[No QA] Add help site docs for Duplicate Expenses feature

[MelvinBot]

Explanation of Change

Adds help site documentation for the new Duplicate Expenses feature in New Expensify. This includes:

1. New article: How-to-Duplicate-an-Expense.md - A dedicated article covering how to duplicate cash, distance, and per diem expenses using the Duplicate option in the More menu. Includes eligibility requirements, what fields are copied vs. reset, cross-workspace limitations for per diem and distance expenses, and an FAQ section.
2. Updated: Expense-and-Report-Actions.md - Added Duplicate to the secondary ("More" menu) actions table so users can discover the feature when reviewing available expense actions.

Both articles follow the HelpDot authoring guidelines, naming conventions, and template structure.

Fixed Issues

$ https://github.com/Expensify/Expensify/issues/616432

Tests

1. Open the help site article preview for How-to-Duplicate-an-Expense.md
2. Verify the article renders correctly with proper heading hierarchy (one #, multiple ##)
3. Verify all UI labels match the product exactly (e.g., Duplicate, Duplicated)
4. Open Expense-and-Report-Actions.md and verify the Duplicate row appears in the secondary actions table
5. Verify all cross-links and formatting render correctly

• Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

N/A — Documentation-only changes with no runtime behavior.

QA Steps

1. Preview the new article How-to-Duplicate-an-Expense.md on the help site
2. Verify all sections render correctly and content matches the Duplicate Expenses feature behavior
3. Preview the updated Expense-and-Report-Actions.md article
4. Verify the Duplicate row appears correctly in the secondary actions table

• 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

N/A — Documentation-only changes

Android: mWeb Chrome

N/A — Documentation-only changes

iOS: Native

N/A — Documentation-only changes

iOS: mWeb Safari

N/A — Documentation-only changes

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

N/A — Documentation-only changes

[OSBotify]

A preview of your ExpensifyHelp changes have been deployed to https://e4330f4c.helpdot.pages.dev ⚡️

Updated articles:

• articles/new-expensify/reports-and-expenses/Expense-and-Report-Actions
• articles/new-expensify/reports-and-expenses/How-to-Duplicate-an-Expense

[melvin-bot]

Concierge 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 as a Concierge Team member?

cc @muttmuure

[melvin-bot]

@muttmuure 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]

[MelvinBot]

Fixed the failing spellcheck: added CROSSLINK to the cspell dictionary (cspell.json). This word was used in an HTML comment placeholder in How-to-Duplicate-an-Expense.md and wasn't recognized by the spellchecker.

[melvin-bot]

@shubham1206agra 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]

[github-actions]

HelpDot Documentation Review

Overall Assessment

This PR adds a new help article for the Duplicate Expenses feature and updates the Expense and Report Actions reference table. The article is well-structured, follows the single-workflow-per-article principle, and provides comprehensive coverage of the duplication feature. However, there are critical style compliance issues -- most notably around the Three Dots Menu Rule -- that must be addressed before merging.

Scores Summary

• Readability: 8/10 - Clear writing, logical flow, and good scannability. The article is well-organized with a natural progression from "who can" to "how to" to "what happens after." Minor deductions for Step 5 being a system description rather than a user action, inconsistent punctuation across steps, and some content redundancy between the introduction and the "What happens after" section.
• AI Readiness: 9/10 - Excellent YAML metadata with comprehensive keywords, a well-defined internalScope, and task-based headings throughout. Heading hierarchy is correct (one # title plus # FAQ, all content sections use ##). Feature names are consistently included in headings. The article is well-positioned for semantic retrieval.
• Style Compliance: 5/10 - Critical violations of the Three Dots Menu Rule in the step instructions and in an FAQ heading. The governance files explicitly prohibit writing "More" or "More menu" -- the required phrasing is Select the three dots **(⋮)**. The screenshot placeholder also does not follow the required Suggestion/Location/Purpose format. These are mandatory conventions that must be corrected.

Key Findings

Critical issues that must be addressed:

1. Three Dots Menu Rule violation (Step 3): The step currently reads Select **More**. The governance file (HELPSITE_NAMING_CONVENTIONS.md) explicitly states: "Do not call it 'More'. Do not write 'More menu'." The required phrasing is: Select the three dots **(⋮)**. This is the single most important fix needed.

2. Prohibited language in FAQ heading: The heading ## Why is the Duplicate option not showing in the More menu? uses the phrase "More menu," which is explicitly prohibited. A compliant alternative would be: ## Why is the Duplicate expense option not showing in the three dots menu? or ## Why is Duplicate expense not appearing when I select the three dots?

3. Screenshot placeholder format is non-compliant: The current placeholder reads:

   <!-- SCREENSHOT:
   WIP here: https://github.com/Expensify/Expensify/issues/616815
   -->
   

   Per HELP_AUTHORING_GUIDELINES.md Section 8, the required format is:

   <!-- SCREENSHOT:
   Suggestion: [Clear description of UI state]
   Location: [Where it appears in article]
   Purpose: [Why this screenshot helps]
   -->
   

   Even for WIP screenshots, the placeholder should follow the required structure so the intent is captured for the person who will add the screenshot later.

