are observing is simply "Actions". It lists the actions you can do. Attacks are listed for convenience but it does not indicate if they are Attack Actions or Cast a Spell actions. They're just attacks listed because you can attack using Attack Action or using Cast a Spell action. 

 

 Not quite wrong, you can select the "Actions" tab, and then select the "Attack" sub-tab - which could be inferred to contain Attack Actions.

It's best to just ignore that detail though. As a player I much prefer having all my "attack" rolls accessible in one place - it makes it much easier to see what options are available without needing to flick between several tabs.

The Attack subtab shows all attacks: action attacks, bonus action attacks, reaction attacks. You can't infer anything from the name of the tab.

Just because something is on a particular tab, doesn't mean the term "attack" is more ambiguous than RAW. There's a difference between an attack and an attack, with the former being a general term to do something to cause damage to something else and the later being something defined:

The most common action to take in combat is the Attack action, whether you are swinging a sword, firing an arrow from a bow, or brawling with your fists.

With this action, you make one melee or ranged attack. See the "Making an Attack" section for the rules that govern attacks.

Certain features, such as the Extra Attack feature of the fighter, allow you to make more than one attack with this action.

There is mention in the Making an Attack section that refer to spells using the same mechanic for resolving the outcome, but nothing in the attack mentions casting a spell because [Tooltip Not Found] is entirely different:

Spellcasters such as wizards and clerics, as well as many monsters, have access to spells and can use them to great effect in combat. Each spell has a casting time, which specifies whether the caster must use an action, a reaction, minutes, or even hours to cast the spell. Casting a spell is, therefore, not necessarily an action. Most spells do have a casting time of 1 action, so a spellcaster often uses his or her action in combat to cast such a spell.