[No QA] Remove unsafe type assertions from test files by KJ21-ENG · Pull Request #97322 · Expensify/App

KJ21-ENG · 2026-07-29T10:40:49Z

Explanation of Change

This test-only cleanup removes 212 unsafe type assertion violations from the ten requested test files while preserving test behavior and production runtime behavior. It uses production-linked types, typed mocks and fixtures, and narrow exceptions only for intentional malformed runtime fixtures. No application UI, production logic, CSS, assets, messaging, generic components, Storybook stories, or deeplink behavior changed.

Fixed Issues

$ #94739
PROPOSAL: #94739 (comment)

Count change

Current baseline source:

config/eslint/eslint.seatbelt.tsv at the exact run base/worktree, SHA-256 960dda33f77a4eaa80d8760fc635a7ac156edb0e2638cf80acf89c0933ad2bd3.

Before:

tests/actions/DomainTest.ts: 20 violations.
tests/actions/IOUTest/SplitTest.ts: 20 violations.
tests/ui/UnreadIndicatorsTest.tsx: 20 violations.
tests/unit/FormulaTest.ts: 21 violations.
tests/unit/MiddlewareTest.ts: 20 violations.
tests/unit/ReportNameUtilsTest.ts: 23 violations.
tests/unit/WorkspacesSettingsUtilsTest.ts: 23 violations.
tests/unit/reportAttributesTest.ts: 24 violations.
tests/unit/resolveChatTargetTest.ts: 20 violations.
tests/unit/useTransactionViolationsTest.ts: 21 violations.

After:

tests/actions/DomainTest.ts: 0 violations.
tests/actions/IOUTest/SplitTest.ts: 0 violations.
tests/ui/UnreadIndicatorsTest.tsx: 0 violations.
tests/unit/FormulaTest.ts: 0 violations.
tests/unit/MiddlewareTest.ts: 0 violations.
tests/unit/ReportNameUtilsTest.ts: 0 violations.
tests/unit/WorkspacesSettingsUtilsTest.ts: 0 violations.
tests/unit/reportAttributesTest.ts: 0 violations.
tests/unit/resolveChatTargetTest.ts: 0 violations.
tests/unit/useTransactionViolationsTest.ts: 0 violations.

Net reduction:

212 fewer @typescript-eslint/no-unsafe-type-assertion violations.

TSV evidence:

The generated inventory was restored after verification; the exact-head worktree TSV SHA-256 matches the recorded base/worktree digest 960dda33f77a4eaa80d8760fc635a7ac156edb0e2638cf80acf89c0933ad2bd3.

Tests

Deterministic cleanup verification reported zero remaining violations for all ten authorized targets; git diff --check also passed.
Focused formatting and lint passed for the repaired targets with 0 errors.
Complete focused Jest verification passed all ten authorized suites.
Verifier-owned project-aware focused typecheck found no authorized-path diagnostic; it was unavailable because the temporary project check encountered an unrelated src/App.tsx diagnostic.
Exact-head Fork CI run 31486371931 passed typecheck, lint, format, React Compiler, and Jest for signed head 6ceee92.

Manual JS-console verification: N/A — this is test-only cleanup with no application runtime change.

Offline tests

N/A — this is test-only type cleanup; no network, offline, or synchronization behavior changed.

QA Steps

N/A — this is test-only cleanup with no staging or production behavior change. The title starts with [No QA].

PR Author Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

N/A — no UI changes, so screenshots and videos are not applicable.

Changed files (10)

tests/actions/DomainTest.ts
tests/actions/IOUTest/SplitTest.ts
tests/ui/UnreadIndicatorsTest.tsx
tests/unit/FormulaTest.ts
tests/unit/MiddlewareTest.ts
tests/unit/ReportNameUtilsTest.ts
tests/unit/WorkspacesSettingsUtilsTest.ts
tests/unit/reportAttributesTest.ts
tests/unit/resolveChatTargetTest.ts
tests/unit/useTransactionViolationsTest.ts

melvin-bot · 2026-07-31T14:27:26Z

@ikevin127 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]

ikevin127 · 2026-08-02T00:46:36Z

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 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 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 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.
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.

ikevin127

🟢 LGTM

Test-only cleanup that removes 212 @typescript-eslint/no-unsafe-type-assertion violations across 10 test files.

I verified the supporting helpers (createMock, typeGuards, TestHelper.getRequiredWriteCall / getRequiredOnyxUpdate(s) / createGlobalFetchMock / assertFormDataMatchesObject) already exist in main and are used correctly, so this is genuinely a no-runtime-change PR.

Overall: Solid and safe to merge, no blocking issues ✅

blimpich · 2026-08-03T18:42:54Z

            expect(result).toBe('{report:unknown}');
        });

+        // FormulaContext.policy is OnyxEntry<Policy> (Policy | undefined), so missing-policy fixtures use undefined; null is outside the typed boundary.


