[No QA] Help site updates: Insights Releases 2-8

[stephanieelliott]

Project tracking issue: https://github.com/Expensify/Expensify/issues/570577
Resource Management issue: https://github.com/Expensify/Expensify/issues/588072
Design issue:

Just noting this is built on a copy of the branch that creates the Top Categories report, opened this PR under the assumption that will be merged before this one is: #81051

[github-actions]

HelpDot Documentation Review

Overall Assessment

This PR introduces comprehensive Insights documentation with three new detailed articles (Insights Overview, Top Categories, Top Merchants) and updates to existing files. The documentation is well-structured, consistently formatted, and provides clear value to users. The writing is professional, accessible, and follows Expensify's documentation standards closely.

Scores Summary

• Readability: 9/10 - Clear, concise language with excellent logical flow. Sentences are well-constructed and appropriate for the target audience. Minor opportunity for simplification in a few technical explanations.
• AI Readiness: 9/10 - Strong YAML metadata with descriptive titles and keywords. Proper heading hierarchy throughout. Clear context and minimal vague references. Breadcrumb paths could be slightly enhanced.
• Style Compliance: 9/10 - Excellent adherence to Expensify voice and tone. Consistent terminology (workspace, member). Proper markdown formatting and FAQ structure. Image references follow conventions.

Key Findings

Strengths:

• Consistent structure across all three new Insights articles (Overview, Top Categories, Top Merchants)
• Comprehensive YAML metadata including title, description, keywords, and internalScope
• Clear "Who can use" sections with proper permission breakdowns
• Excellent use of cross-references between related articles
• Well-organized FAQ sections that address common user questions
• Proper markdown formatting throughout (headings, lists, links, images)
• Good balance of instructional content and explanatory context

Patterns Observed:

• All new files follow a consistent template: metadata, overview, permissions, location, interpretation, customization, FAQ
• Effective use of comparative FAQs ("What's the difference between X and Y?")
• Strong integration with existing documentation via contextual links
• Clear separation of web vs mobile instructions

Minor Areas for Improvement:

• Some sentences could be slightly more concise (e.g., "It's an easy way to" could be "Use this to")
• A few technical terms ("search query engine", "grouping operators") appear without initial context
• Image alt text could be more descriptive for accessibility
• One minor inconsistency: "Insights" vs "insights" capitalization in some contexts

Recommendations

High Priority:

1. Consider adding a brief introductory sentence before first use of "search query engine" to provide context for users unfamiliar with the underlying technology
2. Verify image paths are correct and images exist at specified locations

Medium Priority:

1. Standardize capitalization of "Insights" when referring to the feature (currently mixed)
2. Enhance image alt text for better accessibility (e.g., "Top Categories bar chart showing expenses grouped by category" instead of just "Top Categories bar chart")
3. Consider adding a "Next steps" section to guide users to related features

Low Priority:

1. Minor sentence tightening opportunities for improved conciseness
2. Consider adding more specific examples in the "Ways to use" sections

Files Reviewed

• Insights-Overview.md (new, 167 lines) - Excellent foundation document, clear structure, comprehensive coverage
• View-the-Top-Categories-report.md (new, 123 lines) - Well-organized, follows template consistently
• View-the-Top-Merchants-report.md (new, 133 lines) - Strong content, good FAQ section addressing merchant name variations
• View-the-Top-Spenders-report.md (8 lines changed) - Minor updates for consistency with new articles, improved FAQ
• Using-search-operators.md (12 lines added) - Valuable additions to grouping options, proper documentation of date filters

---

Overall Verdict: This is high-quality documentation that effectively introduces the Insights feature to users. The consistent structure, clear language, and comprehensive coverage make these articles ready for publication with only minor refinements recommended. The documentation successfully balances technical accuracy with user accessibility.

[OSBotify]

A preview of your ExpensifyHelp changes have been deployed to https://fe5e090b.helpdot.pages.dev ⚡️

Updated articles:

• articles/new-expensify/insights/How-to-Use-Insights-in-Expensify
• articles/new-expensify/insights/View-the-Top-Categories-report
• articles/new-expensify/insights/View-the-Top-Merchants-report
• articles/new-expensify/insights/View-the-Top-Spenders-report
• articles/new-expensify/reports-and-expenses/Using-search-operators

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: f4e1fcfeca

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".

[stephanieelliott]

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 there are no new alerts related to the canBeMissing param for useOnyx
• 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 shown in the product is localized by adding it to src/languages/* files and using the translation method
  • 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 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)
• 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
• 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.
• 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.
• 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

[stephanieelliott]

@trjExpensify this is ready for you

[trjExpensify]

Amazing job here! ❤️

[stephanieelliott]

I updated these docs to include references to Spend over time and Pie view since that is all on staging. Will spin up a separate PR for a standalone Spend over time article so we can time that for when that feature goes to prod.

[trjExpensify]

Back from OOO today. view:pie is still in review: #81000

I'll look to merge this once that's deployed.

[trjExpensify]

Pie is on staging. Making sure it gets through today's App deploy and then I'll final approve and merge this.

[trjExpensify]

Alrighty, let's do it! 👍

[OSBotify]

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/trjExpensify in version: 9.3.28-0 🚀

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

[OSBotify]

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/trjExpensify in version: 9.3.30-0 🚀

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

[OSBotify]

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/blimpich in version: 9.3.30-3 🚀

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