What would meet the standard of "considerable actions" in a constructive eviction issue?

I'm in utah, and my heat hasn't worked for two weeks, multiple maintenance requests have been put in on the matter.

Looking up state statutes for constructive eviction, today I gave my landlord notice of deficient rental conditions. I outlined the problem, the timeline laid out by statute to remedy the issue, and that I will be going the rent abatement route if the issue isn't addressed within the time frame given.

Just to get this out of the way, I plan on hiring actual legal counsel this Monday. I'm doing so, so that if nothing is done and I abandon the property, they can help me both get my money back and be ready in case the property management tries to take action against me. I know that my question here is going to be best answered by that attorney.

However, I'm still going to ask this question here for my own curiosity and peace of mind.

The statute states the landlord must take "considerable action" to remedy the issue within the given time frame. It doesn't outline or state what would be considered considerable. I'm aware that the furnace doesn't have to be fixed within three days to trigger the rent abatement, just that actions must be taken to attempt to do so. And thats where all this starts to go from black and white law to a lot of gray.

What do you guys think would be considerable action? Would them just calling an hvac company likely fulfill that? If the hvac technician doesn't show up in the next 3 days does simply calling them fulfill considerable action?