Fix flaky ContactMethodsPage error indicator test

[MelvinBot]

Explanation of Change

ContactMethodsPage › sets error indicator when login has error fields in tests/ui/ContactMethodsPageTest.tsx is flaky on main. The test asserts that after clearing a login's errorFields, the row's brickRoadIndicator settles to none-brickRoadIndicator, but it intermittently reads the stale error-brickRoadIndicator and the waitFor times out.

The brickRoadIndicator is derived synchronously from the useOnyx value, so this is a test-timing race rather than a product bug. After await Onyx.merge(...) clears errorFields, the Onyx write completes but the subscriber notification that triggers the useOnyx re-render is queued as a separate macrotask. Under waitFor's act() wrapping that notification can get deferred, so retries observe the stale error state until the timeout fires.

This is the same race that was already fixed for the sibling test (sets info indicator when login is unvalidated and not default) by adding await waitForBatchedUpdates() between the cleanup Onyx.merge and the waitFor — but that flush was only added to the second test, never the first. This PR mirrors that proven pattern in the first test so the pending notification macrotask is drained before the assertion runs.

This is a test-only change with no product-code impact.

Fixed Issues

$ https://github.com/Expensify/Expensify/issues/650604
PROPOSAL:

Tests

1. Run npx jest tests/ui/ContactMethodsPageTest.tsx (optionally with --runInBand and a repeat loop) and verify the suite passes consistently, including sets error indicator when login has error fields.

• Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

N/A — test-only change.

QA Steps

N/A — test-only change. No user-facing behavior is affected; this only stabilizes an existing unit test.

• 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 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 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.
• 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

N/A — test-only change, no UI impact.

Android: Native

N/A — test-only change, no UI impact.

Android: mWeb Chrome

N/A — test-only change, no UI impact.

iOS: Native

N/A — test-only change, no UI impact.

iOS: mWeb Safari

N/A — test-only change, no UI impact.

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

N/A — test-only change, no UI impact.

[Beamanator]

@MelvinBot add the checklist and make sure the PR description follows the template closely, and check of all boxes in the checklist since this is just a test fix

[melvin-bot]

@mkhutornyi 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]

[Beamanator]

sorry @mkhutornyi no C+ review needed here 🙏

[Beamanator]

LGTM

[OSBotify]

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/amyevans in version: 9.4.17-0 🚀

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

Bundle Size Analysis (Sentry):

• Android
• iOS

[m-natarajan]

@Beamanator @amyevans To confirm NO QA and ok to checkoff this one?

[amyevans]

@m-natarajan yep, you can check it off! Apologies we missed putting it in the title!

[OSBotify]

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/blimpich in version: 9.4.17-3 🚀

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

[OSBotify]

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/blimpich in version: 9.4.17-3 🚀

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