Fix: Expense amount shown in brackets in LHN preview by marufsharifi · Pull Request #86904 · Expensify/App

marufsharifi · 2026-04-01T17:05:33Z

Explanation of Change

This change fixes an inconsistency in the expense preview in the Left Hand Navigation.

Previously, the preview could change format for the same expense after opening or reselecting a report, making the UI feel unstable. Now, instead of relying on a raw message string that can be rehydrated differently, the app builds the preview from stable expense data like amount, currency, and comment. The result is a more consistent and predictable LHN preview for expense reports.

Fixed Issues

$ #83269
PROPOSAL: #83269 (comment)

Tests

Go to workspace chat.
Create an expense.
Open the expense report.
Click on the report header > Pin.
Close the RHP.
Open the pinned expense report.
Navigate away from the expense report.
Verify that the LHN preview doesn't show the expense amount in a bracket.

Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

Same as Tests.

QA Steps

Same as Tests.

// 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

Screenshots/Videos

Android: Native

Screen.Recording.2026-04-01.at.11.04.37.PM.mov

Android: mWeb Chrome

Screen.Recording.2026-04-01.at.11.07.07.PM.mov

iOS: Native

Screen.Recording.2026-04-01.at.10.30.36.PM.1.mp4

iOS: mWeb Safari

Screen.Recording.2026-04-01.at.10.34.54.PM.mov

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

Screen.Recording.2026-04-01.at.10.24.46.PM.mov

codecov · 2026-04-01T17:15:36Z

Codecov Report

✅ Changes either increased or maintained existing code coverage, great job!

Files with missing lines	Coverage Δ
src/libs/OptionsListUtils/index.ts	`84.70% <82.14%> (+0.01%)`	⬆️
... and 148 files with indirect coverage changes

melvin-bot · 2026-04-01T17:54:11Z

Hey, I noticed you changed src/languages/en.ts in a PR from a fork. For security reasons, translations are not generated automatically for PRs from forks.

If you want to automatically generate translations for other locales, an Expensify employee will have to:

Look at the code and make sure there are no malicious changes.
Run the Generate static translations GitHub workflow. If you have write access and the K2 extension, you can simply click: [this button]

Alternatively, if you are an external contributor, you can run the translation script locally with your own OpenAI API key. To learn more, try running:

npx ts-node ./scripts/generateTranslations.ts --help

Typically, you'd want to translate only what you changed by running npx ts-node ./scripts/generateTranslations.ts --compare-ref main

melvin-bot · 2026-04-03T06:08:43Z

@aimane-chnaif 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: f4af4e2ac9

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to 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 👍.

Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".

chatgpt-codex-connector · 2026-04-03T06:17:30Z

+
+    if (isExpenseReport(report) && typeof amount === 'number' && currency) {
+        const formattedAmount = convertToDisplayString(Math.abs(amount), currency);
+        return formatReportLastMessageText(`${formattedAmount} expense${comment ? ` for ${comment}` : ''}`);


Localize canonical expense preview text

This branch hardcodes the preview as ${formattedAmount} expense ... instead of using a translation key, so non-English users will see English text whenever getLastMessageTextForReport() hits this canonical fallback path (for example, when the visible action resolves to CREATED after rehydration). The existing preview path uses localized strings via getReportPreviewMessage, so this introduces a locale regression specifically in the new fallback behavior.

Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.

@aimane-chnaif I checked this flow in a non-English locale, and the LHN preview is already shown in English today (for example, BGN 24.65 expense for 34 miles in Japanese).

Should we preserve that current behavior here, or add a new translation key and localize this fallback ?

We can support localization here

marufsharifi · 2026-04-07T05:54:10Z

@aimane-chnaif, gentle bump. thanks.

MelvinBot · 2026-04-08T16:25:48Z

Code Review

The approach of building the preview from stable expense data instead of the raw message string is sound, but there are a few issues:

1. Hardcoded English strings (localization bug)

getCanonicalMoneyRequestPreviewText at line 601 hardcodes "expense" and "for":

return formatReportLastMessageText(`${formattedAmount} expense${comment ? ` for ${comment}` : ''}`);

This won't be translated for non-English users. The existing iou.expenseAmount translation key already handles this with proper localization (e.g., French uses "pour", Spanish "para"). The function should accept a translate parameter and use translate('iou.expenseAmount', ...) instead of string interpolation — matching the pattern used throughout getLastMessageTextForReport.

Note also that the existing iou.expenseAmount produces $25.00 for Dinner (no "expense" word), so this PR introduces new copy that doesn't match what any existing flow produces.

2. Consider reusing `getReportPreviewMessage` instead of reimplementing

getReportPreviewMessage at src/libs/ReportUtils.ts:5560-5569 already builds a stable preview from originalMessage.amount/currency/comment with proper localization via translateLocal('iou.expenseAmount'). The new getCanonicalMoneyRequestPreviewText duplicates this logic but without localization. Could the fix simply call getReportPreviewMessage directly instead?

3. `getLatestVisibleMoneyRequestAction` duplicates existing logic

The new function at lines 570-582 is nearly identical to the existing find logic at lines 749-756 in the same file. Consider refactoring to reuse getLatestVisibleMoneyRequestAction in both places to reduce duplication.

4. Test coverage gaps

The tests cover the happy path and deleted-action filtering well. Consider adding tests for:

Empty comment (should produce amount-only preview)
Non-USD currencies
Missing amount or currency (fallback path)

aimane-chnaif · 2026-04-08T16:32:41Z

Please address Melvin's review above

chatgpt-codex-connector · 2026-04-08T16:39:56Z

Codex Review: Something went wrong. Try again later by commenting “@codex review”.

Failed to set up container

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".

marufsharifi · 2026-04-09T05:54:42Z

@aimane-chnaif All feedback has been addressed now. Could you please take another look when you get a chance? Thanks!

marufsharifi · 2026-04-14T06:36:21Z

@aimane-chnaif gentle bump. Thanks

aimane-chnaif · 2026-04-14T13:12:56Z

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: mWeb Chrome

iOS: HybridApp

ios.mov

iOS: mWeb Safari

msafari.mov

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

web.mov

aimane-chnaif · 2026-04-14T13:37:12Z

Please fix these regressions.

staging:

marufsharifi · 2026-04-14T14:37:12Z

@aimane-chnaif could you clarify which regression you mean here?

The missing minus sign for negative expenses is a valid regression from this PR, and I’ll fix that.

For the text difference, I believe the current behavior is intentional. Staging is showing the backend-provided preview text, while this PR switches the LHN fallback to the localized/client-formatted preview so the message is translated and includes the comment when available, as discussed here.

chatgpt-codex-connector

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: cca0c91ede

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".

marufsharifi · 2026-05-13T14:40:42Z

@aimane-chnaif Thanks for reviewing again. This feedback has been addressed as well.

marufsharifi · 2026-05-15T07:03:50Z

@aimane-chnaif, friendly bump. thanks.

aimane-chnaif · 2026-05-15T08:30:52Z

I feel like we're creating an infinite loop.
If you rely on AI for addressing feedback, can you please stop it and investigate manually?
And put more focus on testing. None of us want regression penalty despite making great efforts to fix this issue.

Regression:

Merchant name shows instead of description even after fetching the report.

aimane-chnaif · 2026-05-15T08:41:36Z

Test cases:

various currencies
amount - negative/zero/positive
with merchant and with/without description, without merchant (possible in unreported expense) and with/without description
various IOU request types - manual/scan/distance/per diem/time
logout and relogin, clear cache and restart, before/after opening (aka. fetching) report
desktop/mobile view

marufsharifi · 2026-05-19T14:00:04Z

Regression:

Merchant name shows instead of description even after fetching the report.

Thanks for catching this.

This regression came from my fix for the earlier issue. I updated the fallback to use the linked transaction, but missed that expense previews should prefer the description over the merchant. I’ve fixed the new fallback to use the expense description.

I also found a related pre-existing production flicker before the report is fully fetched. In that path, getReportPreviewMessage() derives the comment from getMerchantOrDescription(linkedTransaction), which prefers merchant:

App/src/libs/ReportUtils.ts

Line 5508 in 40223f2

    
           let comment = !isEmptyObject(linkedTransaction) ? getMerchantOrDescription(linkedTransaction) : undefined;

So after clearing cache / first load, LHN can briefly show MYR 2.00 for {merchant}, then after fetching the report it recomputes to -MYR 2.00 for {description}.

REC-20260519173823.mp4

A possible follow-up fix is to special-case expense report list previews in getReportPreviewMessage():

if (isForListPreview && isExpenseReport(report) && !isEmptyObject(linkedTransaction)) {
    comment = getDescription(linkedTransaction) || originalMessage?.comment;
}

Should I handle this production flicker in this PR as well? thanks

marufsharifi · 2026-05-19T14:03:40Z

Test cases:

various currencies

amount - negative/zero/positive

with merchant and with/without description, without merchant (possible in unreported expense) and with/without description

various IOU request types - manual/scan/distance/per diem/time

logout and relogin, clear cache and restart, before/after opening (aka. fetching) report

desktop/mobile view

Thanks for the detailed test cases.

I’ve already tested most of these, but I’ll re-check the full set across all platforms. thanks

marufsharifi · 2026-05-21T07:10:06Z

@aimane-chnaif I tested all cases and found no regressions.

Only in this one I need your confirmation:

getReportPreviewMessage() derives the comment from getMerchantOrDescription(linkedTransaction), which prefers merchant, So after clearing cache / first load, LHN can briefly show MYR 2.00 for {merchant}, then after fetching the report it recomputes to -MYR 2.00 for {description}.
Should I handle this production flicker in this PR as well

aimane-chnaif · 2026-05-21T07:13:28Z

getReportPreviewMessage() derives the comment from getMerchantOrDescription(linkedTransaction), which prefers merchant, So after clearing cache / first load, LHN can briefly show MYR 2.00 for {merchant}, then after fetching the report it recomputes to -MYR 2.00 for {description}.

Should I handle this production flicker in this PR as well

No, out of scope since happening in production

marufsharifi · 2026-05-21T07:18:38Z

No, out of scope since happening in production

Ok, thanks.

The PR and all test cases are finished from my side. Could you please re review again? thanks

MelvinBot · 2026-05-21T16:31:43Z

Regression Analysis

I reviewed the current state of the PR and found 1 potential regression and 1 edge case worth verifying before merge.

1. Scanned/distance expenses with merchant but no description show amount-only in LHN (Medium risk)

getExpenseReportPreviewText uses getDescription(linkedTransaction) which returns transaction.comment.comment — the user-entered description only. Every other preview path in the codebase (e.g., getReportPreviewMessage at line 5501, getTransactionItemRow at line 10653) uses getMerchantOrDescription, which shows the SmartScan-detected merchant when no description exists.

Impact: For scanned receipts where SmartScan detected a merchant (e.g., "Uber", "Starbucks") but the user didn't add a description, the LHN preview shows only the amount (e.g., -$25.00) with no secondary text. Before this PR, lastVisibleMessage.lastMessageText from the server would have included the merchant.

Test: Create a manual expense with a merchant but no description → verify the LHN preview includes the merchant name after the amount.

2. Expense report with all IOU actions pending deletion and CREATED as lastReportAction (Low risk)

When isExpenseReport is true but latestVisibleMoneyRequestAction is undefined (all IOU actions have pendingAction: DELETE), and lastReportAction is a CREATED action, none of the three branches at lines 996–1004 execute. lastMessageTextFromReport stays empty. Before this PR, the lastVisibleMessage?.lastMessageText fallback would have been used for all report types in this block. This is likely intentional (the test at line 4392 expects ''), but worth confirming the LHN shows the expected state when an expense is mid-deletion.

Confirmed OK

Sort order: deprecatedAllSortedReportActions is sorted descending (newest-first), so .find() in getLatestVisibleMoneyRequestAction correctly returns the latest visible IOU action.
Translation key: translate('iou.expenseAmount', formattedAmount, comment) matches the (formattedAmount: string, comment?: string) signature across all locale files.
Transaction lookup: getReportTransactions(reportID) correctly returns transactions for the expense report, and the .find() by IOUTransactionID matches properly.
SidebarUtils caller: Does not pass conciergeReportID, but getReportPreviewMessage has its own Onyx-connected fallback and concierge checks don't apply to expense reports.

Recommendation: Regression #1 is the main one to verify manually — create a scanned expense with a detected merchant but no user description, and confirm the LHN preview text is acceptable.

aimane-chnaif · 2026-05-21T16:38:28Z

@marufsharifi please verify this to make sure we don't break production behavior.

marufsharifi · 2026-05-21T22:07:46Z

@aimane-chnaif

For the first case, I verified this against production and it does not appear to be a regression. When an expense has no description and only has a merchant, production also shows only the amount in the LHN preview and does not show the merchant.

REC-20260522022246.mp4

For the second edge case, I tried to reproduce it but could not hit that state manually.

github-actions · 2026-05-22T09:02:22Z

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

github-actions · 2026-05-22T09:07:45Z

🧪🧪 Use the links below to test this adhoc build on Android, iOS, and Web. Happy testing! 🧪🧪
Built from App PR #86904.

Android 🤖	iOS 🍎
https://ad-hoc-expensify-cash.s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/rock-artifacts/ad-hoc/rock-android-Adhoc-33232fc-d1139c3-f2062af7eed3f05362d1e13c74b25042887e33d9/index.html	https://ad-hoc-expensify-cash.s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/rock-artifacts/ad-hoc/rock-ios-device-AdHoc-33232fc-d1139c3-6c49afbd1e8a9ed1fb01f1863829e2e328f4c726/index.html

Web 🕸️
https://86904.pr-testing.expensify.com

👀 View the workflow run that generated this build 👀

OSBotify · 2026-05-22T09:09:42Z

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

OSBotify · 2026-05-22T22:43:16Z

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/cristipaval in version: 9.3.80-0 🚀

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

Bundle Size Analysis (Sentry):

Android
iOS

MelvinBot · 2026-05-22T22:45:29Z

No help site changes required.

This PR is a bug fix for the LHN expense preview display — it corrects how the preview string is built internally (using stable expense data like amount/currency/comment instead of a raw message string). The changes are limited to src/libs/OptionsListUtils/index.ts and associated tests.

This doesn't introduce new features, change user-facing workflows, or modify any documented behavior, so no updates to App/docs/articles are needed.

OSBotify · 2026-05-25T22:34:58Z

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/luacmartins in version: 9.3.81-2 🚀

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

fix(LHN): remove brackets from expense amount in preview

98ca2cc

melvin-bot Bot assigned marufsharifi Apr 1, 2026

add missed translation

6d672f4

marufsharifi added 4 commits April 3, 2026 08:07

Merge branch 'main' into fix/lhn-expense-amount-bracket-preview

9f0df87

refactor(lhn): extract canonical money request preview helper

d9dc632

add unit tests

dc64f8b

add comment for deprecated sort actions

f4af4e2

marufsharifi marked this pull request as ready for review April 3, 2026 06:08

marufsharifi requested review from a team as code owners April 3, 2026 06:08

melvin-bot Bot requested review from aimane-chnaif and heyjennahay and removed request for a team April 3, 2026 06:08

