[No QA] Update help docs for Release 1: Add pending BYOC transactions (Plaid)

[MelvinBot]

Explanation of Change

Cards connected through Plaid now import pending transactions. Several help articles still said only posted transactions import, so they were wrong for Plaid cards. This PR updates those articles. Other direct connections still import only posted transactions, so every change is scoped to Plaid.

• Set up a Direct Connection for Company Cards: adds a Plaid line to "What happens after…" and a new FAQ, "Do pending transactions import from a direct connection?" This FAQ is the single place to list supported connections, so adding more banks later is a one-line edit.
• Assign Company Cards and Share a Company Card Connection Across Workspaces: add a Plaid note that links to the new FAQ.
• Connect Personal Cards: notes that personal cards connected through Plaid also import pending transactions.
• Create and Submit Reports and Approve Expenses: the pending FAQs now cover Plaid cards, not just the Expensify Card. The submit/approve block uses isPending(), which checks only transaction.status and applies to any card type.
• Classic: Reconcile Company Card Expenses and Report Approvals: the "Only posted transactions will be imported" notes now exclude Plaid cards.
• Why Expenses Duplicate: pending Plaid card transactions can now auto-merge with SmartScanned receipts, so the merge conditions and FAQ now cover Plaid's pending transactions.

Fixed Issues

$ https://github.com/Expensify/Expensify/issues/633255
$ https://github.com/Expensify/Expensify/issues/691737

QA Steps

N/A

[joekaufmanexpensify]

@MelvinBot as it relates to this comment, item 7 has shipped. Please update the PR accordingly.

[joekaufmanexpensify]

@MelvinBot please also address this comment

[MelvinBot]

This is already done in ddb9045, pushed right after your comment. The "pending card transactions" FAQ in Create-and-Submit-Reports.md now says the Submit button still appears, and selecting it opens a message explaining the report can't be submitted because all transactions are pending. Details and code links are in my reply on that thread.

[joekaufmanexpensify]

@MelvinBot I checked the submit behavior behind this FAQ. For an all-pending report, the report header can show Submit for Plaid company card transactions and then show the pending-transactions modal when selected. For pending Expensify Card transactions, the header can hide Submit because those transactions fail its eligibility check. This difference comes from transaction eligibility, not from having one expense versus multiple. The report preview also hides Submit for any all-pending report.

Could you make the FAQ state the submission rule without describing button visibility? Suggested wording:

If all transactions on a report are pending, the report can’t be submitted yet. This applies to Expensify Card transactions and to company or personal cards connected through Plaid. You can submit the report once at least one transaction posts.

[MelvinBot]

Done in 98eaa39. The pending card transactions FAQ in Create-and-Submit-Reports.md now uses your suggested wording word for word and no longer mentions button visibility:

If all transactions on a report are pending, the report can’t be submitted yet. This applies to Expensify Card transactions and to company or personal cards connected through Plaid. You can submit the report once at least one transaction posts.

The FAQ no longer says the report is left out of the Submit to-do. No other article in the PR describes button visibility for pending reports.

[joekaufmanexpensify]

@MelvinBot is this still ongoing?

[MelvinBot]

That one had been missed, sorry. It's now done in 178dc4e. Why Expenses Duplicate now says pending Plaid card transactions can auto-merge with SmartScanned receipts. I also updated the PR description.

What changed in Why-Expenses-Duplicate.md

• Merge conditions (line 38): for Plaid cards, the pending transaction can merge before it posts.
• Won't-merge list (lines 43 and 45): for Plaid cards, these now use the pending import instead of the posting time. That covers edits made before the transaction arrives and the seven-day window.
• FAQ (line 97): same seven-day wording for Plaid.

Please check one assumption I couldn't verify in App code. I assumed the seven-day window and the "edited before" rule now depend on when the pending Plaid transaction imports. If merging works differently, tell me and I'll adjust the wording.

[joekaufmanexpensify]

Changes look good to me. Opening for review. 👍

[melvin-bot]

Product reviewer checklist:

• I have verified the accuracy of the article
  • The article is within a hub that makes sense, and the navigation is correct
  • All processes, screenshots, and examples align with current product behavior.
  • All links within the doc have been verified for correct destination and functionality.
• I have verified the readability of the article
  • The article's language is clear, concise, and free of jargon.
  • The grammar, spelling, and punctuation are correct.
  • The article contains at least one image, or that an image is not necessary
• I have verified the formatting of the article
  • The article has consistent formatting (headings, bullet points, etc.) with other HelpDot articles and that aligns with the HelpDot formatting standards.
  • The article has proper text spacing and breaks for readability.
• I have verified the article has the appropriate tone and style
  • The article's tone is professional, friendly, and suitable for the target audience.
  • The article's tone, terminology, and voice are consistent throughout.
• I have verified the overall quality of the article
  • The article is not missing any information, nor does it contain redundant information.
  • The article fully addresses user needs.
• I have verified that all requested improvements have been addressed

For more detailed instructions on completing this checklist, see How do I review a HelpDot PR?

cc @flaviadefaria

[melvin-bot]

@flaviadefaria 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 Summary

This comment shows the latest Codex review activity on this pull request.

