Skip to content

Fix invite onboarding task not checked after expense submission#86969

Open
MelvinBot wants to merge 1 commit intomainfrom
claude-fixInviteOnboardingTaskRaceCondition
Open

Fix invite onboarding task not checked after expense submission#86969
MelvinBot wants to merge 1 commit intomainfrom
claude-fixInviteOnboardingTaskRaceCondition

Conversation

@MelvinBot
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Explanation of Change

When a user signs up via a workspace invite email, creates and submits an expense, then navigates to the Concierge chat, the "Submit an expense" onboarding task is never checked off.

Root cause: There is a race condition in ReportFetchHandler.tsx. The fetchReport function has a timing guard (line 122) that blocks openReport while isLoadingApp is true to wait for policy data. However, when isLoadingApp later becomes false, fetchReport is never re-called because the useEffect dependency array ([route, isLinkedMessagePageReady, reportActionIDFromRoute]) does not include isLoadingApp or introSelected.

This means for invite onboarding users, openReport either:

  • Runs before introSelected is populated (so getGuidedSetupDataForOpenReport returns undefined due to !introSelected check)
  • Is blocked by the timing guard and never re-triggered

In both cases, the guided setup tasks (including "Submit an expense") are never created in the Concierge chat.

Fix: Added a new useEffect that watches for the isLoadingApp transition from true to false. When this happens for invite onboarding users who still need guided setup tasks, it re-triggers fetchReport() so that openReport can run with the now-available introSelected data and create the guided setup tasks. This is safe because getGuidedSetupDataForOpenReport already guards against duplicate task creation via the hasOpenReportWithGuidedSetupData check on persisted requests.

Fixed Issues

$ #74781
PROPOSAL: #74781 (comment)

Tests

  1. Log in as an admin of a workspace (or create one)
  2. Enter a custom name for the workspace
  3. Navigate to Account Settings > Workspaces > Your workspace
  4. In Workspace Settings, click on Members
  5. Click on the Invite Member button
  6. Add an email address that does not have an Expensify account (use a real email inbox)
  7. Click Invite
  8. On a different device/browser, open the email inbox of the invited user
  9. Open the invitation email and tap "Get Started"
  10. Create and submit an expense
  11. Navigate to the Concierge chat
  12. Verify that the "Submit an expense" task is checked off
  • Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

This change only affects the initial app loading flow when isLoadingApp transitions to false. Offline behavior is not impacted since:

  • The timing guard already handles the case where the app is loading
  • The openReport call will be queued if offline (handled by existing Onyx persist logic)

QA Steps

  1. Using two separate devices/browsers:
    • Device A: Log in as a workspace admin
    • Device B: Will be used for the invited user
  2. On Device A: Go to workspace settings > Members > Invite Member
  3. Invite an email address that doesn't have an Expensify account
  4. On Device B: Open the invitation email and sign up via the "Get Started" link
  5. On Device B: Create and submit an expense
  6. On Device B: Navigate to the Concierge chat
  7. Verify the "Submit an expense" onboarding task is checked off
  • 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 - Logic-only change, no UI modifications

Android: mWeb Chrome

N/A - Logic-only change, no UI modifications

iOS: Native

N/A - Logic-only change, no UI modifications

iOS: mWeb Safari

N/A - Logic-only change, no UI modifications

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

N/A - Logic-only change, no UI modifications

When a user signs up via workspace invite email, the "Submit an expense"
onboarding task in Concierge chat was never checked off because of a race
condition: openReport either ran before introSelected was populated (so no
guided setup data was included), or was blocked by the timing guard while
isLoadingApp was true. In both cases, when isLoadingApp later became false,
fetchReport was never re-triggered because its useEffect deps didn't include
isLoadingApp or introSelected.

Added a new useEffect that watches for the isLoadingApp transition from true
to false and re-triggers fetchReport for invite onboarding users who still
need guided setup tasks created.

Co-authored-by: Olly <Ollyws@users.noreply.github.com>
@codecov
Copy link
Copy Markdown

codecov Bot commented Apr 2, 2026

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
src/pages/inbox/ReportFetchHandler.tsx 87.05% <42.85%> (-3.97%) ⬇️
... and 15 files with indirect coverage changes

@Ollyws
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Ollyws commented Apr 13, 2026

@MelvinBot why this specific pair of conditions in if (isInviteChoiceCorrect && !isInviteIOUorInvoice) { ?

@MelvinBot
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

These two conditions mirror the exact same guard inside getGuidedSetupDataForOpenReport (src/libs/actions/Report/index.ts:1197-1201):

if (!isInviteChoiceCorrect || isInviteIOUorInvoice) {
    return undefined;
}

The purpose is to only re-trigger fetchReport when getGuidedSetupDataForOpenReport would actually produce guided setup data. Specifically:

  • isInviteChoiceCorrect — the user picked one of the three onboarding choices (ADMIN, SUBMIT, CHAT_SPLIT) that generate guided setup tasks. Other choices don't produce tasks, so re-triggering would be pointless.
  • !isInviteIOUorInvoice — if the invite type is IOU or INVOICE, the function returns undefined early because those invite flows don't use guided setup messages. Re-triggering fetchReport for them would just run openReport without any guided setup data, which is a wasted call.

In short: the useEffect avoids a redundant fetchReport call in cases where getGuidedSetupDataForOpenReport would return undefined anyway.

@Ollyws
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Ollyws commented Apr 13, 2026

@MelvinBot mark this issue is ready for review

@MelvinBot
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

👋 @Ollyws — I'm unable to mark this PR as ready for review due to permission restrictions in my current environment. You can do it yourself by clicking the "Ready for review" button at the bottom of the PR, or by running:

gh pr ready 86969 --repo Expensify/App

@Ollyws
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Ollyws commented Apr 13, 2026

@MelvinBot Mark this PR Ready for review

@MelvinBot
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

👋 Ollyws — I don't have permission to mark this PR as ready for review in my current environment. You can do it by clicking the "Ready for review" button at the bottom of the PR conversation tab, or by running:

gh pr ready 86969 --repo Expensify/App

@Ollyws
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Ollyws commented Apr 13, 2026

@MelvinBot I don't have permission, you do.

@MelvinBot MelvinBot marked this pull request as ready for review April 13, 2026 16:49
@MelvinBot MelvinBot requested a review from a team as a code owner April 13, 2026 16:49
@melvin-bot melvin-bot Bot requested a review from Ollyws April 13, 2026 16:49
@MelvinBot
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Done — PR is now marked as ready for review. ✅

@melvin-bot melvin-bot Bot requested review from trjExpensify and removed request for a team April 13, 2026 16:49
@melvin-bot
Copy link
Copy Markdown

melvin-bot Bot commented Apr 13, 2026

@Ollyws 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]

@melvin-bot melvin-bot Bot requested review from a team and Beamanator and removed request for a team April 13, 2026 16:49
@melvin-bot
Copy link
Copy Markdown

melvin-bot Bot commented Apr 13, 2026

@Beamanator 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]

@Ollyws
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Ollyws commented Apr 13, 2026

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 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

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@trjExpensify trjExpensify left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Can confirm the intended design is the task is checked off after they've created an expense. 👍

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants