[annaweber830]

Explanation of Change

Adds the homePageNoRHP onboarding variant to CONST.ONBOARDING_RHP_VARIANT and its type, which is also what lets extractRHPVariantFromResponse accept it from the server. When an account has it, navigateAfterOnboarding closes the side panel and sends the user to Home at every company size, before the micro-company RHP checks run. If a report is already open it stays, same as the rhpHomePage path. Opening Concierge from Home already shows the Concierge DM for this value, because SidePanelContextProvider only picks #admins for rhpAdminsRoom and rhpHomePage, so I added a test for it instead of changing code. The other variants and the Submit workspace path are untouched, and unit tests cover the Home landing for micro, small and large companies. The backend doesn't assign homePageNoRHP yet (https://github.com/Expensify/Expensify/issues/679256), so nothing changes in production until it does.

Fixed Issues

$ #100238
PROPOSAL: #100238 (comment)

Tests

1. Type a new email. Then Continue, then Join.
2. What's your work email? → Skip
3. Manage my team's expenses
4. 10-50 employees → Continue (using a different size from the native video shows it works at any size)
5. What features are you interested in? → Continue
6. Do you use any accounting software? → scroll down → Other → Continue
7. You land on Home with no panel. Wait about 3 seconds.
8. Tap Help (top right, next to Search). The Concierge chat opens full screen.

• Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

Same as tests

QA Steps

No QA. We should QA it with the backend change that will come later.

• 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

issue-100238-android-native.mp4

Android: mWeb Chrome

issue-100238-android-mweb-chrome.mp4

iOS: Native

issue-100238-ios-native-manual.mp4

iOS: mWeb Safari

issue-100238-ios-mweb-safari-manual.mp4

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

issue-100238-macos-chrome.mp4

[melvin-bot]

@mkhutornyi 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]

[github-actions]

❌ CONSISTENCY-15 (docs)

The new @description line joins two independent clauses with a semicolon (...at every company size; opening Concierge shows the Concierge DM). CONSISTENCY-15 asks that comments read as plain, natural sentences and avoid semicolons in place of two separate sentences.

Split it into two sentences:

 * @description 'homePageNoRHP' - Land on Home with the side panel closed, at every company size. Opening Concierge shows the Concierge DM

---

Reviewed at: 95262ef | Please rate this suggestion with 👍 or 👎 to help us improve! Reactions are used to monitor reviewer efficiency.

[github-actions]

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

[mkhutornyi]

SidePanelActions.dismissSidePanel();

What's this line for?

[annaweber830]

Good catch, it isn't needed. For a new account nvp_sidePanel isn't set when onboarding finishes and nothing in the onboarding flow opens it, so the panel is already closed. I removed the line and changed the test to check that the side panel isn't opened.

[trjExpensify]

@neil-marcellini how can this be QA'd or tested properly without the BE? 🤔

No account gets homePageNoRHP until the backend starts assigning it, so this App change does nothing in production until then. That's intended.

[mkhutornyi]

I think this is not testable in staging. App PR should be deployed first

[mkhutornyi]

8. Tap Help (top right, next to Search). The Concierge chat opens full screen.

@annaweber830 this step seems wrong. Does it open full screen?

[MelvinBot]

Code review

The change looks correct and matches the issue. I found no blocking problems. CI tests, lint, and typecheck all pass.

The new homePageNoRHP branch runs before every other variant check. It sends the user to Home and never opens the side panel (navigateAfterOnboarding.ts:99-104). SidePanelContextProvider needs no change, and the other variants behave as before.

I have three non-blocking notes:

1. Native may not pick up the variant. On native, isSidePanelReportSupported is false (index.native.ts:3). That means completeOnboarding does not wait for the response and no variantOverride is passed (useCompleteOnboarding.ts:131). If the backend only sets homePageNoRHP in the CompleteGuidedSetup response, native users skip the new branch. They then go down the control path, which lands on Home or the last accessed report (navigateAfterOnboarding.ts:60-74). Native has no side panel, so this is probably fine. Please confirm that is the intended native behavior.
2. The PR description is out of date. It still says the branch "closes the side panel." Commit 56a78fbb removed that call, so please update the description.
3. QA can't run until the backend assigns the variant. As the reviewer noted, no account gets homePageNoRHP yet. Consider adding [No QA] to the title, or noting that QA should wait until the backend change ships.

