[No QA] Remove unsafe type assertions from ten test files

[KJ21-ENG]

Explanation of Change

This issue 94739 cleanup removes unsafe type assertions from ten authorized test targets. It replaces them with production-linked types, typed mocks and fixtures, and narrow exceptions only for intentionally malformed runtime fixtures. Current main renamed StateSelectionPageTest.tsx to DynamicStateSelectionPageTest.tsx; the guarded rebuild preserves that rename and the current Dynamic page scenarios. No production source files are changed.

Fixed Issues

$ #94739
PROPOSAL: #94739 (comment)

Tests

1. Deterministic focused verification passed for the complete ten-file Jest selection, formatter, and individually scoped lint checks.
2. Exact-head Fork CI run 30627964194 passed typecheck, lint, format, React Compiler, and Jest for faa811f10ad2d7e023a90b5160bd1eb49f8623df.
3. git diff --check passed and the generated Seatbelt TSV was restored.
4. No manual platform or JS-console testing was performed; this is automated test-only evidence.

Offline tests

N/A: this is a test-only type-safety cleanup with no application runtime or network behavior change. Offline and spotty-network manual testing were not performed.

QA Steps

N/A under the [No QA] title: this PR changes test code only. No staging, production, High Traffic account, platform, failure-scenario, or manual QA testing was performed.

Count change

Current baseline source: the tracked Seatbelt TSV at original run base 2c95456c78d65e54730dcde1f758292472ab59fa; the StateSelectionPageTest.tsx entry subsequently migrated to its deterministic rename successor DynamicStateSelectionPageTest.tsx.

Before:

• tests/ui/AuthScreensInitHandlerTest.tsx: 7
• tests/ui/StateSelectionPageTest.tsx: 7
• tests/ui/StateSelectorModalTest.tsx: 7
• tests/unit/ChatGPTTranslatorTest.ts: 7
• tests/unit/DeeplinkRouteNormalizationTest.ts: 7
• tests/unit/FailureTrackingTest.ts: 7
• tests/unit/PersistedRequests.ts: 7
• tests/unit/QuickActionUtilsTest.ts: 7
• tests/unit/chunkLoadErrorRecoveryTest.ts: 7
• tests/unit/hooks/useAllTransactions.test.ts: 7

After:

• tests/ui/AuthScreensInitHandlerTest.tsx: 0
• tests/ui/DynamicStateSelectionPageTest.tsx: 0
• tests/ui/StateSelectorModalTest.tsx: 0
• tests/unit/ChatGPTTranslatorTest.ts: 0
• tests/unit/DeeplinkRouteNormalizationTest.ts: 0
• tests/unit/FailureTrackingTest.ts: 0
• tests/unit/PersistedRequests.ts: 0
• tests/unit/QuickActionUtilsTest.ts: 0
• tests/unit/chunkLoadErrorRecoveryTest.ts: 0
• tests/unit/hooks/useAllTransactions.test.ts: 0

Net reduction:

• 70 unsafe-type-assertion findings removed across ten targets.

TSV evidence: deterministic verification reported zero for every rebuilt target and restored config/eslint/eslint.seatbelt.tsv after counting.

PR Author Checklist

All checklist entries were considered. Platform, offline, screenshots, assets, CSS, UI, copy, production API, markdown, Storybook, generic-component, and manual-console items are N/A because this is a test-only cleanup; no unsupported manual testing is claimed. The test changes and current-main rebuild were covered by focused verification, three independent reviews, and exact-head Fork CI.

• 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

N/A: no UI or runtime behavior changed, and no screenshots or videos were produced.

Changed files (10)

• tests/ui/AuthScreensInitHandlerTest.tsx
• tests/ui/DynamicStateSelectionPageTest.tsx
• tests/ui/StateSelectorModalTest.tsx
• tests/unit/ChatGPTTranslatorTest.ts
• tests/unit/DeeplinkRouteNormalizationTest.ts
• tests/unit/FailureTrackingTest.ts
• tests/unit/PersistedRequests.ts
• tests/unit/QuickActionUtilsTest.ts
• tests/unit/chunkLoadErrorRecoveryTest.ts
• tests/unit/hooks/useAllTransactions.test.ts

[melvin-bot]

@ikevin127 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]

[ikevin127]

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.

[ikevin127]

🟢 LGTM

Notes (no change requested)

• The two new @ts-expect-error Intentionally exercise the runtime guard... in useAllTransactions.test.ts are the honest way to inject null/undefined entries into a strictly-typed SearchResults['data'] to exercise the hook's runtime filtering. They are narrowly scoped to exactly the two malformed entries, carry a clear reason, and are a different rule from the one this issue targets. The rest of that object is now fully type-checked via createMock, which is stricter than the old whole-object as unknown as SearchResults.
• class MockFile extends Blob in PersistedRequests.ts is a real File stub replacing function MockFile() {} + as unknown as typeof File + Object.create(...) as File. global.File = MockFile now typechecks with no cast because the class actually implements the File surface. Good direction.
• chunkLoadErrorRecoveryTest.ts deletes the local type ComponentImport<T> and uses jest.fn<Promise<{default: ComponentType}>, []>() instead of as unknown as ComponentImport<...> — exactly the "typed jest.fn, no local type" pattern.