[Payment due @Krishna2323] Exclude reports with all expenses on hold from Submit/Approve/Pay to-dos

[allgandalf]

Explanation of Change

Reports where every expense is on hold were still counted in the Submit, Approve, and Pay to-dos on Home (For You), the Inbox type-menu badges, and the Search expense-reports tab, even though the user can't act on them until the hold is removed. All three counts come from ONYXKEYS.DERIVED.TODOS (createTodosReportsAndTransactions), and its isSubmitAction / isApproveAction / isPrimaryPayAction gates never looked at hold state. Added a !hasOnlyHeldExpenses(reportTransactions) guard to each of the three pushes, matching the existing !hasOnlyNonReimbursableTransactions guard already on the pay push.

Also updated getReportPrimaryAction so an all-held report the user can unhold surfaces Remove Hold on the report header instead of Approve or Submit, reusing the existing Remove Hold fallback that already handled the pay case.

Fixed Issues

$ https://github.com/Expensify/Expensify/issues/637331
PROPOSAL: N/A (internal bug fix, BE contributor assigned)

Tests

Approve case:

1. On a Control workspace with approvals enabled, have a member submit a one-expense report to you (you are the manager). It moves to Processing.
2. Hold that expense.
3. Open Home (For You) and verify the report is NOT counted in the Approve tile.
4. Open Inbox and verify the report is NOT counted in the Approve type-menu badge.
5. Open Search and verify the report is NOT listed under the Approve expense-reports results.
6. Open the report and verify the header primary action is Remove Hold, not Approve.
7. Remove the hold and verify the report reappears in the Approve count and the header shows Approve again.

Submit case:

1. As a submitter, create a one-expense Open report and hold the expense.
2. Verify it is NOT counted in the Submit to-do and the report header shows Remove Hold, not Submit.
3. Remove the hold and verify it reappears in the Submit count.

Pay case:

1. As a payer, get a one-expense Approved report where the only expense is held.
2. Verify it is NOT counted in the Pay to-do.
3. Remove the hold and verify it reappears in the Pay count.

• Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

The to-do counts are a client-side Onyx derived value with no network dependency, so the behavior is identical offline. With an all-held report already in Onyx, go offline and confirm the report is still excluded from the Submit/Approve/Pay counts and that the report header still shows Remove Hold.

QA Steps

Same as Tests.

• Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

PR Author Checklist

• I linked the correct issue in the ### Fixed Issues section above
• I wrote clear testing steps that cover the changes made in this PR
  • I added steps for local testing in the Tests section
  • I added steps for the expected offline behavior in the Offline steps section
  • I added steps for Staging and/or Production testing in the QA steps section
  • I added steps to cover failure scenarios (i.e. verify an input displays the correct error message if the entered data is not correct)
  • I turned off my network connection and tested it while offline to ensure it matches the expected behavior (i.e. verify the default avatar icon is displayed if app is offline)
  • I tested this PR with a High Traffic account against the staging or production API to ensure there are no regressions (e.g. long loading states that impact usability).
• I included screenshots or videos for tests on all platforms
• I ran the tests on all platforms & verified they passed on:
  • Android: Native
  • Android: mWeb Chrome
  • iOS: Native
  • iOS: mWeb Safari
  • MacOS: Chrome / Safari
• I verified there are no console errors (if there's a console error not related to the PR, report it or open an issue for it to be fixed)
• I followed proper code patterns (see Reviewing the code)
  • I verified that any callback methods that were added or modified are named for what the method does and never what callback they handle (i.e. toggleReport and not onIconClick)
  • I verified that comments were added to code that is not self explanatory
  • I verified that any new or modified comments were clear, correct English, and explained "why" the code was doing something instead of only explaining "what" the code was doing.
  • I verified any copy / text shown in the product is localized by adding it to src/languages/* files and using the translation method
  • I verified all numbers, amounts, dates and phone numbers shown in the product are using the localization methods
  • I verified any copy / text that was added to the app is grammatically correct in English. It adheres to proper capitalization guidelines (note: only the first word of header/labels should be capitalized), and is either coming verbatim from figma or has been approved by marketing (in order to get marketing approval, ask the Bug Zero team member to add the Waiting for copy label to the issue)
  • I verified proper file naming conventions were followed for any new files or renamed files. All non-platform specific files are named after what they export and are not named "index.js". All platform-specific files are named for the platform the code supports as outlined in the README.
  • I verified the JSDocs style guidelines (in STYLE.md) were followed
• If a new code pattern is added I verified it was agreed to be used by multiple Expensify engineers
• I followed the guidelines as stated in the Review Guidelines
• I tested other components that can be impacted by my changes (i.e. if the PR modifies a shared library or component like Avatar, I verified the components using Avatar are working as expected)
• I verified all code is DRY (the PR doesn't include any logic written more than once, with the exception of tests)
• I verified any variables that can be defined as constants (ie. in CONST.ts or at the top of the file that uses the constant) are defined as such
• I verified that if a function's arguments changed that all usages have also been updated correctly
• If any new file was added I verified that:
  • The file has a description of what it does and/or why is needed at the top of the file if the code is not self explanatory
• If a new CSS style is added I verified that:
  • A similar style doesn't already exist
  • The style can't be created with an existing StyleUtils function (i.e. StyleUtils.getBackgroundAndBorderStyle(theme.componentBG))
• If new assets were added or existing ones were modified, I verified that:
  • The assets are optimized and compressed (for SVG files, run npm run compress-svg)
  • The assets load correctly across all supported platforms.
• If the PR modifies code that runs when editing or sending messages, I tested and verified there is no unexpected behavior for all supported markdown - URLs, single line code, code blocks, quotes, headings, bold, strikethrough, and italic.
• If the PR modifies a generic component, I tested and verified that those changes do not break usages of that component in the rest of the App (i.e. if a shared library or component like Avatar is modified, I verified that Avatar is working as expected in all cases)
• If the PR modifies a component related to any of the existing Storybook stories, I tested and verified all stories for that component are still working as expected.
• If the PR modifies a component or page that can be accessed by a direct deeplink, I verified that the code functions as expected when the deeplink is used - from a logged in and logged out account.
• If the PR modifies the UI (e.g. new buttons, new UI components, changing the padding/spacing/sizing, moving components, etc) or modifies the form input styles:
  • I verified that all the inputs inside a form are aligned with each other.
  • I added Design label and/or tagged @Expensify/design so the design team can review the changes.
• If a new page is added, I verified it's using the ScrollView component to make it scrollable when more elements are added to the page.
• I added unit tests for any new feature or bug fix in this PR to help automatically prevent regressions in this user flow.
• If the main branch was merged into this PR after a review, I tested again and verified the outcome was still expected according to the Test steps.

Screenshots/Videos

Android: Native

Android: mWeb Chrome

iOS: Native

iOS: mWeb Safari

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

[melvin-bot]

@Eskalifer1 Please copy/paste the Reviewer Checklist from here into a new comment on this PR and complete it. If you have the K2 extension, you can simply click: [this button]

[melvin-bot]

@marufsharifi Please copy/paste the Reviewer Checklist from here into a new comment on this PR and complete it. If you have the K2 extension, you can simply click: [this button]

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: b8c7d91c39

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Codex has been enabled to automatically review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

• Open a pull request for review
• Mark a draft as ready
• Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

When you sign up for Codex through ChatGPT, Codex can also answer questions or update the PR, like "@codex address that feedback".

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

Filter pending-delete transactions for held-only to-dos

When a report has only held active expenses plus an unheld transaction that is pending deletion (for example, after deleting/moving an expense while offline or before the delete request syncs), transactionsByReportID still includes that pending-delete transaction, so this new hasOnlyHeldExpenses(reportTransactions) guard returns false and the report stays in Submit/Approve/Pay to-dos. The report header path already filters pending deletes before computing the primary action (useReportPrimaryAction.ts:46-53), so the to-do counts can disagree with the actionable UI in that state; filter pending-delete transactions before applying the new held-only checks.

Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.

[Eskalifer1]

Hi @allgandalf I'll be partially unavailable this Friday (after lunch) and OOO all next week, so I won't be able to work on this PR.

I see that it’s on HOLD, so we can wait, but if the PR is ready to work on (the backend will be ready) and I won’t be around for a few more days (since I don’t think it makes sense to reassign it, say, on Friday evening), then feel free to reassign this issue, for example, to the second C+ who was assigned here.

Thanks!

[luacmartins]

I'm re-assigning to @Krishna2323 since they were already working on #85861

[JmillsExpensify]

I guess I didn't approve earlier.

