feat: Add ManualSendMessageVisible

[LukasMod]

Explanation of Change

add ManualSendMessageVisible span (onLayout-anchored) alongside ManualSendMessage

What changed

Dual-emit: the existing ManualSendMessage span is untouched; a new ManualSendMessageVisible span starts at the same moment with identical attributes and ends at the message's onLayout (visibility) instead of the passive effect. After a comparison window in Sentry (~2 weeks), the effect-anchored span gets removed and ManualSendMessageVisible becomes the metric.

• src/CONST/index.ts — new SPAN_SEND_MESSAGE_VISIBLE: 'ManualSendMessageVisible'.
• src/pages/inbox/report/ReportActionCompose/useComposerSubmit.ts — starts both spans back-to-back with the same attributes (report_id, message length, source, list weight).
• src/pages/inbox/report/comment/TextCommentFragment.tsx
  • Original useEffect ending ManualSendMessage kept verbatim.
  • New onLayout handler ends ManualSendMessageVisible: on the existing outer <Text> (text path) and on a new plain <View onLayout> wrapper around RenderCommentHTML (HTML path — it has no layout hook of its own).
• src/hooks/useCancelSendMessageSpanOnSkeleton.ts — skeleton-cancel matches both ops. Prefix cancels (ReportLifecycleHandler, SearchMoneyRequestReportPage) cover the new span automatically since ManualSendMessage is a prefix of ManualSendMessageVisible.

Why

The span claims to measure "message sent → message visible", but its end is anchored in a passive effect.

onLayout is the codebase convention for paint spans: open_report warm ends on the report list's onLayout (ReportActionsList.tsx), ManualNavigateToReportsFirstPaint/ContentLoad end on onLayout (Search/index.tsx, SearchLoadingSkeleton.tsx), and the Visible suffix follows ManualSubmitToDestinationVisible. The effect anchor in send-message was never a deliberate choice — PR #75551 piggybacked endSpan onto a pre-existing useEffect that held the legacy Performance.markEnd(SEND_MESSAGE) call.

Expected numbers

ManualSendMessageVisible will report higher durations than ManualSendMessage. That gap is the JS-thread post-commit burst + frame delivery the effect anchor never saw — honest user-perceived latency, not a regression. When the old span is retired, dashboards/alerts need recalibration to the new baseline.

Validation plan

1. Ship dual-emit.
2. In Sentry, compare ManualSendMessage vs ManualSendMessageVisible distributions per platform for ~2 weeks (same start, same attributes — per-event delta is directly attributable to the anchor).
3. Remove the effect anchor, SPAN_SEND_MESSAGE constant usage in TextCommentFragment/useComposerSubmit, and the extra op check in useCancelSendMessageSpanOnSkeleton.

Risk

• One extra layout-event dispatch per message mount (handler always attached).
• One permanent plain View wrapper around every HTML-path comment — verified layout-neutral (see RENDER_COMMENT_HTML_TEST_MESSAGES.md / SEND_MESSAGE_SPAN_QA_TESTS.md).
• Doubled span volume for send-message during the comparison window.
• Span-leak safety: onLayout always fires on mount for both paths; skeleton/navigation cancel paths cover both spans.

Fixed Issues

$ #97902
PROPOSAL:

Tests

• Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Test 1 — plain text message

1. Open any chat.
2. Send: plain message

Expected: Message renders as before — alignment, width, spacing unchanged.

Test 2 — formatted (HTML) messages

Send each, compare rendering against staging/production side by side:

1. *bold* _italic_ ~strike~ normal
2. `inline code` inside a sentence
3. # Heading message
4. Multiline code block:

   ```
   const x = veryLongFunctionNameThatShouldNotWrapButScrollOrShrink(argument1, argument2);
   const y = 2;
   ```
   

5. check https://staging.new.expensify.com/r/123 inline
6. [labeled link](https://google.com)
7. @<any user login> hello
8. Blockquote:

   > quoted line one
   > quoted line two longer to force wrapping across the available width
   

9. *bold with 😀 emoji* and text
10. *aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa* (long unbroken string)
11. hello 😀 world and 😀😀😀 (web renders these via the HTML path; native as plain text)

Expected: Each message identical to staging/production — message width, code-block width, blockquote left border, mention pill, link styling, emoji size. No horizontal shift or extra vertical spacing.

Test 3 — edit and delete

1. Send *edit me*, then edit it to any other text.
2. Send *delete me*, go offline, delete it.

Expected: Edited label appears inline as before; deleted message shows strikethrough style; layout unchanged.

