Fix Rules revamp regressions on Collect workspaces

[Krishna2323]

Explanation of Change

Fixed Issues

$ #97641
$ #97922
$ #97840
$ #97839
PROPOSAL:

Tests

#97641 — Category rules on Collect

1. On a Collect workspace, go to Settings → Categories → open a category.
2. Verify Description hint, Approver, and Category rules are visible without upgrading.
3. Open Description hint and verify it goes to the Rules upgrade page, not Not Here. Upgrade and verify you return to Description hint.
4. On a fresh Collect workspace, repeat for Approver, Create new rule, and an existing Category rule.
5. From the upgrade page, press Back and verify you return to the category page.
6. Disable Rules from More features and verify Category rules is hidden.
7. On Tags, verify Tag rules → Approver is visible on Collect.
8. On Control, verify all category rows open directly without an upgrade page.

#97839 — Categories blocked by accounting

1. On a workspace with Categories disabled, connect an accounting integration.
2. Go to Rules → Field requirements → Create rule → Category → Enable categories.
3. Verify the Not so fast modal appears. Confirm → Accounting page; Cancel → Categories remain disabled.
4. Repeat from Flag for review → Create rule → Category.
5. Disconnect accounting, repeat the flow, and verify Categories can be enabled.

#97840 — Category empty state

1. On iOS/Android with Categories disabled, open Rules → Field requirements → Create rule → Category.
2. Rotate to landscape and verify the empty state is centered and Enable categories is fully visible.
3. Return to portrait and verify the layout remains correct.

#97922 — Rules tab after upgrading

1. On Collect, go to Rules → General → Agents banner → Try it out → Upgrade → Got it, thanks.
2. Verify you land on Agents, and Back leaves Rules without an extra Rules page.
3. Repeat for Card restrictions, Expense defaults, Field requirements, and Flag for review; verify each returns to the selected tab.
4. Back out of an upgrade without upgrading and verify you return to General.
5. After landing on Agents, switch between tabs and verify the selected tab doesn't reset.
6. On Control, verify all tabs open directly.
7. Upgrade Rules via More features and verify you return to More features as before.

• Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

• Same as test

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
  • MacOS: Desktop
• 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

web_chrome_97840.mp4

iOS: mWeb Safari

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

web_chrome_97641.mp4

web_chrome_97922.mp4

web_chrome_97839.mp4

[melvin-bot]

@situchan 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]

[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
...s/RequireFieldsRules/RequireFieldsRulePageBase.tsx	0.00% <0.00%> (ø)
...c/pages/workspace/upgrade/WorkspaceUpgradePage.tsx	42.70% <66.66%> (-0.30%)	⬇️
src/ROUTES.ts	23.37% <0.00%> (+0.14%)	⬆️
...rc/pages/workspace/tags/DynamicTagSettingsPage.tsx	0.00% <0.00%> (ø)
...rc/pages/workspace/rules/PolicyRulesPageRevamp.tsx	2.17% <0.00%> (-0.05%)	⬇️
...ages/workspace/categories/CategorySettingsPage.tsx	0.00% <0.00%> (ø)
...mponents/Rule/RuleCategoriesDisabledEmptyState.tsx	0.00% <0.00%> (ø)
... and 249 files with indirect coverage changes

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: 84d9256b5b

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to 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 👍.

Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".

[Krishna2323]

@MelvinBot review

[MelvinBot]

Review

Overall this is a clean, well-reasoned set of fixes for the four Collect-workspace Rules-revamp regressions, and the explanatory comments on each change are genuinely helpful. I found no blocking issues. A few notes below — mostly a latent-fragility flag and a testing-coverage gap.

