Skip to content

[No QA] Update Concierge-Intelligence to remove exposed template bit #95450

Merged
VictoriaExpensify merged 1 commit into
mainfrom
stephanieelliott-patch-4
Jul 21, 2026
Merged

[No QA] Update Concierge-Intelligence to remove exposed template bit #95450
VictoriaExpensify merged 1 commit into
mainfrom
stephanieelliott-patch-4

Conversation

@stephanieelliott

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

the bottom of the article was showing /div, just removing that

@stephanieelliott stephanieelliott self-assigned this Jul 6, 2026
@github-actions

github-actions Bot commented Jul 6, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

HelpDot Documentation Review

Overall Assessment

This PR makes a minimal, purely cosmetic cleanup to docs/articles/new-expensify/concierge-ai/Concierge-Intelligence.md. It removes a stray closing </div> tag and a trailing blank line at the end of the file. No content, headings, metadata, or terminology were changed. Scores below reflect only the proposed diff, not the pre-existing article body.

Scores Summary

  • Readability: 10/10 - Removing an orphaned </div> tag has no negative impact on prose and eliminates stray markup that could render awkwardly.
  • AI Readiness: 10/10 - The change removes non-semantic HTML clutter, which is neutral-to-positive for retrieval. No metadata or heading structure was touched by this diff.
  • Style Compliance: 10/10 - Deleting an unmatched, non-standard HTML block improves compliance. No UI terminology, button, or navigation phrasing was affected.

Key Findings

  • The removed </div> had no matching opening tag, so deleting it is a correct cleanup that prevents malformed HTML in the rendered article.
  • The change is safe, low-risk, and does not alter any user-facing content.
  • Positive: the author correctly scoped this to a formatting fix rather than mixing in unrelated edits.
  • Note (out of scope for this PR): the existing article uses multiple top-level headings and non-task-based heading phrasing that do not align with HELP_AUTHORING_GUIDELINES.md Sections 2 and 4. These are pre-existing and are NOT introduced by this diff, so they are not scored here. They could be addressed in a dedicated follow-up.

Recommendations

  • No changes required. This diff is safe to merge as-is.
  • Optional follow-up (separate PR): convert the article to a single title heading with task-based subsection headings to fully meet the authoring guidelines.

Files Reviewed

  • docs/articles/new-expensify/concierge-ai/Concierge-Intelligence.md - Approved. Removes stray </div> and trailing blank line only; clean, low-risk cleanup.

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

@github-actions github-actions Bot changed the title Update Concierge-Intelligence to remove exposed template bit [No QA] Update Concierge-Intelligence to remove exposed template bit Jul 6, 2026
@OSBotify

OSBotify commented Jul 6, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

A preview of your ExpensifyHelp changes have been deployed to https://e3772b0c.helpdot.pages.dev ⚡️

Updated articles:

@stephanieelliott
stephanieelliott requested a review from a team July 8, 2026 22:01
@stephanieelliott
stephanieelliott requested review from a team and removed request for a team July 16, 2026 04:53
@melvin-bot

melvin-bot Bot commented Jul 16, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

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 @VictoriaExpensify

@melvin-bot
melvin-bot Bot requested review from VictoriaExpensify and removed request for a team July 16, 2026 04:53
@melvin-bot

melvin-bot Bot commented Jul 16, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

@VictoriaExpensify 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]

@stephanieelliott stephanieelliott added the HelpDot Apply this label if the issue relates to ExpensifyHelp label Jul 16, 2026
@VictoriaExpensify

VictoriaExpensify commented Jul 21, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

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 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
    • 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
    • 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 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
Android: mWeb Chrome
iOS: HybridApp
iOS: mWeb Safari
MacOS: Chrome / Safari

@VictoriaExpensify
VictoriaExpensify merged commit 06f3ca1 into main Jul 21, 2026
17 checks passed
@VictoriaExpensify
VictoriaExpensify deleted the stephanieelliott-patch-4 branch July 21, 2026 01:12
@OSBotify

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/VictoriaExpensify in version: 9.4.42-0 🚀

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

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

Labels

HelpDot Apply this label if the issue relates to ExpensifyHelp

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants