[No QA] [NO QA] [HOLD for testing] Update help site docs for bulk change approver feature

[MelvinBot]

Explanation of Change

Updates three help site articles to document the new bulk "Change approver" feature added in #77857. The feature allows users to select multiple reports on the Reports page and change the approver (add an approver or bypass approvers) in bulk.

Changes:

• Approve-Expenses.md: Added a new section documenting how to change the approver for multiple reports at once, including notes about cross-workspace member visibility and Control plan requirements.
• Getting-Started-with-the-Reports-Page.md: Added "Change approver" to the list of available bulk actions in the report table.
• Understanding-Report-Statuses-and-Actions.md: Added "Change Approver" to the list of actions available in the grey "More" menu.

Fixed Issues

$ #75220
$ #77372

Tests

1. Open the help site articles locally and verify the new content renders correctly
2. Verify the bulk change approver steps match the actual UI flow

• Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

N/A — documentation-only changes.

QA Steps

[No QA] — documentation-only changes. No code behavior is affected.

• 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.

[stephanieelliott]

@MelvinBot why can't @QichenZhu edit the PR?

[MelvinBot]

QichenZhu has read-only access to the Expensify/App repo, so they cannot push commits to the claude-addBulkChangeApproverDocs branch.

Since this PR was opened from the main Expensify/App repo (not a fork), only users with write access to the repo can push to the branch. The "Allow edits by maintainers" toggle doesn't help here — that only applies to PRs opened from forks.

Options:

1. QichenZhu can comment with the requested changes and tag @MelvinBot to make the updates.
2. A user with write access can push the changes on their behalf.

[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 @CortneyOfstad

[melvin-bot]

@Krishna2323 @CortneyOfstad One of you needs to 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]

Button naming violation: If "Save" is a UI button, it must be bolded per HELPSITE_NAMING_CONVENTIONS.md ("Bold all button names using bold formatting"). Change "save" to Save.

Suggested change

	5. If you selected **Add approver**, choose the approver and save.
	5. If you selected **Add approver**, choose the approver and click **Save**.

[github-actions]

Button naming violation: Per HELPSITE_NAMING_CONVENTIONS.md, all button/menu item names must be bolded. This should be Change Approver to match the formatting standard.

Suggested change

	- Change Approver
	- **Change Approver**

[github-actions]

HelpDot Documentation Review

Overall Assessment

This PR adds documentation for a new "Change approver" bulk action across three files. The changes are focused and well-scoped, documenting a single new feature addition in the appropriate existing articles. The additions are generally clear and follow most governance conventions, with a few items worth addressing.

Scores Summary

• Readability: 8/10 - Steps are clear, sequential, and action-oriented. The note in Approve-Expenses.md packs multiple concepts into one dense paragraph that could be broken up for scannability.
• AI Readiness: 8/10 - The new H2 heading in Approve-Expenses.md ("How to change the approver for multiple reports at once") is task-based and includes the feature name, which is good for retrieval. The other two file changes are list-item additions that do not affect heading structure.
• Style Compliance: 7/10 - There are a few terminology and formatting issues in the proposed changes that conflict with the governance rules.

Key Findings

Issues to address:

1. "More" dropdown reference (Approve-Expenses.md, existing pattern but relevant context): The new section at line 65 uses "Choose Selected" in step 3. Verify that "Selected" is the exact UI label shown in the product. If it is a contextual menu that appears after checkbox selection, clarify the interaction pattern (e.g., "Click Selected in the bulk action bar").

2. Inconsistent capitalization of "Change Approver" vs. "Change approver": In Understanding-Report-Statuses-and-Actions.md, the addition reads "Change Approver" (title case), while in Approve-Expenses.md and Getting-Started-with-the-Reports-Page.md it appears as "Change approver" (sentence case). Per the naming conventions, UI labels must match the exact text shown in the product and be consistent across all articles. One of these capitalizations is wrong -- confirm which matches the UI and standardize.

3. Bold formatting missing on list item (Understanding-Report-Statuses-and-Actions.md): The existing items in the grey More button list use mixed formatting -- some are bolded (e.g., Print), some are not. The new "Change Approver" addition is not bolded. Per button naming standards, UI element names should be bolded. Consider bolding it for consistency.

4. Dense note block (Approve-Expenses.md): The Note: paragraph at the end of the new section combines three distinct pieces of information (cross-workspace member filtering, Control plan requirement, and upgrade prompt). Consider splitting into a bulleted list for better scannability.

Positive aspects:

• The new H2 heading "How to change the approver for multiple reports at once" follows the task-based heading requirement and starts with "How to," which supports AI retrieval.
• Steps are numbered, sequential, and action-oriented, following the step formatting standard.
• Navigation instruction in step 1 correctly uses the unified format: "In the navigation tabs (on the left on web, and at the bottom on mobile)."
• The additions are appropriately scoped -- each file receives only the content relevant to its purpose.

Recommendations

1. Standardize capitalization: Confirm the exact UI label ("Change approver" vs. "Change Approver") and use it consistently across all three files.
2. Bold the new list item in Understanding-Report-Statuses-and-Actions.md to match the formatting pattern of other items in that list.
3. Break up the dense note in Approve-Expenses.md into a bulleted list for improved readability.
4. Verify "Selected" label: Confirm that "Selected" in step 3 of the new bulk action flow matches the exact UI text.

Files Reviewed

• docs/articles/new-expensify/reports-and-expenses/Approve-Expenses.md - New section added for bulk change approver flow. Heading and steps are well-formed; capitalization and note formatting need attention.
• docs/articles/new-expensify/reports-and-expenses/Getting-Started-with-the-Reports-Page.md - Single bullet added to bulk actions list. Clear and concise.
• docs/articles/new-expensify/reports-and-expenses/Understanding-Report-Statuses-and-Actions.md - Single list item added to More button options. Capitalization and bold formatting need alignment.

Review based on proposed diff changes only, scored against docs/HELPSITE_NAMING_CONVENTIONS.md, docs/HELP_AUTHORING_GUIDELINES.md, and docs/TEMPLATE.md.

[OSBotify]

A preview of your ExpensifyHelp changes have been deployed to https://d5c30f77.helpdot.pages.dev ⚡️

Updated articles:

• articles/new-expensify/reports-and-expenses/Approve-Expenses
• articles/new-expensify/reports-and-expenses/Getting-Started-with-the-Reports-Page
• articles/new-expensify/reports-and-expenses/Understanding-Report-Statuses-and-Actions