Edit Article says the strike was in the "Pokrovsk Agglomeration", so in the interests of being precise, this wasn't necessarily directly in Pokrovsk but rather somewhere in the area salient to the city.
Below are some longish thoughts on the state of the war, especially in Pokrovsk and the surrounding area.
Making Russia pay here to fully take Pokrovsk is punishing on many levels most importantly of which is the political and propaganda level. Russia/Putin has to make a choice, by default Pokrovsk is indisputably a big propaganda win for Russia and they have already prematurely tried to leverage that propaganda... but now that Russia is clearly struggling to actually follow through and take Pokrovsk the choice has been forced on Russia, does Russia try to de-emphasize the relevance of confidently and authoritatively seizing the railhub or risk continuing to direct the world's attention to a dead end sunk cost fallacy that demonstrates the faltering weakness of the Russian military?"
One valid way to define "propaganda" is as the best small instance of a thing that can be persuasively argued is symbolic of a broader pattern or truth. Russia has been making the argument that the inevitability of Russia flooding into Pokrovsk and seizing the city is symbolic of the broader inevitability of Russia seizing the entire Oblast and beyond. Disappointingly much of the international english speaking media appears ready to accept this narrative framing of inevitability. This would be more of an existential problem for Ukraine except for the fact that Ukraine has forced Russia into a choice between two diverging paths by fighting so hard in Pokrovsk, there is now only the narrative bandwidth to either emphasize Pokrovsk as an important strategic goal or to de-emphasize it as an important strategic goal in the space of the days or weeks it will take for Russia to fully capture Pokrovsk. If Russia wanted the best of both worlds and wanted to de-emphasize the propaganda effect of Pokrovsk until they actually fully captured it and then turn around and emphasize it again in the wake of the city's capture, it would take longer than the scale of a handful of weeks to construct a narrative that would facilitate this convincingly and Russia simply cannot afford to continue assaulting Pokrovsk for that long at the scale of attrition it is experiencing.
What this precision guided Close Air Support attack is propaganda for, using my above definition is the undeniable strength with which Ukraine is forcing Russia into making choices rather then just frantically reacting to the overwhelming tide of the Russian war machine, the latter narrative of the war being something Putin and Russia desperately need to maintain in order to appear strong. The tactical question posed to Russian infiltration groups over whether they should occupy the obvious building which is clearly a potential target for a guided bomb before Ukraine forces even enter the picture is effective propaganda in that it expresses this broader strategic situation. Negotiations are beginning to happen now, not necessarily ones that will end the war, but certainly ones that will shape relationships between countries critically involved in the Ukraine war, and the strength of Ukraine has shown here is a global bulwark against the perceived inevitability of the power of authoritarian dictators who throw the lives away of their people in the pursuit of oppression.
Note I think it is reasonable to argue the uptick in indiscriminate attacks against Ukrainian civilians as well as targeted attacks by Russia against journalists in the past couple of days and more broadly in the past couple of months is directly indicative of Russia's desperation to generate a propaganda of strength and inevitability it can't plausibly create on the actual frontline of the war. See the weakness for what it is, not to diminish the reality of the violence but rather to question the framing of inevitability around it.