[Payment due @situchan] [No QA] Docs updates for E/A#97401 Settle balance confirmation step

[MelvinBot]

Explanation of Change

PR #97401 added a confirmation modal before an Expensify Card balance is settled. Clicking Settle balance now opens a confirmation window, and the settlement only fires after the user confirms.

The help article How to Troubleshoot Expensify Card Issues documented the old flow (a single click triggered settlement immediately) and also used the wrong capitalization (Settle Balance). This updates the "refresh the workspace's Expensify Card limit" steps to:

• Match the current button label Settle balance (sentence case, per the live UI / en.ts).
• Add the new confirmation step so the documented flow matches the app.

Related PR

• [internal QA] Add confirmation before settling Expensify Card balance #97401

Fixed Issues

$ N/A — documentation follow-up for the behavior change in E/A#97401

Tests

N/A — documentation-only change.

QA Steps

N/A — documentation-only change.

PR Author Checklist

• I linked the correct issue in the ### Fixed Issues section above
• I verified any copy / text that was added to the app is grammatically correct in English and matches the exact UI labels.

---

@situchan, please review the files changed and confirm they reflect the current behavior. Then post a new comment saying @MelvinBot mark this PR as ready for review.

[OSBotify]

A preview of your ExpensifyHelp changes have been deployed to https://6852a7e7.helpdot.pages.dev ⚡️

Updated articles:

• articles/new-expensify/expensify-card/Troubleshoot-Expensify-Card-issues

[situchan]

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.

Screenshots/Videos

Android: HybridApp

Android: mWeb Chrome

iOS: HybridApp

iOS: mWeb Safari

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

test.mov

[melvin-bot]

🎯 @situchan, thanks for reviewing and testing this PR! 🎉

A payment issue will be created for your review once this PR is deployed to production.
E/E issue linked to the PR - no internal issue.

If payment is not needed (e.g., regression PR review fix etc), react with 👎 to this comment to prevent the payment issue from being created.

[stephanieelliott]

@situchan, please review the files changed and confirm they reflect the current behavior. Then post a new comment saying @MelvinBot mark this PR as ready for review.

@situchan bump on this!

[MelvinBot]

✅ The docs change matches current main behavior. situchan already approved this PR on Aug 28 — it just needs the draft flipped to ready.

I verified the two claims in the diff against the code:

Doc step	Code evidence	Match
Button reads Settle balance (sentence case)	src/languages/en.ts:6218 → settleBalance: 'Settle balance', rendered at WorkspaceCardsListLabel.tsx:226	✅
A confirmation window appears, and you click Settle balance again to confirm	WorkspaceCardsListLabel.tsx:171-183 opens a confirm modal titled "Settle balance?" whose confirm button label is the same settleBalance string; queueExpensifyCardForBilling only fires on ModalActions.CONFIRM	✅

So the old wording ("Click Settle Balance to trigger an early settlement") was wrong on both counts, and the new 4-step version is accurate.

Why I verified from code rather than the live app

The Settle balance button only renders when settlementFrequency === MONTHLY && !cardManualBilling && isCurrentBalanceType (WorkspaceCardsListLabel.tsx:166) — that needs a workspace with a verified bank account, Expensify Cards issued, monthly settlement, and an outstanding balance. A fresh test account can't reach that state, so a UI run wouldn't have added evidence beyond the strings and the confirm-modal gate above.

Status: approved by situchan, all checks green except Check independent approval, which needs an internal engineer. I wasn't able to flip the draft to ready myself in this run — situchan or stephanieelliott can click Ready for review, or reply @MelvinBot mark this PR as ready for review to retry.

---

view run

[situchan]

@MelvinBot mark this PR as ready for review.

[MelvinBot]

✅ Done — this PR is now marked Ready for review.

Current state:

• Approved by situchan
• All completed checks pass except Check independent approval, which needs a second approval from an internal engineer
• The ready-flip kicked off fresh runs of review, validate, and the Onyx reviewer check — those are still in progress

Nothing else is blocking on my side.

---

view run

[github-actions]

HelpDot Documentation Review

Overall Assessment

This PR makes a small, targeted improvement to Troubleshoot-Expensify-Card-issues.md. It refines the numbered steps for refreshing a workspace Expensify Card limit: it corrects the button casing (Settle Balance to Settle balance) and adds a previously missing confirmation step. The change is scoped to a single procedure within an existing task-based section and improves both accuracy and completeness.

Scores Summary

• Readability: 9/10 - Steps remain sequential, clear, and action-oriented. The added confirmation step accurately reflects the real UI flow.
• AI Readiness: 9/10 - The change sits under an existing task-based How does a Workspace Admin refresh heading, uses full feature names, and maintains proper structure. No metadata or heading regressions introduced.
• Style Compliance: 10/10 - The core improvement is a direct fix to the naming conventions: Settle balance now uses Sentence case matching the UI (per HELPSITE_NAMING_CONVENTIONS.md Button Naming Standards). Button names remain bold and unquoted.

Key Findings

• Fixing Settle Balance to Settle balance correctly enforces the Sentence-case rule for button names.
• Adding the confirmation-window step makes the procedure match the actual UI flow, aligning with the Step Formatting Standard (Section 5) requirement that steps be aligned with actual UI flow.
• Minor consistency note (not introduced by this PR): steps in this list mix trailing-period and no-trailing-period styles, and step 1 lacks a terminal period. Not blocking.

Recommendations

• No changes required. This is a clean, well-scoped correction.
• Optional: normalize trailing punctuation across all steps in this list for consistency.

Files Reviewed

• docs/articles/new-expensify/expensify-card/Troubleshoot-Expensify-Card-issues.md - Approved. Button casing corrected and confirmation step added; compliant with governance.

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

[situchan]

@stephanieelliott done

[OSBotify]

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/stephanieelliott in version: 9.4.73-0 🚀

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

[melvin-bot]

🤖 Payment issue created: #100625

[OSBotify]

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/mountiny in version: 9.4.73-3 🚀

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

Bundle Size Analysis (Sentry):

• Android