Fix submitted message is shown on an empty one-transaction report last message

[bernhardoj]

Explanation of Change

Fixed Issues

$ #62323
PROPOSAL: #62323 (comment)

Tests

Same as QA Steps

• Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

Same as QA Steps

QA Steps

1. Open a workspace chat with no unsettled expense
2. Create a new request
3. Open the expense report (or pin it on mobile)
4. Verify the expense report LHN item shows "No activity yet"

• 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 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

Android: mWeb Chrome

iOS: Native

iOS: mWeb Safari

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

MacOS: Desktop

[melvin-bot]

@mananjadhav 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]

[bernhardoj]

On native, opening a report immediately crashes the app.

[mananjadhav]

Reviewed the code, will test it today.

[mananjadhav]

Still testing it. @bernhardoj Can you please fix the conflicts?

[bernhardoj]

Fixed

[mananjadhav]

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
  • MacOS: Desktop
• 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 there are no new alerts related to the canBeMissing param for useOnyx
• 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 shown in the product is localized by adding it to src/languages/* files and using the translation method
  • 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 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)
• 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
• 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.
• 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.
• 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

web-submitted-receipt-scan.mov

MacOS: Desktop

[mananjadhav]

I tried to test the previous $ 0.0 amount to ensure we're not adding any regression but the receipt scan always ends up in a message from Concierge.

Before we merge @bernhardoj can you confirm if you've tested? Would be best if you can also upload a video for the same atleast on the Web platform.

[bernhardoj]

Here it is:

a.mp4

It shows No activity yet, and when the scan completes, the pusher sets the last message to "The receipt couldn't be scanned...", but when we reopen the app, the last message is cleared. We should fix this on the pusher if we don't want that message to show.

[lakchote]

It shows No activity yet, and when the scan completes, the pusher sets the last message to "The receipt couldn't be scanned...", but when we reopen the app, the last message is cleared. We should fix this on the pusher if we don't want that message to show.

cc @trjExpensify @JmillsExpensify, what do you think?

This PR added the action The receipt couldn't be scanned... four weeks ago for https://github.com/Expensify/Expensify/issues/484573. I think we should leave the message as it is, so as not to confuse the user and inform them that the scan has failed.

[trjExpensify]

I'm a bit confused by what we're looking at here. Did the receipt scan actually fail? If so, where is the system message for it as part of actionable system messages thing? (CC: @deetergp too).

If it didn't actually fail, then I agree, we shouldn't be showing this message at all. 👍

[bernhardoj]

If it didn't actually fail, then I agree, we shouldn't be showing this message at all.

The scan was successful as shown on the video, so I agree we shouldn't show the failed message at all.

[deetergp]

I'm a bit confused by what we're looking at here. Did the receipt scan actually fail? If so, where is the system message for it as part of actionable system messages thing? (CC: @deetergp too).

I'm a bit confused too… The receipt scan failed system message is part of improved system messages. In your screenshot @tom it looks like it did fail since there is neither a merchant nor an amount.

[lakchote]

Indeed, what is weird here is that the system message on the transaction thread didn't appear. It only appeared in the LHN, and disappears once it is opened again (OpenReport is called).

[trjExpensify]

In your screenshot @tom it looks like it did fail since there is neither a merchant nor an amount.

My screenshot is from the doc to convey the expectation if it did fail. 😅

In this video that Bernhard shared, the scan didn't seem to fail to me:

[lakchote]

@bernhardoj is the issue we're talking about reproducible only on your PR or not? From my understanding, it's an Onyx update issue that is not tied to your changes.

[bernhardoj]

@lakchote it's only observable from this PR. On main, we don't filter out the IOU action in one-transaction report, but we can still see the report lastMessageText is "The receipt couldn't be scanned...".

[lakchote]

@lakchote it's only observable from this PR. On main, we don't filter out the IOU action in one-transaction report, but we can still see the report lastMessageText is "The receipt couldn't be scanned...".

Thanks, @bernhardoj.

From a backend perspective, putting an error as the last message text when the scan was successful looks wrong. @deetergp, could you please take a look since you've authored this new report action?

cc @trjExpensify for your opinion on this too

[deetergp]

So I did a bit more digging into this and I think there real issue is that we are masking the fact that the receipt did fail. Looking it up in the DB, the receipt is in state 5 which is SCANFAILED and if we look at the receipt details, we see that we are not getting a date from the receipt:

scott@db1.rno:~$ sudo readdb.sh -noheader "SELECT details FROM receipts WHERE receiptID = 5448923794981579;" | jq
{
  ...
  "smartscan": {
    "isCash": true,
    "categoryGroup": "uncategorized",
    "amount": 165000,
    "date": "",
    "merchant": "Shop Name",
    "currency": "IDR",
    "workers": [
      ...
}

What is the actual date on the receipt? In @bernhardoj's screenshot, the date shown on the expense is 2025-06-07 which did not come from the back end since we don't have that data.

[trjExpensify]

If you go into the receipt tool in supportal, you can grab the receipt image. It's clearly a fakey, so posting it here with no qualms:

---

You're right, it has no date value on the receipt, and was marked as illegible by AZ according to the tool.

That said, our guidelines for SmartScan (internal peeps doc only, sorry) state:

If there's no date, we use the scanned date (today):
i. Print date or scanned on date - these are to be seen only as a last resort, and should not be put in unless there is no other date within the above list available to use

I'm a bit confused by that with some other competing lines in that ref, so I've followed-up in thread here to ask about it.

[trjExpensify]

Alright, so I confirmed in thread that this was right to be marked as illegible.

• If the day, month and year aren’t visible on the receipt, the date is marked as null, and thus marked as illegible.
• If the day & month is visible, the year is assumed as the current year for the date input.

[lakchote]

@trjExpensify should we proceed with the PR given the issue we're talking about is preexisting to this one?

[trjExpensify]

Yeah, I think we handle that outside of this PR as part of https://github.com/Expensify/Expensify/issues/484573

[github-actions]

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/lakchote in version: 9.1.66-0 🚀

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

[github-actions]

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/lakchote in version: 9.1.66-5 🚀

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

[github-actions]

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/lakchote in version: 9.1.66-5 🚀

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

[github-actions]

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/lakchote in version: 9.1.66-5 🚀

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