[No QA] Revise language for clarity in Submit plan documentation

[garrettmknight]

Updated wording for clarity and consistency throughout the document, including details on workspace creation, submission processes, and member permissions.

Explanation of Change

Fixed Issues

$https://github.com/Expensify/Expensify/issues/613373

PROPOSAL:

Tests

• Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

QA Steps

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

• 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
• 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 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

Android: mWeb Chrome

iOS: Native

iOS: mWeb Safari

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: 666dad18b0

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".

[garrettmknight]

Get paid back

Submit popover

[garrettmknight]

@stephanieelliott no rush on this one, feature is still in detailed, just mapping comms out.

[github-actions]

HelpDot Documentation Review

Overall Assessment

This PR adds a new documentation article for creating a workspace on the Submit plan. The article is well-organized, covers a clear user workflow, and is written in a helpful, approachable tone. However, several governance rule violations need to be addressed before merging -- most notably the missing "How to..." heading, incorrect three-dot menu reference, inline images instead of screenshot placeholders, a full URL instead of a relative link, and an internalScope format mismatch.

Scores Summary

• Readability: 8/10 - Clear, scannable writing with well-structured numbered steps and bullet lists. Minor formatting issues (missing blank lines before some horizontal rules, a typo in image alt text) slightly reduce the score.
• AI Readiness: 5/10 - YAML metadata is present with good keywords, but the article is missing the required "How to..." heading (mandatory per Section 6 of HELP_AUTHORING_GUIDELINES.md), missing a "Who can use..." section (per TEMPLATE.md), and internalScope uses a non-standard YAML-mapping format instead of the required single-string format.
• Style Compliance: 4/10 - Multiple naming convention violations: the three-dot menu is referenced as More (prohibited per HELPSITE_NAMING_CONVENTIONS.md), screenshots use inline Markdown images with GitHub URLs instead of HTML comment placeholders (Section 8), a full external URL is used instead of a relative link (Section 7), and some step actions lack bolded exact button names.

Key Findings

Must fix:

1. Missing "How to..." heading (Section 6): The article must include at least one ## heading that starts with "How to" and includes the feature name. For example, rename ## Create a Submit workspace during onboarding to ## How to create a Submit workspace during onboarding, or rename ## Submit an expense report to your manager or approver to ## How to submit an expense report on the Submit plan.
2. Three-dot menu violation (HELPSITE_NAMING_CONVENTIONS.md): The step Click **More** > **Payment received** uses "More", which is explicitly prohibited. This must be rewritten as: Select the three dots **(⋮)**, then select **Payment received**.
3. Screenshot format violation (Section 8): All three inline images use Markdown image syntax with full GitHub URLs. Per governance, screenshots must use invisible HTML comment placeholders: <!-- SCREENSHOT: Suggestion: ... Location: ... Purpose: ... -->. Replace all three image references with this format.
4. Full URL violation (Section 7): The step Go to the pricing page at https://www.expensify.com/pricing uses a full URL. Cross-linking standards require relative links only, and links should not appear inside numbered steps.
5. internalScope format (Section 3): The current structured YAML format with Audience:, What it covers:, What it does not cover: keys does not match the governance-specified single-string format: Audience is [roles], covers [workflow], does not cover [exclusions].

Should fix:
6. Missing "Who can use" section (TEMPLATE.md): The template calls for a ## Who can use [exact feature name] section specifying required roles, plan limitations, and prerequisites.
7. Vague step actions: Step 3 in the onboarding section ("Choose to create a new workspace") and step 2 in the upgrade section ("Confirm the upgrade") do not reference exact bolded button names from the UI.
8. Typo in image alt text: "Paymemt received" should be "Payment received".
9. Formatting gaps: Missing blank line before the --- separator after "Your workspace will open automatically so you can begin setup." (around line 50) and after the screenshot image on line 97. This may cause Markdown rendering issues.

Positive aspects:

• The article solves a clear, single primary workflow as required.
• All ## headings are task-based and start with action verbs, which is well done.
• Bullet lists for "can do" and "cannot do" in the invite section are effective and scannable.
• The FAQ section is thorough with well-phrased question headings.
• The hamburger menu reference at the end of the article correctly follows the naming convention.
• Keywords in metadata are realistic and search-aligned.

Recommendations

1. Priority: Add at least one "How to..." heading using the feature name to satisfy the AI retrieval optimization rule.
2. Priority: Replace Click **More** with the required three-dot menu format.
3. Priority: Convert all inline images to HTML comment screenshot placeholders.
4. Priority: Remove the full URL and either use a relative link (placed outside of numbered steps) or describe navigation without a URL.
5. Reformat internalScope as a single string value.
6. Add a ## Who can use [Submit plan / Submit workspace] section.
7. Ensure every numbered step references the exact, bolded UI button name.
8. Fix the "Paymemt" typo and the missing blank lines before horizontal rules.

Files Reviewed

• docs/articles/new-expensify/getting-started/Create-a-Workspace-on-the-Submit-Plan.md -- New file, 181 lines. Multiple governance violations require attention before merge.

[OSBotify]

A preview of your ExpensifyHelp changes have been deployed to https://10d29dae.helpdot.pages.dev ⚡️

Updated articles:

• articles/new-expensify/getting-started/Create-a-Workspace-on-the-Submit-Plan

[stephanieelliott]

@garrettmknight just give me a bump when this is ready!