Filter hidden Account Managers from search From filter and scope to workspace members by MelvinBot · Pull Request #84376 · Expensify/App

MelvinBot · 2026-03-06T08:09:26Z

Explanation of Change

Account Managers (AMs) are added as "hidden" members of managed customer workspaces with notificationPreference: 'hidden'. They should be invisible to the customer, but were appearing in the "From" filter on the Reports/Search page. To match Classic behavior, this PR:

Excludes hidden participants from report-based options — processReport in OptionsListUtils now passes shouldExcludeHidden=true to getParticipantsAccountIDsForDisplay, consistent with other call sites at lines 1123 and 1184 that already pass true.
Scopes the From filter to workspace members only — Adds a shouldScopeToWorkspaceMembers prop to SearchFiltersParticipantsSelector that collects all workspace member accountIDs across the user's policies via getMemberAccountIDsForWorkspace and filters the personalDetails suggestions to only those members.
Enables free text email input in the From filter — When shouldScopeToWorkspaceMembers is enabled, the component allows users to type arbitrary emails that aren't in the suggestion list, matching Classic's behavior. The userToInvite option is included in sections so typed emails appear as selectable entries.

Fixed Issues

$ #83879
PROPOSAL: #83879 (comment)

Tests

Log in and navigate to the Reports/Search page
Click the "From" filter (or navigate to advanced filters > From)
Verify only workspace members appear in the suggestions (no Account Managers or random contacts)
Type an arbitrary email like test@example.com in the search field
Verify a selectable option appears for the typed email
Select the typed email and verify it's added as a selected filter
Click "Save" and verify the filter is applied

Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

Go offline and open the From filter
Verify previously loaded workspace members still appear from cached data
Verify the filter works as expected when no network is available

QA Steps

Log in as a managed customer (one who has an Account Manager assigned to their workspace)
Navigate to the Reports page > click the "From" filter
Verify the Account Manager does NOT appear in the filter suggestions
Verify workspace members DO appear in the suggestions
Type an arbitrary email in the search field and verify it appears as a selectable option

Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

PR Author Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

Android: Native

Android: mWeb Chrome

iOS: Native

iOS: mWeb Safari

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

Tested on web — From filter shows workspace members only and accepts free text email input.

Account Managers added as hidden members of managed customer workspaces were appearing in the From filter on the Reports page. This change: 1. Passes shouldExcludeHidden=true in processReport so hidden participants are excluded from report-based option lists 2. Adds shouldScopeToWorkspaceMembers prop to SearchFiltersParticipantsSelector which filters personal details to only workspace members across all user policies 3. Enables free text email input in the From filter so users can type arbitrary emails not in the suggestion list Co-authored-by: DylanDylann <DylanDylann@users.noreply.github.com>

When allowFreeTextInput is true, include the userToInvite option in the sections list so typed emails that don't match existing options appear as selectable entries. Co-authored-by: DylanDylann <DylanDylann@users.noreply.github.com>

MelvinBot · 2026-03-06T08:09:46Z

I created this PR from an upstream branch since 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-filterHiddenAMsFromSearchFilters
git checkout -b claude-filterHiddenAMsFromSearchFilters upstream/claude-filterHiddenAMsFromSearchFilters
git push -u origin claude-filterHiddenAMsFromSearchFilters

Then you can close this PR and open a new one from your fork.

Co-authored-by: DylanDylann <DylanDylann@users.noreply.github.com>

MelvinBot · 2026-03-06T08:11:58Z

Fixed the failing Prettier check. The formatting issues were in src/components/Search/SearchFiltersParticipantsSelector.tsx:

Corrected import ordering (getMemberAccountIDsForWorkspace moved after type imports from @libs/OptionsListUtils)
Expanded the useMemo dependency array into multi-line format per Prettier rules

DylanDylann · 2026-03-06T08:27:18Z

@MelvinBot Mark this PR as ready

MelvinBot · 2026-03-06T08:28:41Z

PR has been marked as ready for review.

melvin-bot · 2026-03-06T08:28:43Z

@DylanDylann 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]

melvin-bot · 2026-03-06T08:29:25Z

@inimaga 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]

DylanDylann · 2026-03-06T08:31:38Z

@MelvinBot We got failed test

DylanDylann · 2026-03-06T08:31:47Z

@codex review

…processReport The processReport change to exclude hidden participants via getParticipantsAccountIDsForDisplay(report, true) caused report 12 (thread with only hidden participants) to be dropped from OPTIONS entirely, making the old excludeHiddenThreads subtraction incorrect. - Add visible participant (current user) to report 11 fixture so it remains in the option list while still having a hidden participant - Update 4 test assertions that previously subtracted 1 for the hidden thread, since it's now excluded at the processReport level Co-authored-by: DylanDylann <DylanDylann@users.noreply.github.com>

MelvinBot · 2026-03-06T08:41:17Z

Fixed the failing test (job 5) check — 8 test failures in OptionsListUtilsTest.tsx.

