fix: Reports - Highlight animation is visible on added expense after duplication

[TaduJR]

Explanation of Change

Per design clarification on the PR thread: when a user duplicates the only expense in a single-tx report, the chat→table flip is intended, the new row should show the highlight animation, and the RHP should widen to super-wide. On main today the highlight doesn't fire and the RHP stays at single-tx width.

Two independent root causes, two focused fixes:

1. Highlight bug. useNewTransactions's render-to-render diff misses adds that happen before the table view mounts — by the time MoneyRequestReportActionsList mounts, the optimistic tx is already in the transactions array. The hook already supports a side rail (pendingNewTransactionIDs from REPORT_METADATA) for this exact case, but the rail was never populated. Fix: write the flag from buildOnyxDataForMoneyRequest so every money-request creation flow hits it with one change. successData/failureData both clear the flag to prevent stale highlights across sessions (REPORT_METADATA is persisted).

2. Wide-RHP bug. The Inbox path only had a useShowWideRHPVersion caller — nothing registered super-wide after the flip. Adding a second hook alongside the first races on effect order. Fix: collapse useShowWideRHPVersion and useShowSuperWideRHPVersion into a single useRHPWidth(width) hook, and collapse the provider's two useState<Set<string>> hint stores into one useState<Map<string, RHPWidthHint>> so contradictions are structurally impossible (React docs). Width priority super-wide > wide > narrow ensures pre-mark hints survive transient loading-state renders.

Fixed Issues

$ #86354
PROPOSAL:

Tests

Scenario 1 — Duplicate on a single-tx report (the original bug)

1. Open a workspace chat.
2. Create a manual expense (e.g., $10).
3. Open the just-created expense from the chat — RHP shows the single-expense detail (single-width).
4. Tap More → Duplicate expense.

Expected:

• The right-hand panel switches from single-expense detail to the multi-tx table view.
• The newly-added duplicate row shows the brief highlight animation.
• The RHP widens to super-wide.

Scenario 2 — Duplicate on a multi-tx report

1. Open a workspace chat with a report that already has ≥ 2 expenses.
2. Open one of the expenses from the table.
3. Tap More → Duplicate expense.

Expected: no layout flip; the new row shows the highlight animation; RHP stays at super-wide.

Scenario 3 — Duplicate from Spend → Expenses (multi-tx underlying report)

1. Navigate to Spend → Expenses.
2. Open a single expense whose underlying report has more than one transaction.
3. Tap More → Duplicate expense.

Expected: view switches to the report's table; the duplicate row shows the highlight; RHP is super-wide.

• Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

Same as tests

QA Steps

// TODO: These must be filled out, or the issue title must include "[No QA]."
Same as tests

• 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
  • MacOS: Desktop
• 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 verified there are no new alerts related to the canBeMissing param for useOnyx
• 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 shown in the product is localized by adding it to src/languages/* files and using the translation method
    • If any non-english text was added/modified, I used JaimeGPT to get English > Spanish translation. I then posted it in #expensify-open-source and it was approved by an internal Expensify engineer. Link to Slack message:
  • I verified all numbers, amounts, dates and phone numbers shown in the product are using the localization methods
  • 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)
  • I verified proper file naming conventions were followed for any new files or renamed files. All non-platform specific files are named after what they export and are not named "index.js". All platform-specific files are named for the platform the code supports as outlined in the README.
  • I verified the JSDocs style guidelines (in STYLE.md) were followed
• 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)
• I verified all code is DRY (the PR doesn't include any logic written more than once, with the exception of tests)
• I verified any variables that can be defined as constants (ie. in CONST.ts or at the top of the file that uses the constant) are defined as such
• I verified that if a function's arguments changed that all usages have also been updated correctly
• 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.
• If a new page is added, I verified it's using the ScrollView component to make it scrollable when more elements are added to the page.
• 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

Screen.Recording.2026-05-26.at.4.00.29.PM.mov

Android: mWeb Chrome

iOS: Native

Screen.Recording.2026-05-26.at.3.54.13.PM.mov

iOS: mWeb Safari

Screen.Recording.2026-05-26.at.3.56.27.PM.mov

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

Screen.Recording.2026-05-26.at.3.49.40.PM.mov

[melvin-bot]

@abzokhattab 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

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: 6350f99a47

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Codex has been enabled to automatically 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".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

When you sign up for Codex through ChatGPT, Codex can also answer questions or update the PR, like "@codex address that feedback".

[codecov]

Codecov Report

❌ Looks like you've decreased code coverage for some files. Please write tests to increase, or at least maintain, the existing level of code coverage. See our documentation here for how to interpret this table.

