feat: Add Attendees to Edit multiple in expenses

[samranahm]

Explanation of Change

Fixed Issues

$ #94313
PROPOSAL: #94313 (comment)

Tests

Precondition:

• User has Attendees tracking enabled in Workspace Rules
• User is on the Control plan

1. Create some expenses and navigate to Spend > Reports.
2. Open a report that contains multiple expenses.
3. Select multiple expenses and click the green selected button.
4. Choose "Edit multiple" from the pop-up menu.
5. Verify that the "Attendees" field is present.
6. Open the Attendees page and verify no attendees is preselected.
7. Select some attendees, click Save, and verify that all selected attendees are shown in the "Attendees" field on the "Edit multiple expenses" page.
8. Click Save again and verify that the attendees are applied to all expenses selected in step 3.
9. Select multiple expenses again, open the "Edit multiple expenses" page, update other fields (such as Category, Merchant, and Description), then open the "Attendees" field again and select some attendees.
10. Click Save and verify that all selected expenses are updated with the values you chose.
11. Open Attendees page again and press save without selecting any attendees and verify “At least one attendee must be selected” error appear.

• Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

QA Steps

Same as test

// 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 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 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

Android: Native

Android: mWeb Chrome

Android.mWeb.Chrome.mp4

iOS: Native

IOS.Native.mp4

iOS: mWeb Safari

IOS.mWeb.Safari.mp4

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

macOS.Chrome.mp4

[melvin-bot]

@eh2077 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: fefa84706e

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Codex has been enabled to automatically 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 👍.

When you sign up for Codex through ChatGPT, Codex can also answer questions or update the PR, like "@codex address that feedback".

[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/CONST/index.ts	94.81% <ø> (ø)
src/ROUTES.ts	22.46% <ø> (ø)
src/SCREENS.ts	100.00% <ø> (ø)
src/libs/Navigation/linkingConfig/config.ts	66.66% <ø> (ø)
src/libs/ReportUtils.ts	86.65% <ø> (-0.03%)	⬇️
...gation/AppNavigator/ModalStackNavigators/index.tsx	6.41% <0.00%> (-0.01%)	⬇️
src/libs/actions/IOU/BulkEdit.ts	84.83% <87.50%> (+0.11%)	⬆️
...arch/SearchEditMultiple/SearchEditMultiplePage.tsx	0.00% <0.00%> (ø)
...pages/iou/request/MoneyRequestAttendeeSelector.tsx	0.00% <0.00%> (ø)
...arch/SearchEditMultiple/SearchEditMultipleUtils.ts	44.30% <0.00%> (-4.31%)	⬇️
... and 1 more
... and 10 files with indirect coverage changes

[Copilot]

Pull request overview

Adds bulk-edit support for Attendees when using Spend > Reports > select multiple expenses > Edit multiple, including navigation/route wiring and persistence via a dedicated API command.

Changes:

• Add “Attendees” as an editable field in the Search “Edit multiple” flow, including a new RHP page for selecting attendees.
• Update bulk-edit persistence to write attendees via UpdateMoneyRequestAttendees, including optimistic transaction updates and recent-attendee tracking.
• Add/extend unit tests to cover attendees-only updates and mixed (generic + attendees) updates.

Reviewed changes

Copilot reviewed 12 out of 12 changed files in this pull request and generated 2 comments.

Show a summary per file

File	Description
tests/actions/IOUTest/BulkEditTest.ts	Adds tests validating attendees persistence command selection and optimistic updates.
src/SCREENS.ts	Introduces a new Search bulk-edit attendees RHP screen constant.
src/ROUTES.ts	Adds the route for the Search bulk-edit attendees RHP page.
src/pages/Search/SearchEditMultiple/SearchEditMultipleUtils.ts	Adds selection-level gating to determine when attendees bulk edit is enabled.
src/pages/Search/SearchEditMultiple/SearchEditMultiplePage.tsx	Surfaces the Attendees field in the bulk-edit field list and includes it in save payload.
src/pages/Search/SearchEditMultiple/SearchEditMultipleAttendeesPage.tsx	New RHP page for choosing attendees and writing to the bulk-edit draft transaction.
src/pages/iou/request/MoneyRequestAttendeeSelector.tsx	Adjusts error-message behavior to avoid showing it during loading/transition.
src/libs/ReportUtils.ts	Allows bulk-editing the ATTENDEES edit-request field.
src/libs/Navigation/linkingConfig/config.ts	Wires deep linking config for the new attendees RHP screen/route.
src/libs/Navigation/AppNavigator/ModalStackNavigators/index.tsx	Registers the attendees RHP page in the Search modal stack navigator.
src/libs/actions/IOU/BulkEdit.ts	Implements attendees bulk-edit persistence (including optimistic updates and API command splitting).
src/CONST/index.ts	Adds ATTENDEES to EDIT_REQUEST_FIELD constants.

---

💡 Add Copilot custom instructions for smarter, more guided reviews. Learn how to get started.

[joekaufmanexpensify]

Good for product.

[eh2077]

Bug: One attendee selected shown from bulk edit when both transactions have two same attendees

I think the expected behavior should show no attendee selected, just like other field selectors. So bulk edit has consistent behavior for all fields - there's no default values and merged values until selecting some.

@joekaufmanexpensify do you agree?

Screen.Recording.2026-07-28.at.4.34.31.PM.mov

[joekaufmanexpensify]

Yep, I think that works. One note: an expense must always have one attendee. I assume we'll throw if the user tries to proceed without selecting at least one attendee? If so, good with me. 👍

[eh2077]

I assume we'll throw if the user tries to proceed without selecting at least one attendee?

yes, you're right we can't proceed if no attendee is selected.

Screen.Recording.2026-07-29.at.9.38.21.PM.mov

[joekaufmanexpensify]

Sounds good. This is good with me then. 👍

[eh2077]

@samranahm gentle bump on #97108 (comment) and #97108 (comment)

[samranahm]

Ahh, missed this one. Looking into it.

[samranahm]

I think the expected behavior should show no attendee selected, just like other field selectors. So bulk edit has consistent behavior for all fields - there's no default values and merged values until selecting some.

Agreed. We'll show the current user as the default attendee only for expenses that haven't been updated yet. Once an expense or all selected expenses has been updated, no attendee will be selected by default unless all the selected expenses have the same one attendee, and the user won't be able to save without selecting at least one attendee.

[joekaufmanexpensify]

Sounds good. Yep, as long as that's how the other fields work, sounds good to me.

[samranahm]

Sounds good. Looking at the other fields again and none of them preselect a value even when every selected expense already shares the same value (e.g. category). The only reason attendees has a default was to avoid the “At least one attendee must be selected” error on page open. We’re now deferring that error until the user tries to save with nothing selected, so attendees can start empty like the other fields and stay consistent.

[samranahm]

@eh2077 All yours, please take a look.

[samranahm]

Test steps updated.

[eh2077]

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

[samranahm]

Resolving merge conflicts.