Review	Status	Commit	Review trigger
📝 Code Review	✅ Completed 2026-10-14T18:17:59.726428Z	178dc4e	Draft marked ready

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" or "@codex security review".

Codex reacts with 👀 while any review is running, comments if it has suggestions, and reacts with 👍 once all reviews finish with no findings.

[github-actions]

HelpDot Documentation Review

Overall Assessment

This PR updates nine existing help articles (seven New Expensify, two Expensify Classic) to document that cards connected through Plaid now import pending transactions, correcting prior statements that only posted transactions import. The changes are small, consistent, and well-scoped: every edit limits the new behavior to Plaid and preserves the existing "posted only" rule for other connections. A new FAQ in Set up a Direct Connection for Company Cards acts as the single source of truth, and other articles link to it rather than duplicating the detail. This is a clean, maintainable approach.

Scores Summary

• Readability: 9/10 - Sentences are clear, concise, and scannable. The new FAQ uses a tidy bulleted list for pending-transaction behavior. A couple of inline parentheticals in Why Expenses Duplicate add mild density but remain readable.
• AI Readiness: 9/10 - The new FAQ heading ("Do pending transactions import from a direct connection?") is a proper question-word, feature-specific heading. The reworded Create and Submit Reports heading stays task/question-based while broadening scope correctly. Metadata keywords were expanded with real search phrases ("Plaid pending transactions"), and internalScope remains accurate. Heading hierarchy stays within one-hash and two-hash levels only.
• Style Compliance: 9/10 - Generic terms (company card, report, transaction, workspace members) are correctly lowercase; Plaid is correctly capitalized as a proper noun. Cross-link anchor text is descriptive ("Learn which connections import pending transactions"). Minor: "oAuth" in Connect Personal Cards is unconventional casing (typically "OAuth").

Key Findings

• Scope discipline is excellent: every change explicitly excludes non-Plaid direct connections, so no existing accurate statements were broken.
• Strong information architecture: one canonical FAQ with other articles cross-linking to it, which keeps future updates to a single edit.
• Cross-links use descriptive, search-aligned anchor text and root-relative paths consistent with existing conventions; links are placed in explanatory text, not inside numbered steps.
• Heading changes remain compliant with task/question-based rules while correctly generalizing from "Expensify Card" to "card" to reflect the wider scope.
• Minor nit: "oAuth" casing in Connect Personal Cards; consider "OAuth" or matching the exact UI label.

Recommendations

• Optional: standardize "oAuth" to "OAuth" (or the exact UI wording) in Connect Personal Cards.
• Optional: in Why Expenses Duplicate, consider whether the repeated inline Plaid parentheticals could be consolidated into a single short note to reduce density; current form is acceptable.
• No blocking issues. The PR is ready to merge from a documentation-quality standpoint.

Files Reviewed

• Reconcile-Company-Card-Expenses.md (Classic) - Accurate Plaid exception added to posted-only note. Good.
• Report-Approvals.md (Classic) - Two posted-only notes updated consistently. Good.
• Assign-Company-Cards.md - Plaid note with cross-link to canonical FAQ. Good.
• Connect-Personal-Cards.md - Personal-card Plaid behavior clarified. Minor "oAuth" casing nit.
• Set-up-a-Direct-Connection-for-Company-Cards.md - New canonical FAQ plus keywords expansion. Strong.
• Share-a-Company-Card-Connection-Across-Workspaces.md - Plaid note with cross-link. Good.
• Approve-Expenses.md - Pending-expense FAQ broadened to cover Plaid cards. Good.
• Create-and-Submit-Reports.md - Heading and body generalized to all pending cards. Good.
• Why-Expenses-Duplicate.md - Merge conditions and FAQ updated for Plaid pending transactions. Good; slightly dense parentheticals.

Note: This is a summary review. Scores reflect only the proposed changes in the diff.

[joekaufmanexpensify]

Addressed review comment about using technical term oAuth in the article 👍

[OSBotify]

A preview of your ExpensifyHelp changes have been deployed to https://8c573809.helpdot.pages.dev ⚡️

Updated articles:

• articles/expensify-classic/connect-credit-cards/Reconcile-Company-Card-Expenses
• articles/expensify-classic/reports/Report-Approvals
• articles/new-expensify/connect-credit-cards/configure-and-manage-company-cards/Assign-Company-Cards
• articles/new-expensify/connect-credit-cards/connect-and-manage-personal-cards/Connect-Personal-Cards
• articles/new-expensify/connect-credit-cards/connect-company-cards/Set-up-a-Direct-Connection-for-Company-Cards
• articles/new-expensify/connect-credit-cards/connect-company-cards/Share-a-Company-Card-Connection-Across-Workspaces
• articles/new-expensify/reports-and-expenses/Approve-Expenses
• articles/new-expensify/reports-and-expenses/Create-and-Submit-Reports
• articles/new-expensify/reports-and-expenses/Why-Expenses-Duplicate

[OSBotify]

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/stephanieelliott in version: 9.5.13-0 🚀

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

[OSBotify]

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/grgia in version: 9.5.13-6 🚀

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

Bundle Size Analysis (Sentry):

• Android
• iOS