Files with missing lines	Coverage Δ
...archList/ListItem/TransactionGroupListExpanded.tsx	64.51% <100.00%> (ø)
...WideRHPContextProvider/useRHPWidth/index.native.ts	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
src/hooks/useNavigateToTransactionThread.ts	33.33% <100.00%> (ø)
src/hooks/useNewTransactions.ts	93.75% <100.00%> (+2.32%)	⬆️
src/libs/actions/IOU/MoneyRequestBuilder.ts	89.44% <100.00%> (+0.36%)	⬆️
...tView/MoneyRequestReportTransactionsNavigation.tsx	1.23% <0.00%> (ø)
src/pages/Search/SearchMoneyRequestReportPage.tsx	0.00% <0.00%> (ø)
src/components/Search/index.tsx	0.86% <0.00%> (ø)
src/components/WideRHPContextProvider/default.ts	18.18% <0.00%> (+4.84%)	⬆️
src/pages/inbox/WideRHPReceiptPanel.tsx	10.81% <0.00%> (-1.69%)	⬇️
... and 2 more
... and 11 files with indirect coverage changes

[TaduJR]

@codex review

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: dca23bd080

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Codex has been enabled to automatically 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".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

When you sign up for Codex through ChatGPT, Codex can also answer questions or update the PR, like "@codex address that feedback".

[TaduJR]

@codex review

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: 956581943f

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Codex has been enabled to automatically 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".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

When you sign up for Codex through ChatGPT, Codex can also answer questions or update the PR, like "@codex address that feedback".

[TaduJR]

@codex review

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

Codex Review: Didn't find any major issues. Keep it up!

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Codex has been enabled to automatically 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".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

When you sign up for Codex through ChatGPT, Codex can also answer questions or update the PR, like "@codex address that feedback".

[abzokhattab]

Thanks for the fix ... the mobile screenshots look to be missing .. can you please add them

[TaduJR]

Thanks for the fix ... the mobile screenshots look to be missing .. can you please add them

@abzokhattab

Added them. I was recording.

Thanks!

[trjExpensify]

Is this really a bug? When you create a new expense within the report, we highlight the newly added expense in the table. Duplicating an expense is essentially the same thing.

2026-05-07_03-08-25.mp4

CC: @Expensify/design @garrettmknight

[dubielzyk-expensify]

Is this really a bug? When you create a new expense within the report, we highlight the newly added expense in the table. Duplicating an expense is essentially the same thing.

Agree. I think this is by design.

[shawnborton]

Agree!

[TaduJR]

@codex review

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: 14e199a2b9

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Codex has been enabled to automatically 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".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

When you sign up for Codex through ChatGPT, Codex can also answer questions or update the PR, like "@codex address that feedback".

[TaduJR]

@TaduJR it works with the single expense ... but doesnt work with more than 2 .. is that expected?

@abzokhattab

Yeaa now I got you. I was able to repo, and fixed the push on the latest commit.

Indeed It was a production bug as you mentioned above.

Thanks 🙏.

[abzokhattab]

@MelvinBot review the pr

[MelvinBot]

PR Review

Re-reviewed at 14e199a2. The refactor is clean: the useShowWideRHPVersion/useShowSuperWideRHPVersion → useRHPWidth consolidation and the Set+Set → single Map<reportID, RHPWidthHint> change are complete with no dangling references to any removed symbol, and CI is green (the only failing check is checklist, which is the author/reviewer checklist, not code).

I focused on the newest change — dropping the isFocused === false early return in useNewTransactions (useNewTransactions.ts:29-48) — since that has the widest blast radius. No blocking bugs found. Three things worth a quick manual confirmation before merge:

1. pendingNewTransactionIDs is now written for every money-request creation

The rail is set in buildOnyxDataForMoneyRequest, so it fires for scan / distance / split / track / manual — not just duplicate. That's intentional ("one change covers every flow"), but please sanity-check one non-duplicate creation flow to confirm the highlight still behaves (no missing/duplicate highlight) now that both the rail and the render-diff can flag the same add.

2. Fast-network race on the success-path clear (low)

successData clears the flag on the server response. If the create resolves before the destination table view mounts and consumes the rail (fast/cached response, or returning to the report later), the rail highlight is gone and the render-diff won't re-catch a tx that's already present at mount. Codex flagged a variant of this and you marked it Invalid — just worth one pass against a High Traffic account to be sure.