Root cause: The processReport change to pass shouldExcludeHidden=true to getParticipantsAccountIDsForDisplay caused report 12 (a thread with only hidden participants) to be excluded from OPTIONS at the processReport level, rather than later by the excludeHiddenThreads filter. This made the test assertions that subtracted 1 for the hidden thread incorrect (double-counting the exclusion).

Fix:

Added the current user (accountID 2) as a visible participant to report 11 in the test fixture, so it remains in the option list while still testing the hidden participant behavior
Updated 4 test assertions that subtracted for the hidden thread, since it's now excluded earlier in the pipeline

melvin-bot · 2026-03-06T08:41:29Z

@Gonals 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]

chatgpt-codex-connector

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: cf577856f3

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".

chatgpt-codex-connector · 2026-03-06T08:41:37Z

src/components/Search/SearchFiltersParticipantsSelector.tsx

+        }
+        memberIDs.add(currentUserAccountID);
+        return memberIDs;
+    }, [shouldScopeToWorkspaceMembers, allPolicies, currentUserAccountID]);


Recompute workspace member IDs after personal details hydrate

workspaceMemberAccountIDs is memoized without any dependency on personal details, but getMemberAccountIDsForWorkspace() resolves each member through getPersonalDetailByEmail (src/libs/PolicyUtils.ts:513). On cold start or partial Onyx hydration, policies can load before personal details, so this memo captures an incomplete member set and never refreshes, causing valid workspace members to be missing from the From filter until policies change. Include personal-details state in this memo (or derive account IDs directly from the already-available personalDetails) so the scoped list stays correct.

Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.

codecov · 2026-03-06T08:49:30Z

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
src/libs/OptionsListUtils/index.ts	`80.03% <100.00%> (-0.16%)`	⬇️
...earchAdvancedFiltersPage/SearchFiltersFromPage.tsx	`0.00% <ø> (ø)`
...nents/Search/SearchFiltersParticipantsSelector.tsx	`0.00% <0.00%> (ø)`
... and 6 files with indirect coverage changes

MelvinBot · 2026-03-06T09:01:59Z

I ran out of time before I could finish helping you. This usually means the task was too complex or I got stuck exploring. Please try again with a more specific request or post in the #melvinbot-ai.

Run details: https://github.com/Expensify/Expensify/actions/runs/22755517486

DylanDylann · 2026-03-06T09:29:57Z

Let me check

trjExpensify

Agreed product change in Slack, but please get videos up and test this a bunch.

MelvinBot and others added 2 commits March 6, 2026 07:57

MelvinBot assigned DylanDylann Mar 6, 2026

MelvinBot requested a review from a team March 6, 2026 08:09

MelvinBot mentioned this pull request Mar 6, 2026

[$250] Reports - Both current and previous account managers are appearing in the managed customers accounts when using filters #83879

Open

7 tasks

Fix: Apply Prettier formatting to SearchFiltersParticipantsSelector

cf57785

Co-authored-by: DylanDylann <DylanDylann@users.noreply.github.com>

MelvinBot marked this pull request as ready for review March 6, 2026 08:28

MelvinBot requested a review from a team as a code owner March 6, 2026 08:28

melvin-bot bot requested review from DylanDylann and removed request for a team March 6, 2026 08:28

melvin-bot bot requested review from a team, inimaga and trjExpensify and removed request for a team March 6, 2026 08:28

MelvinBot requested a review from a team as a code owner March 6, 2026 08:40

melvin-bot bot requested review from Gonals and removed request for a team March 6, 2026 08:41

chatgpt-codex-connector bot reviewed Mar 6, 2026

View reviewed changes

trjExpensify reviewed Mar 6, 2026

View reviewed changes

Conversation

MelvinBot commented Mar 6, 2026

Explanation of Change

Fixed Issues

Tests

Offline tests

QA Steps

PR Author Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

Uh oh!

MelvinBot commented Mar 6, 2026

Uh oh!

MelvinBot commented Mar 6, 2026

Uh oh!

DylanDylann commented Mar 6, 2026

Uh oh!

MelvinBot commented Mar 6, 2026

Uh oh!

melvin-bot bot commented Mar 6, 2026

Uh oh!

melvin-bot bot commented Mar 6, 2026

Uh oh!

DylanDylann commented Mar 6, 2026

Uh oh!

DylanDylann commented Mar 6, 2026

Uh oh!

MelvinBot commented Mar 6, 2026

Uh oh!

melvin-bot bot commented Mar 6, 2026

Uh oh!

chatgpt-codex-connector bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

💡 Codex Review

Uh oh!

chatgpt-codex-connector bot Mar 6, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

codecov bot commented Mar 6, 2026 • edited by github-actions bot Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Codecov Report

Uh oh!

MelvinBot commented Mar 6, 2026

Uh oh!

DylanDylann commented Mar 6, 2026

Uh oh!

trjExpensify left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

3 participants

codecov bot commented Mar 6, 2026 •

edited by github-actions bot

Loading