Verified as correct:

• arePolicyRulesEnabled(policy, categories, isRulesRevampEnabled) — the new 3rd arg defaults to false, so all existing callers keep their old behavior; only the intended call sites (Category settings, Tag settings) opt into the revamp gating. ✅
• ?tab= query param round-trips correctly: the WORKSPACE.RULES linking config has no explicit parse, so React Navigation auto-parses the string query into route.params.tab, matching the new tab?: string in types.ts. ✅
• compareParams: false on the Rules goBack is the right call given the backTo now carries a ?tab= — with param comparison the tab-bearing route wouldn't match the mounted one and would replace instead of pop. ✅

1. Latent fragility — the new draft-clear cleanup depends on an unenforced navigation invariant (non-blocking)

The new unmount cleanup in RequireFieldsRulePageBase.tsx:165:

useEffect(() => () => clearDraftRequireFieldsRule(), []);

is safe as currently routed — I traced both the category-change and sub-page-navigation paths. The category picker is pushed onto the same RHP stack (base page stays mounted) and its goBack returns to the same route key as the mounted base page, so it pops rather than remounts. The cleanup therefore only fires on a genuine unmount (leaving the flow / save), which is the intended behavior.

The fragility: this safety depends entirely on the picker's backTo continuing to match the base page's route key. The code in RequireFieldsRulesUtils.ts:756-758 already warns about exactly the ?categoryName=-mismatch bug that causes a remount. Previously such a remount was benign (derived-state rebuild handled it); with this cleanup, a remount would fire clearDraftRequireFieldsRule() and wipe the just-selected category before the new instance reseeds. Consider a small regression test asserting the require-fields category picker returns to the same route key, so this invariant can't silently regress.

2. Two effects both drive the Rules tab — worth confirming they can't race (non-blocking)

In PolicyRulesPageRevamp.tsx two effects call Tab.setSelectedTab:

• Effect A ([activeTab, policy]) forces Collect policies back to GENERAL.
• Effect B ([requestedTab]) applies the ?tab= param.

Since requestedTab is only ever set by the upgrade backTo (by which point the policy is Control), Effect A is inert and they don't conflict — this is fine. Just flagging that if the policy is momentarily still Collect while Onyx hydrates right after upgrade, Effect A → GENERAL could briefly compete with Effect B → requestedTab. Low risk; noting it in case the target tab ever flickers on slow hydration.

3. Minor: tab is typed as bare string

getRoute(policyID, tab?: string) and the nav param type use string rather than the RulesTab union. It's runtime-validated with isRulesTab, so this is safe — just a slightly looser type than it could be.

Testing note: I tried to verify the Collect flows live on web, but the Melvin test account doesn't have the rulesRevamp beta enabled and only had a Collect workspace, so the Category-settings → upgrade rows never render and the core beta-gated flows couldn't be exercised. I did confirm the app renders correctly and that the analogous Rules toggle in More features on a Collect workspace routes to the Upgrade page (not a Not Found), matching the intended pattern. The PR has iOS Native + macOS videos, but the Android: Native, Android: mWeb, and iOS: mWeb screenshot sections are empty despite the checklist marking all platforms tested — worth attaching those, especially the #97840 landscape empty-state fix which is mobile-specific.

Nice work — the fixes look correct and the inline comments make the intent easy to follow.

[JS00001]

shouldnt later manual tab presses change the url?

[Krishna2323]

They don't, intentionally — the selected tab lives in Onyx (CONST.TAB.RULES_TAB_TYPE) so it persists after you leave and come back, and the tab param is only an entry hint for deep links and the post-upgrade back behaviour. Putting it in the URL on every press would mean two sources of truth for the same state. Tough the comment needs update, its a bit confusing.

[situchan]

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

Android: mWeb Chrome

iOS: HybridApp

iOS: mWeb Safari

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

97641.mov

97922.mov

97839.mov

97840.mov

[JmillsExpensify]

LGTM

[situchan]

Regarding #97922:
Should we also support device back button or modal backdrop press?

