Fix Audit Reports navigation and prioritize report routes

[marufsharifi]

Explanation of Change

This update fixes several cases where users started in Reports/Search but were unexpectedly redirected into Inbox.

The change makes report-opening behavior context-aware, so direct opens from Search now use Search-owned routes instead of Inbox routes. It also fixes Search-based task create/edit flows by returning users to their existing Search stack after dismissing modals, rather than reconstructing an Inbox report route.

For leave-chat flows, the exact backTo route from report details is now preserved and used first, which keeps users in the same Search context they came from. Finally, the deleted-report fallback after leaving was updated to be Search-aware as well, so once a report disappears, users are no longer bounced into Inbox as a fallback.

Fixed Issues

$ #85560
PROPOSAL: #85560 (comment)

Tests

1. Open a task from Reports > Chats search results and stay in Search context

   • Go to Reports > Chats.
   • Open a task result from Search.
   • Verify the task opens in a Search-owned route, not an Inbox report route.
   • Verify the browser URL keeps the /search/view/... context with backTo.
   • Verify the Reports > Chats page remains as the underlying context.
   • Verify no redirect to Inbox happens.

2. Edit task description from Search and dismiss back to the same Search stack

   • Go to Reports > Chats.
   • Open a task from Search results.
   • Open Description.
   • Enter or update the task description.
   • Click Save.
   • Verify the modal closes.
   • Verify you return to the same Search-owned task/report stack.
   • Verify you are not redirected to Inbox.

3. Leave-chat or deleted-report fallback preserves Search context

   • Go to Reports > Chats.
   • Open a chat/report from Search results.
   • Trigger the leave-chat flow from report details.
   • Confirm the leave action.
   • Verify navigation uses the preserved backTo Search route first.
   • If the report is deleted after leaving, verify the app dismisses back within Search instead of sending you to Inbox or an unrelated fallback.
   • Verify no unexpected bounce to Concierge/Inbox occurs.

4. Edit expense description from Search and return to the same Search flow

   • Go to Reports > Chats.
   • Open an expense/report item from Search results.
   • Open the Description editor.
   • Change the description.
   • Click Save.
   • Verify the editor closes.
   • Verify you return to the same Search-owned expense/report stack.
   • Verify the app does not reconstruct an Inbox route.

5. Create or edit a second task description from Search without losing Search context

   • Go to Reports > Chats.
   • Open another task from Search results.
   • Open Description.
   • Enter a new description or modify the existing one.
   • Click Save.
   • Verify the task flow dismisses cleanly.
   • Verify you land back in the existing Search stack.
   • Verify there is no redirect to Inbox.

6. Edit task title from Search and dismiss back correctly

   • Go to Reports > Chats.
   • Open a task from Search results.
   • Open Title.
   • Update the task title.
   • Click Save.
   • Verify the modal closes.
   • Verify you return to the same Search-owned task/report stack.
   • Verify you are not taken to Inbox.

• 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

Screen.Recording.2026-04-14.at.12.13.18.AM.mov

REC-2026041924207.PM.mp4

REC-2026041924307.PM.mp4

REC-2026041924753.PM.mp4

REC-2026041925021.PM.mp4

REC-2026041925056.PM.mp4

Android: mWeb Chrome

Screen.Recording.2026-04-13.at.11.59.29.PM.mov

REC-2026041641057.PM.mp4

REC-2026041641135.PM.mp4

REC-2026041641215.PM.mp4

REC-2026041641342.PM.mp4

REC-2026041641716.PM.mp4

iOS: Native

Screen.Recording.2026-04-13.at.10.52.13.PM.mov

REC-20260416101416.AM.mp4

REC-20260416101950.AM.mp4

REC-20260416102051.AM.mp4

REC-20260416102647.AM.mp4

REC-20260416102821.AM.mp4

iOS: mWeb Safari

Screen.Recording.2026-04-13.at.10.55.14.PM.mov

REC-2026041662705.PM.mp4

REC-2026041662858.PM.mp4

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

assign.task.mp4

assing.description.edit.mp4

concierge.mp4

expense.description.mp4

Screen.Recording.2026-04-13.at.10.35.44.PM.mov

task.title.edit.mov

[codecov]

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
...components/ReportActionItem/MoneyRequestAction.tsx	53.84% <ø> (ø)
src/components/ReportActionItem/TaskPreview.tsx	81.81% <100.00%> (ø)
src/libs/actions/Task.ts	58.50% <100.00%> (ø)
src/pages/tasks/TaskAssigneeSelectorModal.tsx	0.00% <ø> (ø)
src/pages/tasks/TaskDescriptionPage.tsx	0.00% <ø> (ø)
src/pages/tasks/TaskTitlePage.tsx	0.00% <ø> (ø)
...igation/helpers/getReportRouteForCurrentContext.ts	80.00% <80.00%> (ø)
src/pages/inbox/ReportNavigateAwayHandler.tsx	66.66% <0.00%> (-1.91%)	⬇️
src/libs/actions/Report/index.ts	68.68% <66.66%> (-0.07%)	⬇️
src/pages/ReportDetailsPage.tsx	56.68% <0.00%> (ø)
... and 2 more
... and 30 files with indirect coverage changes

[melvin-bot]

@sobitneupane 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]

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: ce0b3268b8

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to 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 👍.

Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".

[marufsharifi]

@sobitneupane, I've addressed AI feedback. all yours. thanks.

[marufsharifi]

@sobitneupane, kindly bump. thanks.

[marufsharifi]

@sobitneupane, friendly bump. Thanks.

[sobitneupane]

Reviewing the PR.