---

view run

[mkhutornyi]

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

ios.mp4

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

web.mov

[MelvinBot]

Regression check

I found no regressions for accounts that exist today. The new code only runs when the variant is homePageNoRHP (navigateAfterOnboarding.ts:99-104). No account has that value yet. No code maps over every variant, so adding the new value to the type can't break another branch.

One future behavior change is worth confirming. It only matters once the backend assigns the new value:

• Track onboarding would skip the Concierge side panel. extractRHPVariantFromResponse now accepts homePageNoRHP (Report/index.ts:6184-6187). Before this PR, an unknown value came back as undefined, and Track choices fell back to trackExpensesWithConcierge (useAutoCreateTrackWorkspace.ts:126-133). If the backend gives a Track user homePageNoRHP, they now land on Home with no Concierge panel. Please confirm with the backend owner whether Track users can get this arm. If they shouldn't, the backend can exclude them, or the Track hook can ignore this value.

I also ran onboarding on web ("Manage my team's expenses", 10-50 employees), and the results are in the next comment. That run can't tell the new branch from the old one. The test email contains +, so the control path also skips #admins and lands on Home (useCompleteOnboarding.ts:148). It does show that the existing flow still finishes cleanly.

---

view run

[MelvinBot]

🤖 Web test steps verification results: ✅ pass

Onboarding with "Manage my team's expenses", 10-50 employees, and Other accounting software completed on desktop web. It landed on Home with no side panel open, and the Help button opened the Concierge DM in the side panel.

Step	Status
Onboarding completes without an error screen or stuck loading state Each of the 5 onboarding steps moved forward with no error banners or stuck spinners. The final Continue closed the modal and showed Home.	✅
Where the user lands, and side panel state The user landed on Home with no side panel open. Home showed the Getting started checklist. No #admins room or workspace overview opened. The tester couldn't read the nvp_onboardingRHPVariant value with the available tools.	✅
Click the Help/Concierge button next to Search The side panel opened with the Concierge DM and its onboarding task list. It opened as a side panel, not full screen.	✅
No JS console errors related to onboarding, navigation, or the side panel No error banners, toasts, or broken UI appeared. The tester couldn't read the browser console on web, so this check covers visible errors only.	✅

---

view run · view recording

[trjExpensify]

I think this is not testable in staging. App PR should be deployed first

Mhm, why App first? Also, if it's not testable, then we need to mark it as [No QA] to communicate that. CC: @neil-marcellini

[neil-marcellini]

I think this is not testable in staging. App PR should be deployed first

Mhm, why App first? Also, if it's not testable, then we need to mark it as [No QA] to communicate that. CC: @neil-marcellini

Yes, I think the app does need to go out first because when we change the backend, we are going to remove the task list from the admins room and send the new variants, including this homepage no RHP variant. If we send that from the backend before the frontend is ready, then it will fall through to the control variant default with no task list. It would also change what the variant experiment is tracking and the homepageNoRHP variant would be measuring the control variant for some time. I suppose it could technically happen, even if the frontend goes out first, if a user is on an old app version, but that's very unlikely, considering that this is an onboarding flow. I'll mark it No QA.

[neil-marcellini]

Looks great, thank you!

[neil-marcellini]

The PR author checklist was failing, but they clearly tried to fill it out, so I went ahead and merged.

[github-actions]

🚧 neil-marcellini 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 #102276.

Android 🤖	iOS 🍎
https://ad-hoc-expensify-cash.s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/rock-artifacts/ad-hoc/rock-android-Adhoc-142bca6-0ca1693-84df9b6e0c3fbf6eac62e247473dd73e57297dbe/index.html	https://ad-hoc-expensify-cash.s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/rock-artifacts/ad-hoc/rock-ios-device-AdHoc-142bca6-0ca1693-2a474f54e0d6f87b68f34465adfceee352769222/index.html

Web 🕸️
https://102276.pr-testing.expensify.com

---

👀 View the workflow run that generated this build 👀

[OSBotify]

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/neil-marcellini in version: 9.5.0-0 🚀

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

[MelvinBot]

No help site update is needed: this PR adds a new onboarding experiment variant (homePageNoRHP) that the backend doesn't assign yet, so no user sees a change and no article sentence becomes incorrect.

---

view run

[OSBotify]

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/Julesssss in version: 9.5.0-5 🚀

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

Bundle Size Analysis (Sentry):

• Android