[Due for payment 2026-10-14] [Insights][R4][App] Remove legacy violations suggested searches from the Spend UI

@mallenexpensify

Implement this section of the design doc: Remove violations suggested searches from the Spend page's UI.

Description

Remove the legacy violations suggested-search entry points from the Spend UI while preserving search-key resolution for existing queries.

Remove insightsSearchKeys and the Insights section generated from it by createTypeMenuSections.
Preserve the corresponding entries in getSuggestedSearches, which SearchQueryProvider still uses to resolve currentSearchKey.

Acceptance criteria

The old violations suggested-search menu entries no longer appear in the Spend UI.
Existing queries continue resolving currentSearchKey correctly.
Include manual menu and existing-query regression steps.

Sequencing

Coordinate with Compliance availability so the replacement is usable when the old entry points disappear. Related implementation: #102809.

Issue Owner

Current Issue Owner: @mallenexpensify

@nkdengineer

(Neil's AI agent)

We'd like to do this now instead of waiting for Compliance. Per this Slack thread, the Insights page is close to going live for Spend. #101310 hid the four spend insights from the Spend page, but it only filters SPEND_INSIGHT_KEYS, so Violations by submitter is left alone in the Spend Insights section. It will come back on the Insights > Compliance page in #102809 (tracking issue: https://github.com/Expensify/Expensify/issues/645498).

Solution: remove the Violations by submitter suggested search from the Insights section on the Spend page, but leave support for this search intact. Hiding it only for insightsPage beta users, the same way #101310 handled the spend insights, is fine.

@nkdengineer you added this insight in #97067 (re-landed in #98391). Are you able to work on this?

@nkdengineer

@nkdengineer you added this insight in #97067 (re-landed in #98391). Are you able to work on this?

@neil-marcellini Yes, I'm available to work on this.

Ok great, please get started when you can and lmk when it's ready for review.

@neil-marcellini

@neil-marcellini The PR is ready for review.

@nkdengineer

@nkdengineer

The solution for this issue has been 🚀 deployed to production 🚀 in version 9.5.4-3 and is now subject to a 7-day regression period 📆. Here is the list of pull requests that resolve this issue:

Remove legacy violations suggested searches from the Spend UI #103143

If no regressions arise, payment will be issued on 2026-10-14. 🎊

The following checklist (instructions) will need to be completed before the issue can be closed. Please copy/paste the Contributor+ Checklist from here into a new comment on this GH and complete it. If you have the K2 extension, you can simply click: [this button]. If no checklist is needed for this issue, you can click: [no checklist button]

Contributor+ Checklist:

[Contributor] The offending PR and associated issue have been commented on, pointing out the bug it caused and why, so the author and reviewers can learn from the mistake.

Link to the comment on the PR: N/A (New feature)
[Contributor] If the regression was CRITICAL (e.g. interrupts a core flow) A discussion in #expensify-open-source has been started about whether any other steps should be taken (e.g. updating the PR review checklist) in order to catch this type of bug sooner.

Link to discussion: N/A
[Contributor] If it was decided to create a regression test for the bug, please propose the regression test steps using the template below to ensure the same bug will not reach production again.

Regression Test Proposal Template. Needed for all bugs AND new features

Regression Test Proposal

Precondition:

Precondition: insightsPage beta is enabled

Test:

Go to the Spend page
Verify that the Insight suggested searches don't appear anymore

Do we agree 👍 or 👎

@mallenexpensify

Triggered auto assignment to @mallenexpensify (Awaiting Payment)

@nkdengineer

Payment Summary

Resolving PRs:

Remove legacy violations suggested searches from the Spend UI #103143
Reviewer: @nkdengineer owed $175 via NewDot

BugZero Checklist (@mallenexpensify)

I have confirmed assignees, roles, and Upwork contracts look correct
I have paid out Upwork contracts / manual NewDot requests
[BugZero Assignee] I have created a GH issue for creating/updating the regression test once above steps have been agreed upon

Navigation Menu

Repository navigation

[Due for payment 2026-10-14] [Insights][R4][App] Remove legacy violations suggested searches from the Spend UI #102811

Description

Acceptance criteria

Sequencing

Contributor+ Checklist:

Regression Test Proposal

Precondition:

Test:

Payment Summary

BugZero Checklist (@mallenexpensify)

Metadata

Assignees

Labels

Type

Projects

Milestone

Relationships

Development

[Due for payment 2026-10-14] [Insights][R4][App] Remove legacy violations suggested searches from the Spend UI #102811

Description

Description

Acceptance criteria

Sequencing

Activity

neil-marcellini commented on Oct 5, 2026

nkdengineer commented on Oct 5, 2026

neil-marcellini commented on Oct 5, 2026

nkdengineer commented on Oct 6, 2026

melvin-bot commented on Oct 7, 2026

nkdengineer commented on Oct 9, 2026

Contributor+ Checklist:

Regression Test Proposal

Precondition:

Test:

melvin-bot commented on Oct 13, 2026

melvin-bot commented on Oct 13, 2026

Payment Summary

BugZero Checklist (@mallenexpensify)

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

Labels

Type

Projects

Milestone

Relationships

Development

Issue actions