[sosek108]

Explanation of Change

This moves two sections of the Report Details page into their own components. ReportDetailsNameSection renders the name block for non-expense reports: the name, the subtitle and the group workspace row. ReportDetailsTitleSection renders the title field and the "From" row for expense, invoice and money request reports. Both take only reportID and read their own Onyx data (report, policy, parent report, Concierge report ID, rules, parent report action and archived state), so the page no longer passes that data down.

The report name derivation from useDerivedReportNamesByReportIDs moved into a new useReportDetailsReportName hook. The page shell no longer subscribes to the derived report attributes. Only the mounted section does, and the two sections never mount together.

Stack note: this is PR 4 of 8 in the DynamicReportDetailsPage decomposition (parent issue #102173).

Fixed Issues

$ #102179
PROPOSAL:

Tests

1. Open a workspace chat room, then open its Report details. Verify the name and subtitle look and behave as on prod, and that renaming the room works where allowed
2. Open a workspace chat, then open its Report details. Verify the name and subtitle look and behave as on prod
3. Open a group chat, then open its Report details. Verify the name and the group workspace row look and behave as on prod, and that renaming the group works
4. Open an expense report, then open its Report details. Verify the title field and the "From" row look and behave as on prod, and that editing the title works where allowed
5. Open a money request, then open its Report details. Verify the title field and the "From" row look and behave as on prod

Offline tests

N/A

QA Steps

Same as tests

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 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 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)
• 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)
• 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 the PR adds or modifies the UI:
  • I asked an AI agent to review the changes for accessibility issues and addressed its findings.
  • I tested with a screen reader (VoiceOver on macOS) and verified all new/changed elements are reachable with a logical focus order.
  • I verified all new/changed elements have meaningful accessible names and roles.
  • I verified state changes are announced (e.g. checked/unchecked, expanded/collapsed, selected).
• 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

Nagranie.z.ekranu.2026-10-1.o.12.19.42.mov

iOS: mWeb Safari

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/759cb49a-c456-4259-a004-53eddd4bc997

[codecov]

Codecov Report

❌ Looks like you've decreased code coverage for some files. Please write tests to increase, or at least maintain, the existing level of code coverage. See our documentation here for how to interpret this table.

Files with missing lines	Coverage Δ
src/pages/DynamicReportDetailsPage/index.tsx	80.63% <100.00%> (-3.32%)	⬇️
...micReportDetailsPage/useReportDetailsReportName.ts	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
...amicReportDetailsPage/ReportDetailsNameSection.tsx	95.83% <95.83%> (ø)
...micReportDetailsPage/ReportDetailsTitleSection.tsx	93.61% <93.61%> (ø)
... and 9 files with indirect coverage changes

[sosek108]

@MelvinBot review

[MelvinBot]

Review

I found no bugs. The change looks like the pure refactor the description promises. It's fine to merge once you've done the manual checks.

• Same data. Each section reads the same Onyx keys the page used before (withReportOrNotFound gets report and policy from the same keys). parentReport, parentReportAction, isReportArchived/isParentReportArchived, rules and conciergeReportID also match.
• Same JSX and conditions. I compared both sections line by line against the removed blocks. shouldShowFurtherDetailsContent, roomDescription, additionalRoomDetails and the key={menuItem-${fieldKey}} remount all behave the same.
• CI. Typecheck, lint and Jest pass. Only the author and reviewer checklist jobs fail.

Optional nits (you don't need to fix these in this PR):

1. getReportDetailsCaseID and isTrackExpenseReportNew now run in three places: index.tsx:230, ReportDetailsNameSection.tsx:71 and ReportDetailsTitleSection.tsx:70. They're cheap, but a later PR in the stack could move this into a shared hook.
2. After the !report?.reportID early return, some optional chaining is no longer needed. Examples are the report?.policyID check inside onPress, which is already gated on report.policyID, and report?.reportID. The old code had the same chaining, so you could leave it to keep the diff a pure move.
3. Codecov reports lower coverage. useReportDetailsReportName is easy to unit test, for example the ADD_COMMENT and group-chat branches that skip Parser.htmlToText.

I reviewed the code only. I did not run the app.

---

view run

[melvin-bot]

@nkdengineer 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]

[nkdengineer]

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
• 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 proper code patterns were followed (see Reviewing the code)
  • 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 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)
• 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)
• If a new component is created I verified that:
  • A similar component doesn't exist in the codebase
  • All props are defined accurately
  • 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
  • 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 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 the PR adds or modifies the UI:
  • I asked an AI agent to review the changes for accessibility issues and addressed its findings.
  • I tested with a screen reader (VoiceOver on macOS) and verified all new/changed elements are reachable with a logical focus order.
  • I verified all new/changed elements have meaningful accessible names and roles.
  • I verified state changes are announced (e.g. checked/unchecked, expanded/collapsed, selected).
• 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

Screen.Recording.2026-10-01.at.23.07.26.mov

Android: mWeb Chrome

Screen.Recording.2026-10-01.at.23.05.32.mov

iOS: HybridApp

Uploading Screen Recording 2026-10-01 at 23.06.08.mov…

iOS: mWeb Safari

Screen.Recording.2026-10-01.at.23.06.43.mov

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

Screen.Recording.2026-10-01.at.23.00.55.mov

Screen.Recording.2026-10-01.at.23.01.18.mov

Screen.Recording.2026-10-01.at.23.01.44.mov

Screen.Recording.2026-10-01.at.23.02.22.mov

[nkdengineer]

LGTM!

[trjExpensify]

PR doesn’t need product input as a performance refactor PR. Unassigning and unsubscribing myself.

[github-actions]

🚧 mjasikowski 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 #102738.

Android 🤖	iOS 🍎
https://ad-hoc-expensify-cash.s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/rock-artifacts/ad-hoc/rock-android-Adhoc-4964b15-db85bbb-eea0c3bd9196081725c91eb53fe79827a693ffb6/index.html	https://ad-hoc-expensify-cash.s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/rock-artifacts/ad-hoc/rock-ios-device-AdHoc-4964b15-db85bbb-188305b4be4132ca00cca04d6127e6d3fae60ad8/index.html

Web 🕸️
https://102738.pr-testing.expensify.com

---

👀 View the workflow run that generated this build 👀

[OSBotify]

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/mjasikowski in version: 9.5.2-0 🚀

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

[MelvinBot]

No help site update needed. This PR moves the Report details name and title sections into separate components. The labels, fields, and behavior users see stay the same, so no article sentence becomes incorrect.

---

view run

[OSBotify]

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/Julesssss in version: 9.5.2-4 🚀

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

Bundle Size Analysis (Sentry):

• Android
• iOS