Restore Wallet and other Account sections for agent accounts

[NicolasBonet]

Explanation of Change

App#90248 hid several Account sections for agent accounts (agent_*@expensify.ai). That was too restrictive: without the Wallet, when a company/test card is assigned to an agent there's no way to see the card or its transactions in the UI. This PR reverses that hiding so agents don't have arbitrary constraints, keeping only Security hidden (agents can't have 2FA and shouldn't be able to troubleshoot biometrics).

Restored for agents (both the Account menu entries and their route-level withAgentAccessDenied guards):

• Account > Wallet — menu item, root screen, and all wallet/card/bank-account/reimbursement-account subscreens
• Account > Preferences — menu item, root screen, and preference subscreens
• Account > Subscription — menu item, root screen, and subscription subscreens
• Account > Profile > Public > Contact methods — menu link and contact-method routes
• Account > Profile > Private — private personal details section and its routes
• App download links and the dynamic verify-account screens used by the restored flows

Still hidden for agents (Security domain): all 2FA screens, agents page and the troubleshoot for biometrics.

Fixed Issues

$ #95351
PROPOSAL:

Tests

1. From the owner account, copilot into the agent account (Account > Copilot, or sign in as the agent).
2. Open Account settings.
3. Verify the Wallet, Preferences, Security and Subscription menu items are visible.
4. Open Wallet and verify the page loads (no "Hmm... it's not here" blocking view). Verify assigned cards are listed if the agent has any.
5. Open Preferences and verify the page loads and subpages (Theme, Language, Priority mode, Payment currency) open.
6. Open Subscription and verify the page loads.
7. Open Profile and verify the Contact methods row is pressable and opens the contact methods page, and that the Private section (legal name, date of birth, phone number, address) is visible and its rows open.
8. Verify the Pronouns and Timezone rows are still hidden on the agent's Profile page, and the AI prompt section is still shown.
9. Navigate directly to /settings/security as the agent and verify it is shown, but the option to add 2FA is hidden.
10. Open the Troubleshoot section and validate that test biometrics is missing.
11. Sign in with a regular (non-agent) account and verify all Account sections, including Security, still appear and work as before.

• Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

1. As the agent account, go offline.
2. Open Account > Wallet, Preferences, and Profile > Private details.
3. Verify the pages render from cached data with the standard offline indicator and no blocking view.

QA Steps

Same as tests.

• 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 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)
• 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)
• 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.
• 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

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

Uploading CleanShot 2026-07-06 at 13.13.50.mp4…

[melvin-bot]

@cretadn22 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]

[cretadn22]

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 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)
• 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)
• 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.
• 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

Uploading Screen Recording 2026-07-07 at 01.48.29.mov…

Android: mWeb Chrome

Screen.Recording.2026-07-07.at.01.44.17.mov

iOS: HybridApp

Screen.Recording.2026-07-07.at.01.47.49.mov

iOS: mWeb Safari

Screen.Recording.2026-07-07.at.01.45.03.mov

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

Screen.Recording.2026-07-07.at.01.35.14.mov

[cretadn22]

@NicolasBonet This step doesn't seem to work as expected for me. Instead of navigating to the profile page, it just displays a blank white space

Navigate directly to /settings/security as the agent and verify it redirects to the profile page (still blocked)

Screen.Recording.2026-07-07.at.01.35.14.mov

[NicolasBonet]

@NicolasBonet This step doesn't seem to work as expected for me. Instead of navigating to the profile page, it just displays a blank white space

Navigate directly to /settings/security as the agent and verify it redirects to the profile page (still blocked)

Screen.Recording.2026-07-07.at.01.35.14.mov

Please check again, I fixed that @cretadn22

[joekaufmanexpensify]

Good for product.

[melvin-bot]

@amyevans 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]

[cretadn22]

@NicolasBonet We need to fix the failing tests before merging this PR

[NicolasBonet]

@MelvinBot let's address the tests failing here: https://github.com/Expensify/App/actions/runs/28821279438/job/85473296572?pr=95421

[MelvinBot]

Fixed the failing test (job 1) check and pushed to this branch (2f1b418).

Root cause: The commit 02d36ba ("Wait for navigation readiness before agent redirect") wrapped the agent redirect in Navigation.isNavigationReady().then(...) at withAgentAccessDenied.tsx:31, but the jest.mock('@libs/Navigation/Navigation', ...) block in the test didn't stub isNavigationReady. So the call resolved to undefined, producing:

TypeError: _Navigation.default.isNavigationReady is not a function
    at isNavigationReady (src/libs/Navigation/AppNavigator/withAgentAccessDenied.tsx:31:32)

Fix: Added isNavigationReady: jest.fn(() => Promise.resolve()) to the Navigation mock in tests/unit/withAgentAccessDenied.test.tsx, matching the real function's Promise<void> return type. With the mocked promise resolving, the redirect test's Navigation.navigate assertion is now reachable, and the other two cases (already-on-target, non-agent) don't hit this path.