Test 5 — telemetry still fires (dev console, optional)

1. With browser console open, send any message.

Expected: Two "Ending span" logs per sent message: [Sentry][ManualSendMessage_<id>] and [Sentry][ManualSendMessageVisible_<id>], the Visible one with an equal or larger duration.

Offline tests

QA Steps

• 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 verified there are no new alerts related to the canBeMissing param for useOnyx
• 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 shown in the product is localized by adding it to src/languages/* files and using the translation method
    • If any non-english text was added/modified, I used JaimeGPT to get English > Spanish translation. I then posted it in #expensify-open-source and it was approved by an internal Expensify engineer. Link to Slack message:
  • I verified all numbers, amounts, dates and phone numbers shown in the product are using the localization methods
  • 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)
  • I verified proper file naming conventions were followed for any new files or renamed files. All non-platform specific files are named after what they export and are not named "index.js". All platform-specific files are named for the platform the code supports as outlined in the README.
  • I verified the JSDocs style guidelines (in STYLE.md) were followed
• 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)
• I verified all code is DRY (the PR doesn't include any logic written more than once, with the exception of tests)
• I verified any variables that can be defined as constants (ie. in CONST.ts or at the top of the file that uses the constant) are defined as such
• I verified that if a function's arguments changed that all usages have also been updated correctly
• 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.
• If a new page is added, I verified it's using the ScrollView component to make it scrollable when more elements are added to the page.
• 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

iOS: Native

iOS: mWeb Safari

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

[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/hooks/useCancelSendMessageSpanOnSkeleton.ts	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
...ox/report/ReportActionCompose/useComposerSubmit.ts	67.16% <0.00%> (ø)
...pages/inbox/report/comment/TextCommentFragment.tsx	78.18% <60.00%> (-2.22%)	⬇️
... and 462 files with indirect coverage changes

[LukasMod]

@codex review

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

Codex Review: Didn't find any major issues. Hooray!

Reviewed commit: 221232f5a6

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".

[melvin-bot]

@Ollyws 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]

[trjExpensify]

PR doesn’t need product input as a perf PR. Unassigning and unsubscribing myself.

[Ollyws]

@LukasMod Test 2, step 11 isn't working on web:

Screen.Recording.2026-08-08.at.12.51.33.mov

[LukasMod]

@Ollyws Could you explain exactly what is wrong in your video? I can’t see any difference in rendering between dev and staging.

[Ollyws]

Seems like it was a problem on my end, feel free to ignore.

[Ollyws]

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

[Ollyws]

LGTM.

[github-actions]

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

[github-actions]

🧪🧪 Use the links below to test this adhoc build on Android, iOS, and Web. Happy testing! 🧪🧪
Built from App PR #97789.

Android 🤖	iOS 🍎
https://ad-hoc-expensify-cash.s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/rock-artifacts/ad-hoc/rock-android-Adhoc-a9c401a-68dc4c6-da3d1d47bf2453a8468c0192b374eebf01a60cd6/index.html	https://ad-hoc-expensify-cash.s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/rock-artifacts/ad-hoc/rock-ios-device-AdHoc-a9c401a-68dc4c6-dc3edaf6396cc09dd265e21d511d655576ae9362/index.html

Web 🕸️
https://97789.pr-testing.expensify.com

---

👀 View the workflow run that generated this build 👀

[OSBotify]

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/Julesssss in version: 9.4.53-0 🚀

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

[MelvinBot]

🤖 No help site changes required — no draft docs PR was created.

I reviewed the changes in this PR and they are entirely internal performance instrumentation, with no customer-facing impact.

What this PR does: Adds a new observability span ManualSendMessageVisible (anchored to the message's onLayout paint) alongside the existing effect-anchored ManualSendMessage span, so the two can be compared in Sentry before the old anchor is retired.

Why no docs are needed:

• Every changed file is internal telemetry or a contributor guide — contributingGuides/OBSERVABILITY_METRICS.md, src/CONST/index.ts, useCancelSendMessageSpanOnSkeleton.ts, useComposerSubmit.ts, and TextCommentFragment.tsx.
• There is no change to user-facing behavior, UI, buttons, settings labels, feature names, pricing, or workflows. Sending a message renders exactly as before (the PR explicitly verifies layout-neutrality).
• The help site under docs/articles documents customer-facing product behavior; a Sentry span rename/re-anchor is not surfaced to customers, and a search of docs/articles found nothing that references this instrumentation.

Since no help-site changes are needed, there is no linked help site PR to review.