Screen.Recording.2026-08-11.at.2.16.52.PM.mov

Screen.Recording.2026-08-11.at.2.17.29.PM.mov

[situchan]

Bug: after upgrade and switch to the targeted tab, tab query persists in navigation route so it ends up always showing persisted tab even after refresh on another tab

Screen.Recording.2026-08-11.at.2.22.29.PM.mov

[situchan]

Looks good except above 2

[JS00001]

@Krishna2323 please take a look at those, then we can continue on with this one

[Krishna2323]

Should we also support device back button or modal backdrop press?

I think this isn't supported anywhere in the app

Monosnap.screencast.2026-08-12.05-48-56.mp4

[Krishna2323]

Bug: after upgrade and switch to the targeted tab, tab query persists in navigation route so it ends up always showing persisted tab even after refresh on another tab

@situchan fixed:

Monosnap.screencast.2026-08-12.05-53-22.mp4

[situchan]

Bug: after upgrade and switch to the targeted tab, tab query persists in navigation route so it ends up always showing persisted tab even after refresh on another tab

@situchan fixed:

Monosnap.screencast.2026-08-12.05-53-22.mp4

@Krishna2323 This is still not fixed.

Repro step: deep link to .../rules?tab=cardRestrictions, switch to another tab and refresh

Screen.Recording.2026-08-12.at.9.52.54.AM.mov

[situchan]

Maybe not bug?: Enable Category RHP is not closed when click device/browser back button

Screen.Recording.2026-08-12.at.9.50.37.AM.mov

[Krishna2323]

Repro step: deep link to .../rules?tab=cardRestrictions, switch to another tab and refresh

Fixed

[Krishna2323]

Maybe not bug?: Enable Category RHP is not closed when click device/browser back button

Seems expected to me

[JS00001]

Yeah, that issue looks expected to me

[github-actions]

🚧 JS00001 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 #98236.

Android 🤖	iOS 🍎
https://ad-hoc-expensify-cash.s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/rock-artifacts/ad-hoc/rock-android-Adhoc-a3adc2f-b9ee1a7-7c482cba6b36bc94c9ba8ce4e553c622902f28eb/index.html	https://ad-hoc-expensify-cash.s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/rock-artifacts/ad-hoc/rock-ios-device-AdHoc-a3adc2f-b9ee1a7-50de23b91173660fd6321acc1481508ef53d23fd/index.html

Web 🕸️
https://98236.pr-testing.expensify.com

---

👀 View the workflow run that generated this build 👀

[OSBotify]

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/JS00001 in version: 9.4.53-0 🚀

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

[MelvinBot]

🤖 No help site changes required.

I reviewed the changes in this PR against the help articles under App/docs/articles, applying HELPSITE_NAMING_CONVENTIONS.md, HELP_AUTHORING_GUIDELINES.md, and TEMPLATE.md.

This PR is a set of navigation/UI regression fixes for the Rules revamp on Collect workspaces — it restores intended behavior rather than introducing or changing any documented, user-facing capability:

• Category/Tag rule rows on Collect now route to the Rules upgrade page instead of hitting a Not Found page (CategorySettingsPage.tsx, DynamicTagSettingsPage.tsx).
• Preserves the selected Rules tab when bouncing back after an upgrade (ROUTES.ts, PolicyRulesPageRevamp.tsx, WorkspaceUpgradePage.tsx).
• Fixes the "enable Categories" flow when blocked by an active accounting connection, and centers the categories-disabled empty state (RuleCategoriesDisabledEmptyState.tsx).

The one relevant article — Workspace Rules — already documents Category Rules, Tag Rules, and that "Only Workspace Admins on the Control plan can enable, update, or disable workspace rules." That statement remains accurate: the plan gating and the set of documented rules are unchanged. The fixes here are internal routing/state corrections (upgrade prompt vs. Not Found, tab restoration, empty-state layout) that the help site doesn't describe and doesn't need to.

Since no documented behavior changed, I did not create a draft help site PR.

@Krishna2323, if you believe any of these flows are described on the help site and should be updated, let me know which article and I'll draft the change.