[No QA] Prioritize workspace expenses over individual expenses

[garrettmknight]

This is mostly structural, just moving sections around to prioritize workspace expenses and deemphasize personal expense split.

Explanation of Change

Fixed Issues

$https://github.com/Expensify/Expensify/issues/491348

Tests

• Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

QA Steps

// TODO: These must be filled out, or the issue title must include "[No QA]."

• 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 verified there are no new alerts related to the canBeMissing param for useOnyx
• 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
    • If any non-english text was added/modified, I used JaimeGPT to get English > Spanish translation. I then posted it in #expensify-open-source and it was approved by an internal Expensify engineer. Link to Slack message:
  • 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

[github-actions]

AI Readiness violation: This heading "When to Submit to an Individual" is vague. Consider changing it to "When to Submit an Expense to an Individual" to include the full feature context. This helps AI assistants better understand and reference this section.

[garrettmknight]

This is a strucutral edit to a previously written article.

[github-actions]

AI Readiness violation: This heading "When to Submit to a Workspace" is vague. Consider changing it to "When to Submit an Expense to a Workspace" to include the full feature context. This helps AI assistants better understand and reference this section.

[github-actions]

Readability violation: The pronoun "this option" at the beginning is vague. Consider rephrasing to be more explicit, such as: "Submit an expense to an individual for personal payments." This improves clarity and scannability.

[github-actions]

AI Readiness violation: The heading "Next Steps for Individual Expenses" lacks specificity. Consider "Next Steps After Submitting Expenses to an Individual" to provide clearer context for AI comprehension.

[github-actions]

HelpDot Documentation Review

Overall Assessment

This PR makes structural improvements to the "Create an Expense" documentation by reordering sections to prioritize workspace expenses over personal expenses. The changes are purely organizational and improve the document flow for the primary business use case while maintaining all existing content quality.

Scores Summary

• Readability: 9/10 - Excellent clarity and logical flow. The reordering improves the reading experience by presenting business (workspace) scenarios before personal scenarios, which aligns better with the primary user journey. All existing content maintains clear, jargon-free language at an appropriate reading level.

• AI Readiness: 8/10 - Good structural organization with descriptive headings. The document has proper YAML metadata and clear heading hierarchy. The reordering enhances contextual clarity by presenting "When to Submit to a Workspace" before individual submissions. Minor improvement opportunity: the "Split Personal Expenses" section could benefit from more explicit feature name context in the heading.

• Style Compliance: 9/10 - Strong adherence to Expensify style standards. Proper terminology usage (workspace, member), consistent button labels, and appropriate markdown formatting throughout. The removal of the redundant FAQ about splitting expenses (now that the Split Expense section is more detailed) improves content efficiency.

Key Findings

Positive Aspects:

• Improved prioritization: Moving workspace expense content before individual expenses better reflects typical user needs and business-focused workflows
• Logical flow enhancement: Placing "Next Steps for Workspace Expenses" immediately after the expense creation methods (before the Split Personal Expenses section) creates a more intuitive reading path
• Content consolidation: The removed FAQ question about splitting payments was redundant given the detailed "Split Personal Expenses" section
• Clarity improvement: Updated split expense intro text now explicitly mentions "group chat" which adds helpful context
• No regressions: All existing content quality, formatting, and accuracy maintained

Structural Improvements:

• Section order now follows: Workspace → Individual → Split, which matches typical user priority
• Next Steps sections now appear in logical sequence after their respective content blocks
• FAQ remains comprehensive while removing duplication

Minor Enhancement Opportunities:

• Consider if the "Split Personal Expenses" heading could be more descriptive for AI parsing (e.g., "Split Personal Expenses with Multiple People")
• The FAQ section could potentially include a question about workspace vs. individual expense selection to reinforce the reordered structure

Recommendations

Priority Actions:

1. Approved for merge - The structural changes successfully improve document flow without compromising content quality
2. Consider adding a brief intro sentence under "# Create an Expense" that references the importance of choosing between workspace and individual submission (to reinforce the new ordering)
3. Future enhancement: Consider adding visual indicators (like 💼 for workspace, 👤 for individual) to help readers quickly identify section types

Suggestions for Future Iterations:

• Add cross-references between the "When to Submit" sections and their corresponding "Next Steps" sections
• Consider a quick-reference table comparing workspace vs. individual expense flows
• Potential to add a "Most Common" or "Recommended" badge to workspace expense sections

Files Reviewed

• docs/articles/new-expensify/reports-and-expenses/Create-an-Expense.md - ✅ Structural reorganization improves document flow; all content quality maintained

---

This is a summary assessment. The changes represent a meaningful improvement to user experience by prioritizing business use cases while maintaining all existing documentation quality standards.

[OSBotify]

A preview of your ExpensifyHelp changes have been deployed to https://bd61f27d.helpdot.pages.dev ⚡️

Updated articles:

• articles/new-expensify/reports-and-expenses/Create-an-Expense

[stephanieelliott]

@garrettmknight I fixed for some outdated UI elements and tweaked some formatting, feel free to merge if you are happy with it.

[justinpersaud]

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

Screen.Recording.2025-06-19.at.10.01.06.AM.mov

Android: mWeb Chrome

Screen.Recording.2025-06-19.at.9.58.15.AM.mov

iOS: HybridApp

Screen.Recording.2025-06-19.at.9.51.44.AM.mov

iOS: mWeb Safari

Screen.Recording.2025-06-19.at.9.52.56.AM.mov

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

Screen.Recording.2025-06-19.at.9.48.56.AM.mov

MacOS: Desktop

Screen.Recording.2025-06-19.at.9.49.40.AM.mov

[OSBotify]

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/justinpersaud in version: 9.3.11-16 🚀

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

[OSBotify]

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/Julesssss in version: 9.3.12-1 🚀

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