Skip to content

Conversation

@stephanieelliott
Copy link
Contributor

Product change issue: #75318

@stephanieelliott stephanieelliott self-assigned this Jan 17, 2026
@github-actions github-actions bot changed the title Update articles for Allow approvers to edit expenses on draft open reports [No QA] Update articles for Allow approvers to edit expenses on draft open reports Jan 17, 2026
@OSBotify
Copy link
Contributor

OSBotify commented Jan 17, 2026

@stephanieelliott stephanieelliott marked this pull request as ready for review January 17, 2026 03:16
@github-actions
Copy link
Contributor

HelpDot Documentation Review

Overall Assessment

This PR updates two documentation files to reflect a new product feature that allows current approvers to edit expenses on draft open reports. The changes are minimal but strategically placed to accurately reflect the expanded permissions. The updates are clear, consistent, and maintain the existing documentation structure well.

Scores Summary

  • Readability: 9/10 - The additions are clear and grammatically correct. The use of commas to list multiple roles ("The member who created the report, the current approver, and Workspace Admins") follows proper grammar conventions. However, there's a minor inconsistency in punctuation (missing period in one instance).
  • AI Readiness: 9/10 - The heading update in Managing-Expenses-in-a-Report.md ("Managing Expenses in a Report in New Expensify") improves AI context by including the full platform name. The keyword addition ("expense actions") enhances searchability. Clear role-based permissions are easy for AI to parse and understand.
  • Style Compliance: 8/10 - Terminology is consistent with Expensify standards ("Workspace Admin," "member," "current approver"). However, there's a minor punctuation inconsistency: one bullet ends with a period while others in the same list do not.

Key Findings

Strengths:

  • Precise targeting: Only the permission statements that needed updating were changed
  • Consistent terminology: "current approver" is used consistently across both files
  • Maintains existing structure: No unnecessary reformatting or restructuring
  • Clear context: The changes make it immediately clear who has what permissions
  • Improved heading: Adding "in New Expensify" to the main heading enhances discoverability

Issues Identified:

  1. Punctuation inconsistency in Managing-Expenses-in-a-Report.md (line 12): The first bullet ends with no period, but the updated version should match the pattern of the other bullets in the list
  2. Minor style note in Attach-and-edit-receipts-on-expenses.md (line 14): The original file uses "or" between roles, but after the update, the pattern changes slightly - this is acceptable but worth noting for consistency

Recommendations

Priority 1 - Must Fix:

  • Ensure consistent punctuation in the "Who can edit or modify expenses in a report" section in Managing-Expenses-in-a-Report.md. The first bullet should either have a period at the end (to match formal style) or none should have periods (current mixed state).

Priority 2 - Nice to Have:

  • Consider updating the FAQ section in Attach-and-edit-receipts-on-expenses.md (line 102-103) to reflect that current approvers can also attach receipts, not just "the expense creator or a Workspace Admin"

Files Reviewed

  1. docs/articles/new-expensify/reports-and-expenses/Attach-and-edit-receipts-on-expenses.md - Successfully updated to include current approver permissions for attaching/replacing receipts
  2. docs/articles/new-expensify/reports-and-expenses/Managing-Expenses-in-a-Report.md - Successfully updated to include current approver permissions for editing expenses, plus improved heading and keywords

Overall Recommendation

Approve with minor revisions. The documentation changes accurately reflect the product update and maintain good quality. The one punctuation inconsistency should be corrected, and the FAQ update would improve completeness. Otherwise, the changes are well-executed and ready for publication.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants