[No QA] Remove rental cars from Consolidated Travel Billing help doc

[blimpich]

Explanation of Change

The Book Travel Using Consolidated Travel Billing help doc told employees they could book rental cars using Consolidated Travel Billing. That's incorrect — car bookings aren't supported by CTB. This removes rental cars from the list of bookable travel types and from the post-booking receipt guidance.

Fixed Issues

$ https://expensify.slack.com/archives/C05S5EV2JTX/p1784690321172779?thread_ts=1784667244.731329&cid=C05S5EV2JTX
PROPOSAL:

Tests

• Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

QA Steps

See [No QA] in title.

• 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 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.
• 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

N/A - docs-only content change.

Android: mWeb Chrome

N/A - docs-only content change.

iOS: Native

N/A - docs-only content change.

iOS: mWeb Safari

N/A - docs-only content change.

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

N/A - docs-only content change.

[OSBotify]

A preview of your ExpensifyHelp changes have been deployed to https://9ac2880c.helpdot.pages.dev ⚡️

Updated articles:

• articles/travel/consolidated-travel-billing/Book-Travel-Using-Consolidated-Travel-Billing

[github-actions]

HelpDot Documentation Review

Overall Assessment

This is a small, focused content correction to the Book Travel Using Consolidated Travel Billing article. It removes rental car / car booking references from two locations: the bookable travel types list (step 4) and the post-booking receipt guidance. The change is factually motivated (car bookings are not supported by CTB) and improves the accuracy of the doc. Only two lines are modified, so this review is scoped strictly to those edits.

Scores Summary

• Readability: 9/10 - Both edited lines remain clear, sequential, and action-oriented. Removing the "or after returning the vehicle" clause actually tightens the receipt guidance.
• AI Readiness: 9/10 - The edits preserve the task-based heading structure and feature naming. Removing an unsupported travel type improves retrieval accuracy by eliminating incorrect associations (CTB + rental cars).
• Style Compliance: 8/10 - Edited copy uses correct terminology and UI-exact labels. The revised step 4 correctly adds an Oxford comma ("hotels, or rail tickets"). Minor: a trailing space remains after the period on the edited step-4 line (pre-existing formatting; worth cleaning up while touching the line).

Key Findings

• Both changes correctly and consistently remove car/rental references from the two places they appeared, keeping the article internally consistent.
• The revised sentences stay concise and benefit-focused, matching the authoring guidelines.
• One nit within the changed line: trailing whitespace after "rail tickets." on step 4.
• Out of scope but noted for a future pass (not part of this diff): the cross-link on line 47 still says "rental car" and uses a full URL rather than a relative link; line 57 is missing a terminating period. These are on unchanged lines and are not blocking for this PR.

Recommendations

• Optional: strip the trailing space on the edited step-4 line.
• Approve. The change is accurate, correctly scoped, and consistent with the governance guidelines.

Files Reviewed

• docs/articles/travel/consolidated-travel-billing/Book-Travel-Using-Consolidated-Travel-Billing.md - Two-line accuracy correction removing car bookings; compliant and ready to merge.

Note: Detailed line-by-line feedback has been provided as inline comments.

[OSBotify]

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/blimpich in version: 9.4.43-0 🚀

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

[OSBotify]

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/yuwenmemon in version: 9.4.43-1 🚀

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

Bundle Size Analysis (Sentry):

• Android