[Krishna2323]

Reviewer Checklist

• I have verified the author checklist is complete (all boxes are checked off).
• I verified the correct issue is linked in the ### Fixed Issues section above
• I verified testing steps are clear and they cover the changes made in this PR
  • I verified the steps for local testing are in the Tests section
  • I verified the steps for Staging and/or Production testing are in the QA steps section
  • I verified the steps cover any possible failure scenarios (i.e. verify an input displays the correct error message if the entered data is not correct)
  • I turned off my network connection and tested it while offline to ensure it matches the expected behavior (i.e. verify the default avatar icon is displayed if app is offline)
• I checked that screenshots or videos are included for tests on all platforms
• I included screenshots or videos for tests on all platforms
• I verified that the composer does not automatically focus or open the keyboard on mobile unless explicitly intended. This includes checking that returning the app from the background does not unexpectedly open the keyboard.
• I verified tests pass on all platforms & I tested again on:
  • Android: HybridApp
  • Android: mWeb Chrome
  • iOS: HybridApp
  • iOS: mWeb Safari
  • MacOS: Chrome / Safari
  • MacOS: Desktop
• If there are any errors in the console that are unrelated to this PR, I either fixed them (preferred) or linked to where I reported them in Slack
• I verified there are no new alerts related to the canBeMissing param for useOnyx
• I verified proper code patterns were followed (see Reviewing the code)
  • I verified that any callback methods that were added or modified are named for what the method does and never what callback they handle (i.e. toggleReport and not onIconClick).
  • I verified that comments were added to code that is not self explanatory
  • I verified that any new or modified comments were clear, correct English, and explained "why" the code was doing something instead of only explaining "what" the code was doing.
  • I verified any copy / text shown in the product is localized by adding it to src/languages/* files and using the translation method
  • I verified all numbers, amounts, dates and phone numbers shown in the product are using the localization methods
  • I verified any copy / text that was added to the app is grammatically correct in English. It adheres to proper capitalization guidelines (note: only the first word of header/labels should be capitalized), and is either coming verbatim from figma or has been approved by marketing (in order to get marketing approval, ask the Bug Zero team member to add the Waiting for copy label to the issue)
  • I verified proper file naming conventions were followed for any new files or renamed files. All non-platform specific files are named after what they export and are not named "index.js". All platform-specific files are named for the platform the code supports as outlined in the README.
  • I verified the JSDocs style guidelines (in STYLE.md) were followed
• If a new code pattern is added I verified it was agreed to be used by multiple Expensify engineers
• I verified that this PR follows the guidelines as stated in the Review Guidelines
• I verified other components that can be impacted by these changes have been tested, and I retested again (i.e. if the PR modifies a shared library or component like Avatar, I verified the components using Avatar have been tested & I retested again)
• I verified all code is DRY (the PR doesn't include any logic written more than once, with the exception of tests)
• I verified any variables that can be defined as constants (ie. in CONST.ts or at the top of the file that uses the constant) are defined as such
• If a new component is created I verified that:
  • A similar component doesn't exist in the codebase
  • All props are defined accurately and each prop has a /** comment above it */
  • The file is named correctly
  • The component has a clear name that is non-ambiguous and the purpose of the component can be inferred from the name alone
  • The only data being stored in the state is data necessary for rendering and nothing else
  • For Class Components, any internal methods passed to components event handlers are bound to this properly so there are no scoping issues (i.e. for onClick={this.submit} the method this.submit should be bound to this in the constructor)
  • Any internal methods bound to this are necessary to be bound (i.e. avoid this.submit = this.submit.bind(this); if this.submit is never passed to a component event handler like onClick)
  • All JSX used for rendering exists in the render method
  • The component has the minimum amount of code necessary for its purpose, and it is broken down into smaller components in order to separate concerns and functions
• If any new file was added I verified that:
  • The file has a description of what it does and/or why is needed at the top of the file if the code is not self explanatory
• If a new CSS style is added I verified that:
  • A similar style doesn't already exist
  • The style can't be created with an existing StyleUtils function (i.e. StyleUtils.getBackgroundAndBorderStyle(theme.componentBG)
• If the PR modifies code that runs when editing or sending messages, I tested and verified there is no unexpected behavior for all supported markdown - URLs, single line code, code blocks, quotes, headings, bold, strikethrough, and italic.
• If the PR modifies a generic component, I tested and verified that those changes do not break usages of that component in the rest of the App (i.e. if a shared library or component like Avatar is modified, I verified that Avatar is working as expected in all cases)
• If the PR modifies a component related to any of the existing Storybook stories, I tested and verified all stories for that component are still working as expected.
• If the PR modifies a component or page that can be accessed by a direct deeplink, I verified that the code functions as expected when the deeplink is used - from a logged in and logged out account.
• If the PR modifies the UI (e.g. new buttons, new UI components, changing the padding/spacing/sizing, moving components, etc) or modifies the form input styles:
  • I verified that all the inputs inside a form are aligned with each other.
  • I added Design label and/or tagged @Expensify/design so the design team can review the changes.
• If a new page is added, I verified it's using the ScrollView component to make it scrollable when more elements are added to the page.
• For any bug fix or new feature in this PR, I verified that sufficient unit tests are included to prevent regressions in this flow.
• If the main branch was merged into this PR after a review, I tested again and verified the outcome was still expected according to the Test steps.
• I have checked off every checkbox in the PR reviewer checklist, including those that don't apply to this PR.