⚠️ I couldn't run the test locally to confirm — the sandbox in this run blocks jest execution. The change directly resolves the exact TypeError above, so please let CI re-run to confirm the check goes green.

[NicolasBonet]

@MelvinBot let's allow to add pronouns, timezone and all the other stuff currently hidden with the exception of 2FA.

[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
src/components/TestToolMenu.tsx	92.85% <100.00%> (+0.35%)	⬆️
.../Navigation/AppNavigator/withAgentAccessDenied.tsx	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
src/pages/settings/InitialSettingsPage.tsx	86.46% <100.00%> (+0.75%)	⬆️
src/pages/settings/Profile/ProfilePage.tsx	95.14% <100.00%> (-0.05%)	⬇️
...AppNavigator/Navigators/SettingsSplitNavigator.tsx	12.00% <0.00%> (ø)
...c/pages/settings/Security/SecuritySettingsPage.tsx	0.00% <0.00%> (ø)
...gation/AppNavigator/ModalStackNavigators/index.tsx	6.65% <1.17%> (+0.09%)	⬆️
... and 382 files with indirect coverage changes

[MelvinBot]

Thanks NicolasBonet — I mapped out everything that's still gated behind isAgentAccount / withAgentAccessDenied so we can un-hide all of it except 2FA. Before I push (this touches security-gating across ~6 source files + 3 test files), I want to confirm two nuances since guessing wrong here would expose the wrong thing.

Plan — remove agent gating everywhere except 2FA:

1. Profile fields — always show Pronouns & Timezone (ProfilePage.tsx:127-144) and drop the guards on the PRONOUNS / TIMEZONE / TIMEZONE_SELECT routes.
2. Security section — show the menu item (InitialSettingsPage.tsx:307-318) and un-guard the SECURITY split-navigator route (SettingsSplitNavigator.tsx:21).
3. Security sub-flows — un-guard Device management, Close account, Merge accounts, Lock/Unlock account, and the Add/Update-delegate flows.
4. Agents section — show it (InitialSettingsPage.tsx:321) and un-guard the AGENTS.ROOT + add/edit routes.
5. Keep hidden: only the TWO_FACTOR_AUTH.* routes stay wrapped in withAgentAccessDenied, plus the 2FA row on the Security page itself (SecuritySettingsPage.tsx:80-92) gets a new isAgentAccount guard so it disappears even though the page is now visible.
6. Update the three tests that currently assert the hidden behavior (InitialSettingsPageTest, ProfilePageTest, withAgentAccessDenied.test).

Two things to confirm:

• (a) Security page: you want the Security page itself visible with only the 2FA row hidden inside it (my plan), correct? The alternative reading — keep the whole Security page hidden — would contradict "exception of 2FA," so I'm going with "show the page, hide just 2FA" unless you say otherwise.
• (b) Agents section: "all the other stuff" literally includes the Agents management section (creating/editing other agents), which was hidden as part of the agent profile design (App#90244), not App#90248. Do you want that shown for agent accounts too, or should the Agents section stay hidden and only the App#90248 items come back?

Full list of currently-gated items

Menu-level (isAgentAccount): Pronouns + Timezone rows (ProfilePage), Security menu item, Agents section (InitialSettingsPage).

Route guards (withAgentAccessDenied) in ModalStackNavigators/index.tsx: PRONOUNS (L397), TIMEZONE (L399), TIMEZONE_SELECT (L400), DEVICE_MANAGEMENT (L420), CLOSE (L421), AGENTS.ADD/ADD_AVATAR/EDIT/EDIT_NAME/EDIT_PROMPT/EDIT_AVATAR (L471-476), DELEGATE.* (L971-981), MERGE_ACCOUNTS.* (L984-990), LOCK.* (L991-993), TWO_FACTOR_AUTH.* (L1099-1112 → stays).

In SettingsSplitNavigator.tsx: SECURITY (L21), AGENTS.ROOT (L25).

Reply to confirm (a) and (b) and I'll implement it. One process note: I'm not currently an assignee on this PR, so to have me push the change please add me (MelvinBot) as an assignee first — otherwise you may prefer to apply this yourself since it's a straightforward mechanical change. I also can't run jest in this environment, so CI will be the verification step for the test updates.

[NicolasBonet]

@MelvinBot i only want the 2FA options, the security page itself should be available, let's also keep hidden the agents page

[MelvinBot]

Done — pushed 6578847. Agents now see the Security page with only the 2FA options hidden, and the Agents page stays hidden.

