[No QA] Docs updates for E/A#92885 Print not shown for Draft reports

[MelvinBot]

Why this change

Expensify/App#92885 hides the Print secondary action (More menu) for reports in the Open (Draft) state. A Draft has no finalized printable view, so Print previously opened a "Report Not Found" page. Download as PDF is unaffected.

Our help site documented Print as available for "Any report" / "Any report state", which is now inaccurate.

What changed

In docs/articles/new-expensify/reports-and-expenses/Expense-and-Report-Actions.md, the two Print rows in the "Additional report actions available from the More menu" tables now state Print is available for any report except Draft:

Before	After
Print — Any report	Print — Any report except Draft
Print — Any report state	Print — Any report status except Draft

No other articles required changes — the "What actions are available for each report status" section already lists Print only under Paid/Done reports (not Draft), and other Print mentions are generic "options like…" lists.

Linked PR

Source: #92885 (Fixed Issue: #87837)

---

@wildan-m, please review the files changed and confirm they reflect the current behavior. Then mark this PR Ready for review.

[OSBotify]

A preview of your ExpensifyHelp changes have been deployed to https://8fc48cce.helpdot.pages.dev ⚡️

Updated articles:

• articles/new-expensify/reports-and-expenses/Expense-and-Report-Actions

[github-actions]

HelpDot Documentation Review

Overall Assessment
This PR makes two small, targeted content corrections to Expense-and-Report-Actions.md. Both edits update the availability of the Print action in the reference tables, changing it from "Any report" / "Any report state" to exclude the Draft status. This is a factual accuracy fix that does not alter article structure, headings, metadata, or formatting.

Scores Summary

• Readability: 9/10 - The edits are clear, concise, and preserve the existing table format. Wording is easy to scan.
• AI Readiness: 9/10 - No impact on task-based headings, metadata, or heading hierarchy. The added qualifier ("except Draft") improves retrieval precision by making availability conditions explicit and consistent with the status vocabulary used elsewhere in the article.
• Style Compliance: 8/10 - Draft is capitalized correctly to match the status term used throughout the article. Minor inconsistency: the two updated rows use slightly different phrasing ("Any report except Draft" vs. "Any report status except Draft"). Aligning both to the same pattern would improve consistency.

Key Findings

• Both changes are factually scoped, low-risk corrections that improve accuracy.
• Correct, consistent capitalization of the Draft status term.
• Minor wording inconsistency between the two edited rows ("except Draft" vs. "status except Draft").
• No structural, heading, metadata, or navigation rules are affected by the diff.

Recommendations

• Consider aligning the two rows to identical phrasing, e.g. use "Any report status except Draft" in both, so the summary and detailed tables read consistently.

Files Reviewed

• docs/articles/new-expensify/reports-and-expenses/Expense-and-Report-Actions.md - Two table row updates to the Print action; accurate and compliant, with a minor phrasing-consistency suggestion.

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

[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 @jliexpensify

[melvin-bot]

@jliexpensify 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]

[jliexpensify]

LGTM

[OSBotify]

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/stephanieelliott in version: 9.4.29-0 🚀

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

[OSBotify]

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/stephanieelliott in version: 9.4.31-0 🚀

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

[OSBotify]

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/grgia in version: 9.4.31-0 🚀

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

Bundle Size Analysis (Sentry):

• Android