Screenshots/Videos

Android: HybridApp

android_hybrid.mp4

Android: mWeb Chrome

android_mWeb.mp4

iOS: HybridApp

ios_hybrid.mp4

iOS: mWeb Safari

ios_mWeb.mp4

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

web_chrome_approve.mp4

web_chrome_pay.mp4

web_chrome_submit.mp4

[Krishna2323]

Screenshots/Videos

Android: Native
Android: mWeb Chrome
iOS: Native
iOS: mWeb Safari
MacOS: Chrome / Safari

@allgandalf Looks like the screenshots/videos are missing from the author checklist 😅

[allgandalf]

can you proceed as is? i'm done for the day, it would take me tomorrow to upload the recording for Web

[Krishna2323]

LGTM!

[melvin-bot]

🎯 @Krishna2323, thanks for reviewing and testing this PR! 🎉

A payment issue will be created for your review once this PR is deployed to production.
E/E issue linked to the PR - https://www.github.com/Expensify/Expensify/issues/637331.

If payment is not needed (e.g., regression PR review fix etc), react with 👎 to this comment to prevent the payment issue from being created.

[luacmartins]

@allgandalf conflicts

[Krishna2323]

@allgandalf friendly bump to resolve the conflicts

[github-actions]

🚧 @luacmartins has triggered a test Expensify/App build. You can view the workflow run here.

[OSBotify]

✋ This PR was not deployed to staging yet because QA is ongoing. It will be automatically deployed to staging after the next production release.

[github-actions]

🧪🧪 Use the links below to test this adhoc build on Android, iOS, and Web. Happy testing! 🧪🧪
Built from App PR #92499.

Android 🤖	iOS 🍎
https://ad-hoc-expensify-cash.s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/rock-artifacts/ad-hoc/rock-android-Adhoc-fd03a9fd225-d12cd93-5bfdf2fbd6b61d26df62a0e4ecc329053b8b6cf9/index.html	https://ad-hoc-expensify-cash.s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/rock-artifacts/ad-hoc/rock-ios-device-AdHoc-fd03a9f-d12cd93-473c8c4f32d26c826536223299d5fff474c25fa7/index.html

Web 🕸️
https://92499.pr-testing.expensify.com

---

👀 View the workflow run that generated this build 👀

[OSBotify]

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/luacmartins in version: 9.4.9-0 🚀

platform	result
🕸 web 🕸	success ✅
🤖 android 🤖	success ✅
🍎 iOS 🍎	success ✅

Bundle Size Analysis (Sentry):

• Android
• iOS

[MelvinBot]

Help site review — changes required

Yes. This PR introduces a user-visible behavior change worth documenting: reports where every expense is on hold are now excluded from the Submit, Approve, and Pay to-dos (Home For you, Inbox type-menu badges, and Search), and an all-held report now surfaces Remove hold as its primary action instead of Submit/Approve/Pay.

I created a draft help site PR updating two articles:

• Expensify-Home-Overview.md — documents that all-held reports are excluded from the For you Submit/Approve/Pay counts until the hold is removed, plus a matching FAQ entry.
• Understanding-Report-Statuses-and-Actions.md — clarifies the Held Expenses primary action and the to-do exclusion.

UI label verified against unhold: 'Remove hold' in src/languages/en.ts.

Draft PR: #93744

@allgandalf, please review the linked help site PR and confirm it reflects the current behavior. Then mark the linked help site PR Ready for review

[OSBotify]

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/puneetlath in version: 9.4.9-0 🚀

platform	result
🕸 web 🕸	success ✅
🤖 android 🤖	success ✅
🍎 iOS 🍎	success ✅