[MelvinBot]

Explanation of Change

Help site updates for the behavior shipped in [CP prod] fix: The Violation column can be selected without the necessary filters.

That PR made the Violations column conditional: it is only listed in Display > Edit columns when the search has a has:submitted-violation or has:approved-violation filter, it can't be deselected while one of those filters is applied, and it is dropped from a saved column layout when both filters are removed. The help site documented Edit columns as a free choice of columns and never explained this dependency, so members who went looking for Violations had no article telling them why it wasn't there.

Docs-only change, no code touched. Three articles:

docs/articles/new-expensify/reports-and-expenses/Using-Reports-in-New-Expensify.md

• Added Violations to the list of available columns, noting it is only listed when you filter for violations.
• Added a new ## How to add the Violations column in Spend section with the steps to apply the filter, what happens to the column while the filter is applied, and what happens when the filter is removed.
• Noted that Submitted violation and Approved violation only appear under Has for members of a workspace with Rules enabled (gated by getHasOptionAvailability in src/libs/SearchUIUtils.ts), since that is the most likely reason a member can't find the filter at all.
• Corrected the button label View Results to View results to match the UI string in src/languages/en.ts.
• Added retrieval keywords for the column and both filter values.

docs/articles/new-expensify/reports-and-expenses/Use-Search-Operators-to-Filter-and-Analyze.md

• Added approved-violation to the documented values for the has: operator. It was missing, and this PR makes it a first-class trigger for the Violations column alongside submitted-violation.

docs/articles/new-expensify/insights/View-the-Violations-by-submitter-report.md

• Added an FAQ entry explaining why the Violations column doesn't appear in a member's own search. This article is where members first see the column, in the built-in Violations by submitter search, so it's where they'll ask why their own search doesn't have it.

UI labels (Spend, Display, Edit columns, Filters, Has, Submitted violation, Approved violation, View results) were verified against dev NewDot web and src/languages/en.ts. Writing follows docs/HELPSITE_NAMING_CONVENTIONS.md, docs/HELP_AUTHORING_GUIDELINES.md, and docs/TEMPLATE.md: no ### or deeper headings, task-based ## headings, exact UI labels in bold, and relative cross-links placed outside numbered steps.

Fixed Issues

$ #100877
PROPOSAL:

Tests

// TODO: The human co-author must fill out the tests you ran before marking this PR as "ready for review"

AI tests run by MelvinBot: none required. Per the test-selection-matrix skill, this change touches only markdown under docs/articles — no app code, no shell scripts, no docs routing or config, so no required-local bundle applies. cspell could not be run in this sandbox (the command was blocked); CI will run it.

• Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

QA Steps

// TODO: These must be filled out, or the issue title must include "[No QA]."

// TODO: The human co-author must fill out the QA tests you ran before marking this PR as "ready for review".

• 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

iOS: Native

iOS: mWeb Safari

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

---

@nkdengineer, please review the files changed and confirm they reflect the current behavior. Then post a new comment saying @MelvinBot mark this PR as ready for review.

[MelvinBot]

I created this PR from an upstream branch because I don't have push access to your fork.

To take ownership of this branch and be able to push updates, run:

git remote add upstream https://github.com/Expensify/App.git
git fetch upstream claude-violationsColumnDocs
git checkout -b claude-violationsColumnDocs upstream/claude-violationsColumnDocs
git push -u origin claude-violationsColumnDocs

Then you can close this PR and open a new one from your fork. If you only need to review the wording, no action is needed here.

[OSBotify]

A preview of your ExpensifyHelp changes have been deployed to https://c5ec0bd0.helpdot.pages.dev ⚡️

Updated articles:

• articles/new-expensify/insights/View-the-Violations-by-submitter-report
• articles/new-expensify/reports-and-expenses/Use-Search-Operators-to-Filter-and-Analyze
• articles/new-expensify/reports-and-expenses/Using-Reports-in-New-Expensify

[stephanieelliott]

Handled in Handled in #101948