Unnecessary comment

Suggested change

// FormulaContext.policy is OnyxEntry<Policy> (Policy | undefined), so missing-policy fixtures use undefined; null is outside the typed boundary.

Fixed. removed the unnecessary comment.

blimpich · 2026-08-03T18:43:48Z

@@ -1,3 +1,5 @@
+import type ReportNameUtils = require('@libs/ReportNameUtils');
+


Why is there a newline here?

Fixed. removed the unnecessary newline between the imports.

blimpich · 2026-08-03T18:44:15Z


-    const buildArgs = (overridePolicies?: OnyxCollection<Policy>, overrideReports?: OnyxCollection<Report>, transactionsUpdate?: OnyxCollection<Transaction> | null) =>
-        [
+    // Onyx-derived dependency values use undefined for absent entries; null is outside the typed transactions boundary.


Unnecessary comment

Suggested change

// Onyx-derived dependency values use undefined for absent entries; null is outside the typed transactions boundary.

Fixed. removed the unnecessary comment.

blimpich

Very minor changes requested, but otherwise looks good 👍

blimpich · 2026-08-10T16:57:47Z

Merge conflicts 😢

KJ21-ENG · 2026-08-12T07:30:53Z

@blimpich Could you please take a look at this when you get a chance? Thanks!

OSBotify · 2026-08-12T18:39:30Z

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/blimpich in version: 9.4.53-0 🚀

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

OSBotify · 2026-08-14T20:16:10Z

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/roryabraham in version: 9.4.53-10 🚀

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

Bundle Size Analysis (Sentry):

Android

melvin-bot Bot assigned KJ21-ENG Jul 29, 2026

Reconcile cleanup branch with current main

e93b8f7

KJ21-ENG force-pushed the seatbelt/94739-tests-20260728-1 branch from 8365118 to e93b8f7 Compare July 29, 2026 20:28

KJ21-ENG added 5 commits July 30, 2026 02:51

Repair cleanup fixtures after exact-head CI review

b652aa8

Fix translation fixture tuple typing

5889443

Repair CI translation typing and act warning

b0e3bdd

Repair translation fixture typing

b00dbdd

Repair translation callback signature

b78b47a

KJ21-ENG marked this pull request as ready for review July 31, 2026 14:27

KJ21-ENG requested a review from a team as a code owner July 31, 2026 14:27

melvin-bot Bot requested review from ikevin127 and removed request for a team July 31, 2026 14:27

ikevin127 approved these changes Aug 2, 2026

View reviewed changes

melvin-bot Bot requested a review from blimpich August 2, 2026 01:03

blimpich reviewed Aug 3, 2026

View reviewed changes

blimpich requested changes Aug 3, 2026

View reviewed changes

KJ21-ENG marked this pull request as draft August 4, 2026 14:13

KJ21-ENG closed this Aug 6, 2026

KJ21-ENG reopened this Aug 6, 2026

KJ21-ENG added 3 commits August 11, 2026 16:13

Restore transaction violations test timing

6ceee92

Merge main and address review feedback

31e19f4

Remove unused FormData type export

239b384

KJ21-ENG marked this pull request as ready for review August 12, 2026 07:29

blimpich self-requested a review August 12, 2026 15:55

blimpich approved these changes Aug 12, 2026

View reviewed changes

blimpich merged commit ba81ecc into Expensify:main Aug 12, 2026
36 of 38 checks passed

OSBotify mentioned this pull request Aug 12, 2026

Deploy Checklist: New Expensify 2026-08-12 #98463

Closed

melvin-bot Bot mentioned this pull request Aug 14, 2026

Systematically reduce @typescript-eslint/no-unsafe-type-assertion violations #94739

Open

		@@ -1,3 +1,5 @@
		import type ReportNameUtils = require('@libs/ReportNameUtils');

Conversation

KJ21-ENG commented Jul 29, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Explanation of Change

Fixed Issues

Count change

Tests

Offline tests

QA Steps

PR Author Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

Changed files (10)

Uh oh!

melvin-bot Bot commented Jul 31, 2026

Uh oh!

ikevin127 commented Aug 2, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Reviewer Checklist

Uh oh!

ikevin127 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

blimpich Aug 3, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

KJ21-ENG Aug 12, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

blimpich Aug 3, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

KJ21-ENG Aug 12, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

blimpich Aug 3, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

KJ21-ENG Aug 12, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

blimpich left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

blimpich commented Aug 10, 2026

Uh oh!

KJ21-ENG commented Aug 12, 2026

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

OSBotify commented Aug 12, 2026

Uh oh!

OSBotify commented Aug 14, 2026

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

4 participants

KJ21-ENG commented Jul 29, 2026 •

edited

Loading

ikevin127 commented Aug 2, 2026 •

edited

Loading