Other issues to address:

4. Step 5 is not a user action: The **Duplicate expense** menu item will briefly change to **Duplicated** to confirm the action. is describing system behavior, not an action the user performs. This should be moved out of the numbered steps into a note or follow-up paragraph after the steps.

5. Inconsistent step punctuation: Step 1 is missing a period at the end (select **Reports > Expenses**), while Steps 2-4 all end with periods. Punctuation should be consistent across all steps.

6. Inconsistent step verbs: Steps use a mix of "select," "Open," and "Choose" for similar UI interactions. Consider standardizing on "Select" for all menu/button interactions per the naming conventions examples (e.g., Select **Confirm**, Select **Chat**).

Positive aspects worth highlighting:

• Strong, well-crafted YAML metadata with a clear internalScope that explicitly excludes duplicate detection, resolving flagged duplicates, and merging -- good boundary-setting for AI retrieval.
• Comprehensive keyword list covering realistic search phrases ("copy expense," "duplicate cash expense," etc.).
• Article structure closely follows TEMPLATE.md with all three required sections present: "Who can," "How to," and "What happens after."
• The edge case section explaining why duplication is unavailable for certain per diem and distance expenses is a valuable addition that anticipates user confusion.
• FAQ section is well-targeted to real user questions.
• The table row added to Expense-and-Report-Actions.md is concise, accurate, and correctly positioned among other secondary actions.
• Single-workflow focus is well-maintained throughout -- the article does not stray into duplicate detection or merging territory.

Recommendations

Priority 1 (must fix):

• Replace Select **More**. in Step 3 with Select the three dots **(⋮)**.
• Rewrite the FAQ heading ## Why is the Duplicate option not showing in the More menu? to avoid the prohibited "More menu" phrasing.

Priority 2 (should fix):

• Restructure Step 5 as a note or paragraph after the numbered steps rather than a numbered step itself.
• Update the screenshot placeholder to use the required Suggestion/Location/Purpose format.
• Add a period at the end of Step 1 for consistent punctuation.

Priority 3 (nice to have):

• Standardize step verbs to use "Select" consistently for interacting with UI elements.
• Consider reducing redundancy between the introduction paragraph and the "What happens after" section, which repeat largely the same list of copied fields.
• In the CROSSLINK placeholder, consider adopting the same HTML comment structure as screenshots (with Suggestion/Location/Purpose fields) for consistency, even though CROSSLINK placeholders are not formally defined in the governance files.

Files Reviewed

• docs/articles/new-expensify/reports-and-expenses/How-to-Duplicate-an-Expense.md (new file) -- Well-structured new article with critical Three Dots Menu Rule violations that need correction before merge.
• docs/articles/new-expensify/reports-and-expenses/Expense-and-Report-Actions.md (modified) -- Single table row addition is clean, accurate, and properly placed.
• cspell.json (modified) -- Added "CROSSLINK" to the dictionary. No concerns.

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

[stephanieelliott]

Applied all relevant bot comments. Also confirmed the UI naming is correct, the naming conventions file is just too strict. Will create a separate PR to address that.

[stephanieelliott]

Reviewer Checklist

• I have verified the author checklist is complete (all boxes are checked off).
• 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 / Chrome
  • iOS / native
  • iOS / 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 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 the left part of a conditional rendering a React component is a boolean and NOT a string, e.g. myBool && <MyComponent />.
  • 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 verified the translation was requested/reviewed 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 approved by marketing by adding the Waiting for Copy label for a copy review on the original GH to get the correct copy.
  • 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.js 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 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
  • If we are not using the full Onyx data that we loaded, I've added the proper selector in order to ensure the component only re-renders when the data it is using changes
  • 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(themeColors.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 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.
• 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 author 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

MacOS: Desktop

[github-actions]

🚧 @muttmuure 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 #86388.

Android 🤖	iOS 🍎
https://ad-hoc-expensify-cash.s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/rock-artifacts/ad-hoc/rock-android-Adhoc-ba01fa2-38ead1b-920a3eb4506bafbac5fe356bcaffdced6176e7fb/index.html	https://ad-hoc-expensify-cash.s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/rock-artifacts/ad-hoc/rock-ios-device-AdHoc-ba01fa2-38ead1b-8867e13a518ff43d1003ec29f7219e5b4f31798a/index.html

Web 🕸️
https://86388.pr-testing.expensify.com

---

👀 View the workflow run that generated this build 👀

[OSBotify]

✋ This PR was not deployed to staging yet because QA is ongoing. It will be automatically deployed to staging after the next production release.

[OSBotify]

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/muttmuure in version: 9.3.52-0 🚀

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

Bundle Size Analysis (Sentry):

• Android
• iOS