[No QA][Payment due @ahmedGaber93] Docs updates for E/A#97998 document 500-expense per-report move limit

[MelvinBot]

Explanation of Change

Companion help-site update for #97998, which surfaces a warning and blocks moving an expense into a report that has already reached the 500-expense per-report limit (the modal reads: Reports are limited to 500 expenses. Please move some to another report.).

Previously, the Managing Expenses in a Report article documented how to move expenses between reports but did not mention the 500-expense limit anywhere. This PR documents that limit so the new blocking behavior is discoverable in help.

Changes

• Added a note in the How to Move or Remove Expenses from a Report section explaining the 500-expense per-report limit and the message shown when a destination report is full.
• Added the limit as a possible cause (and a matching solution) in the Why can't I move, edit, or delete expenses in a report? FAQ.

Guidelines applied

Reviewed and applied docs/HELPSITE_NAMING_CONVENTIONS.md, docs/HELP_AUTHORING_GUIDELINES.md, and docs/TEMPLATE.md. Changes are additive edits to an existing, compliant article: UI labels (Move expense(s), Remove from report, Create report) match the existing article and the app, no new headings were introduced, and the user-facing message is quoted verbatim from the source PR.

Related

• Source PR: Surface over-limit error when moving an expense to a report at the 500-transaction limit #97998
• Source issue: [Due for payment 2026-08-25] Full story: Moving an expense to a report with 500 transactions fails silently without an error message #97894

---

@ahmedGaber93, 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.

[OSBotify]

A preview of your ExpensifyHelp changes have been deployed to https://915c69ba.helpdot.pages.dev ⚡️

Updated articles:

• articles/new-expensify/reports-and-expenses/Managing-Expenses-in-a-Report

[MelvinBot]

Nothing to fix here — all real CI checks are green. ✅

The only check still showing red is Check independent approval, and that's not a code or CI failure. It fails by design until an independent internal reviewer approves the PR, so there's no fix I can push for it — it clears once someone approves.

Current check status

Check	Status
build	✅ pass
CLA	✅ pass
check	✅ pass
dryRun	✅ pass
spellcheck	✅ pass
validate	✅ pass
verify	✅ pass
verifySignedCommits	✅ pass
Check independent approval	❌ fail — needs an independent reviewer's approval (not fixable via code)

Everything else is either passing or skipped.

This is a docs-only PR, and the earlier build job that was pending has since finished successfully. No changes were needed.

[ahmedGaber93]

@MelvinBot Mark this PR ready for review

[MelvinBot]

🤖 Done — this PR is now marked Ready for review.

Since it's a docs-only change (a single help-site markdown file), no app testing was needed.

[ahmedGaber93]

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

[ahmedGaber93]

LGTM! CC @amyevans

[melvin-bot]

🎯 @ahmedGaber93, thanks for reviewing and testing this PR! 🎉

A payment issue will be created for your review once this PR is deployed to production.
E/E issue linked to the PR - no internal issue.

If payment is not needed (e.g., regression PR review fix etc), react with 👎 to this comment to prevent the payment issue from being created.

[github-actions]

HelpDot Documentation Review

Overall Assessment

This PR makes small, additive edits to the existing Managing Expenses in a Report article to document the new 500-expense per-report move limit (companion to #97998). No new headings, metadata, or structural changes are introduced. The additions slot into the existing, compliant "How to Move or Remove Expenses from a Report" section and the "Why can't I move, edit, or delete expenses in a report?" FAQ. The changes are accurate, well-scoped, and align with the source PR's blocking behavior.

Scores Summary

• Readability: 8/10 - Clear, plain-language guidance with a verbatim italicized system message. Slight nit: two consecutive Note: blocks now stack in the same section, which marginally reduces scannability.
• AI Readiness: 9/10 - Additions reuse existing task-based headings (correct per Section 4 of the authoring spec, no new headings introduced). Content is search-relevant ("500 expense limit") and uses full, UI-accurate phrasing. No metadata change required for additive edits.
• Style Compliance: 9/10 - UI labels are correctly bolded and match the app (Move expense(s), Remove from report, Create report). The blocking message is quoted verbatim in italics rather than restyled as a UI label, which is the right call. Note:/Solution: formatting and "Workspace Admins" terminology match the existing article and naming conventions.

Key Findings

• Additive, low-risk change that keeps the article single-workflow and does not disturb heading hierarchy or YAML frontmatter.
• The user-facing message is quoted exactly from the source PR, improving discoverability and matching the actual modal.
• The FAQ cause plus matching Solution update keeps the troubleshooting entry internally consistent.
• Minor: the new Note: about the limit sits directly above the pre-existing Note: about admins creating reports. Consider merging into a single note block or separating with context so two consecutive notes do not read as a wall.

Recommendations

• Optional polish: consolidate or visually separate the two stacked Note: blocks in the move/remove section for cleaner scanning.
• No blocking issues, safe to merge once @ahmedGaber93 confirms the behavior and message text match the shipped app.

Files Reviewed

• docs/articles/new-expensify/reports-and-expenses/Managing-Expenses-in-a-Report.md - Compliant additive edits; documents the 500-expense move limit in both the how-to section and the FAQ.

Note: This review covers only the proposed diff, not unchanged portions of the article.

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: d52af7565b

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".

[amyevans]

Looks good

[OSBotify]

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/amyevans in version: 9.4.56-0 🚀

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