melvin-bot Bot removed the request for review from a team April 3, 2026 06:08

chatgpt-codex-connector Bot reviewed Apr 3, 2026

View reviewed changes

marufsharifi added 3 commits April 9, 2026 08:30

Merge branch 'main' into fix/lhn-expense-amount-bracket-preview

fd5b25d

address feedbacks

48ca09e

fix eslint

8fbb12c

chatgpt-codex-connector Bot reviewed May 13, 2026

View reviewed changes

Comment thread src/libs/OptionsListUtils/index.ts Outdated

marufsharifi added 2 commits May 13, 2026 19:03

fix: use linked transaction amount in expense preview

33ace78

Merge branch 'main' into fix/lhn-expense-amount-bracket-preview

d3de62b

marufsharifi added 2 commits May 19, 2026 10:46

Merge branch 'main' into fix/lhn-expense-amount-bracket-preview

95bdb9b

fix: update expense preview to use description instead of merchant

3779b40

aimane-chnaif approved these changes May 21, 2026

View reviewed changes

melvin-bot Bot requested a review from cristipaval May 21, 2026 16:23

Merge branch 'main' into fix/lhn-expense-amount-bracket-preview

04bf251

cristipaval approved these changes May 22, 2026

View reviewed changes

cristipaval merged commit 33232fc into Expensify:main May 22, 2026
36 checks passed

OSBotify mentioned this pull request May 22, 2026

Deploy Checklist: New Expensify 2026-05-22 #91472

Closed

71 tasks

aimane-chnaif mentioned this pull request May 27, 2026

Synced the message preview between Search router and LHN #79278

Merged

53 tasks

Uh oh!

Conversation

marufsharifi commented Apr 1, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Explanation of Change

Fixed Issues

Tests

Offline tests

QA Steps

PR Author Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

Uh oh!

codecov Bot commented Apr 1, 2026 • edited by github-actions Bot Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Codecov Report

Uh oh!

melvin-bot Bot commented Apr 1, 2026

Uh oh!

melvin-bot Bot commented Apr 3, 2026

Uh oh!

chatgpt-codex-connector Bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

💡 Codex Review

Uh oh!

chatgpt-codex-connector Bot Apr 3, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

marufsharifi Apr 3, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

aimane-chnaif Apr 8, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

marufsharifi commented Apr 7, 2026

Uh oh!

MelvinBot commented Apr 8, 2026

Code Review

1. Hardcoded English strings (localization bug)

2. Consider reusing getReportPreviewMessage instead of reimplementing

3. getLatestVisibleMoneyRequestAction duplicates existing logic

4. Test coverage gaps

Uh oh!

aimane-chnaif commented Apr 8, 2026

Uh oh!

chatgpt-codex-connector Bot commented Apr 8, 2026

Uh oh!

marufsharifi commented Apr 9, 2026

Uh oh!

marufsharifi commented Apr 14, 2026

Uh oh!

aimane-chnaif commented Apr 14, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Reviewer Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

Uh oh!

aimane-chnaif commented Apr 14, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

marufsharifi commented Apr 14, 2026

Uh oh!

chatgpt-codex-connector Bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

💡 Codex Review

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

marufsharifi commented May 13, 2026

Uh oh!

marufsharifi commented May 15, 2026

Uh oh!

aimane-chnaif commented May 15, 2026

Uh oh!

aimane-chnaif commented May 15, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

marufsharifi commented May 19, 2026

Uh oh!

marufsharifi commented May 19, 2026

Uh oh!

marufsharifi commented May 21, 2026

Uh oh!

marufsharifi commented Apr 1, 2026 •

edited

Loading

codecov Bot commented Apr 1, 2026 •

edited by github-actions Bot

Loading

2. Consider reusing `getReportPreviewMessage` instead of reimplementing

3. `getLatestVisibleMoneyRequestAction` duplicates existing logic

aimane-chnaif commented Apr 14, 2026 •

edited

Loading

aimane-chnaif commented Apr 14, 2026 •

edited

Loading

aimane-chnaif commented May 15, 2026 •

edited

Loading