What changed (interpreting "I only want the 2FA options hidden" literally — everything else in Security is restored for agents):

• Security page + menu item now visible for agents — removed the withAgentAccessDenied guard on the Security screen and the !isAgentAccount gate on the menu item (SettingsSplitNavigator.tsx:21, InitialSettingsPage.tsx:307).
• Only 2FA / multifactor options hidden inside the Security page for agents — the "Two-factor authentication" row and the "Revoke MFA" row are gated behind !isAgentAccount (SecuritySettingsPage.tsx:82).
• 2FA routes stay guarded — the TWO_FACTOR_AUTH.* screens keep withAgentAccessDenied, so agents deep-linking to a 2FA route are still redirected.
• Other Security sub-pages restored for agents — device management, close account, merge accounts, lock account, and the delegate (Copilot) flows had their withAgentAccessDenied guards removed, since Copilot is already available to agents and you asked for only 2FA to be hidden.
• Agents page still hidden — kept withAgentAccessDenied on AGENTS.ROOT/AGENTS.* and the !isAgentAccount gate on the menu item.
• Updated the InitialSettingsPage test that asserted Security is hidden for agents → now asserts it's shown.

⚠️ Two things to confirm:

1. Scope: I read "only the 2FA options" strictly, so I also un-hid the other Security sub-items (device management, close account, merge accounts, lock account, delegates) for agents. If you actually wanted those to remain hidden and only the Security landing page + non-2FA rows exposed, let me know and I'll narrow it.
2. Verification: The sandbox in this run blocks running oxfmt/tsc/jest locally, so I couldn't run the formatter or tests here. I hand-matched the oxfmt line-wrapping (≤190 single-line, longer entries wrapped after () =>), but please let CI confirm the Oxfmt/typecheck/test checks are green.

[NicolasBonet]

@cretadn22 re-asking for approval as I was asked to add some more sections.

@joekaufmanexpensify this should be ready for your review as well

[cretadn22]

@NicolasBonet Could you update the PR description and testing steps?

[NicolasBonet]

@NicolasBonet Could you update the PR description and testing steps?

Done

[github-actions]

🚧 yuwenmemon has triggered a test Expensify/App build. You can view the workflow run here.

[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.

[github-actions]

🧪🧪 Use the links below to test this adhoc build on Android, iOS, and Web. Happy testing! 🧪🧪
Built from App PR #95421.

Android 🤖	iOS 🍎
https://ad-hoc-expensify-cash.s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/rock-artifacts/ad-hoc/rock-android-Adhoc-326d032dc7a-af7837c-0bcbdefb8be20baf0ecf6048cd7a7ee9de0f28ad/index.html	https://ad-hoc-expensify-cash.s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/rock-artifacts/ad-hoc/rock-ios-device-AdHoc-326d032-af7837c-088b7f64fc54efc914a619ca03252a95333703c0/index.html

Web 🕸️
https://95421.pr-testing.expensify.com

---

👀 View the workflow run that generated this build 👀

[OSBotify]

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/yuwenmemon in version: 9.4.32-0 🚀

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

[MelvinBot]

🤖 Help site review — no changes required

I reviewed the changes in this PR against the help site articles under App/docs/articles and no documentation updates are needed.

Why: This PR is an internal-visibility change. It reverses App#90248 so that internal agent accounts (agent_*@expensify.ai) once again see the Wallet, Preferences, Subscription, Contact methods, and Private personal-details sections in Account settings, while keeping Security's 2FA/biometrics options hidden. This only affects which Settings menu items render for the special internal agent-account type — it changes no customer-facing feature, flow, label, or behavior.

The help site's AI Agents articles (e.g. Create-and-Use-Custom-Agents.md) describe the AI Agents product feature conceptually — how to create and use custom agents — and never document which Account settings menu items are visible when signed into an agent account. Nothing in App/docs/articles describes this behavior, so there is nothing to update.

Since no changes are required, I did not open a draft help site PR.

What I checked

• Searched App/docs/articles for references to agent accounts, expensify.ai, and agent_ — the only matches are the AI Agents product articles, which describe the feature conceptually.
• Searched for any doc tying agent accounts to Wallet / Preferences / Subscription / Contact methods / settings-menu visibility — no matches.

If you feel a public-facing behavior here should be documented, reply with @MelvinBot and point me at the specific behavior and I'll draft the article.

[jponikarchuk]

Deploy Blocker #95712 was identified to be related to this PR.

[jponikarchuk]

Deploy Blocker #95726 was identified to be related to this PR.

[jponikarchuk]

Deploy Blocker #95730 was identified to be related to this PR.

[jponikarchuk]

Deploy Blocker #95755 was identified to be related to this PR.

[OSBotify]

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/grgia in version: 9.4.32-3 🚀

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

Bundle Size Analysis (Sentry):

• Android