3. Super-wide hint is never downgraded by the screen (edge case, low)

In useRHPWidth (effect at L44-50) a hint only clears when the caller's width >= the hint. So a super-wide hint that turns out wrong (report drops to 1 tx between marking and mounting) is never cleared by the screen itself — it relies on Search calling unmarkReportRHPWidth(reportID, 'super-wide'). If that unmark path is missed, the RHP can stay super-wide for the session. Narrow edge case, just noting it.

What I verified

• No dangling references: grep for showWideRHPVersion, showSuperWideRHPVersion, useShow*RHPVersion, markReportIDAsExpense, markReportIDAsMultiTransactionExpense, isReportIDMarkedAs*, removeWideRHPRouteKey, removeSuperWideRHPRouteKey across src/ → zero hits.
• Focus-guard removal is contained for the chat preview: MoneyRequestReportPreview consumes newTransactions, but its scroll-to-new-tx effect already self-guards on isFocusedRef.current (L427), and the highlight style latches until didScreenTransitionEnd. The metadata write is keyed on the expense report, while the preview reads it via chatReportID, so the rail doesn't cross-fire into the preview.
• useRHPWidth hint propagation is sound: changing reportRHPWidthHints changes the context fn identities in the consumer's effect deps, so a Search-set hint is picked up on the next render and consumed (unmarked) once the caller's width meets/exceeds it. Priority super-wide > wide > narrow is what prevents the loading-state flash.
• CI: typecheck / lint / jest / React Compiler all green; both new test files (GetMoneyRequestInformationTest, useNewTransactionsTest) pass.

---

This is review feedback, not a merge blocker. Reply with @MelvinBot <feedback> to dig into any of these.

[abzokhattab]

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

Screen.Recording.2026-06-22.at.03.31.14.mov

iOS: mWeb Safari

Screen.Recording.2026-06-22.at.03.33.03.mov

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

Screen.Recording.2026-06-22.at.03.09.58.mov

Screen.Recording.2026-06-22.at.03.10.20.mov

[abzokhattab]

LGTM

[TaduJR]

cc @blimpich

[github-actions]

🚧 blimpich has triggered a test Expensify/App build. You can view the workflow run here.

[github-actions]

🧪🧪 Use the links below to test this adhoc build on Android, iOS, and Web. Happy testing! 🧪🧪
Built from App PR #89585.

Android 🤖	iOS 🍎
https://ad-hoc-expensify-cash.s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/rock-artifacts/ad-hoc/rock-android-Adhoc-c144f62229d-6b731fa-99d3cd8e33b37e9a60656ea6c7e667c9e10c8d19/index.html	https://ad-hoc-expensify-cash.s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/rock-artifacts/ad-hoc/rock-ios-device-AdHoc-c144f62-6b731fa-b87970b6d9d07eac228d3cd24d79621bb233e8b9/index.html

Web 🕸️
https://89585.pr-testing.expensify.com

---

👀 View the workflow run that generated this build 👀

[blimpich]

Apologies @TaduJR but we got unlucky with the merge and broke main. See revert PR here: #94367

Please re-raise the PR with the latest main merged in when you get a chance 👍

[OSBotify]

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/blimpich in version: 9.4.18-0 🚀

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

Bundle Size Analysis (Sentry):

• Android
• iOS

[MelvinBot]

🤖 Help site review: no changes required.

I reviewed the changes in this PR against the help articles in App/docs/articles and concluded no help site updates are needed.

Why: This PR fixes two internal UI rendering bugs in the duplicate-expense flow — (1) the highlight animation on the newly-added row not firing, and (2) the right-hand panel not widening to super-wide after the chat→table flip. Both are purely visual/rendering behaviors driven by internal hooks (useNewTransactions, the WideRHPContextProvider hooks, and REPORT_METADATA plumbing). None of them change a documented user-facing workflow, feature name, eligibility rule, or outcome.

The relevant article, How to Duplicate an Expense, documents how to duplicate (steps, eligibility, what gets copied, what happens after) — none of which this PR alters. Highlight animations and RHP panel width are not (and generally should not be) documented in help articles, so there is nothing to update.

I did not open a draft docs PR since no content changes are warranted.

@TaduJR, please review the above and confirm it reflects the current behavior. Since no help site changes were required, there is no linked help site PR to mark Ready for review — let me know if you'd like me to document anything that isn't currently covered.

[jponikarchuk]

This PR failing because of the issue #94415
This issue is reproducible in: All platforms

[abzokhattab]

Expected there was a problem in the merge pipeline we reverted it and retrying with the new PR

[jponikarchuk]

This PR failing because of the issue #94427 (Scenario 3)
This issue is reproducible in: All platforms

[OSBotify]

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/blimpich in version: 9.4.18-2 🚀

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