[Performance] Cancel telemetry span when user discards expense without submitting

[JakubKorytko]

Explanation of Change

Fix telemetry spans that linger when users discard an expense (navigate back from Confirmation after pressing Submit). The fix has two layers:

1. Primary: Call cancelTracking() at the top of navigateBack in IOURequestStepConfirmation. The orchestrator never uses navigateBack (it uses dismissModal), so this unambiguously means the user is abandoning the flow - cancel any active span regardless of pending state.

2. Fallback: A useEffect cleanup that cancels tracking on unmount when no pendingSubmitFollowUpAction is set. This catches gesture/hardware back that bypasses navigateBack, but only for the DEFAULT handler case where pending hasn't been set yet.

Also exported cancelTracking from the submitFollowUpAction module.

Sentry Evidence

Trace 1f7d2097 (Web, Safari/Mac, 13.6s, manual expense): The user clicked Submit, then navigated back and discarded changes (breadcrumbs show "Discard changes" button tap, navigation back to manual start page). Despite never completing the submission, the span ran for 13.6s and ended with finished_manually: true. This pollutes metrics with durations that don't represent real submit-to-visible time.

Fixed Issues

$ #94464
PROPOSAL: N/A

Tests

1. From any page, tap the global FAB and select "Create expense"
2. Fill in the details but do not submit
3. Press the Back button to discard the expense
4. Verify that no [Sentry][ManualSubmitToDestinationVisible] Ending span log appears without canceled: true (either no log at all, or it shows canceled: true)

---

1. From any page, tap the global FAB and select "Create expense"
2. Fill in the details and tap "Submit"
3. Let the submit complete normally (do not press back)
4. Verify [Sentry][ManualSubmitToDestinationVisible] Ending span (Xms) appears with a sub-two-second duration and no canceled: true

---

1. Open a DM chat with another user
2. Use the "Pay" quick action to send money
3. Complete the payment normally
4. Verify [Sentry][ManualSubmitToDestinationVisible] Ending span (Xms) appears with a sub-two-second duration and no canceled: true

Offline tests

N/A

QA Steps

Same as tests.

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 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 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 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 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

Android: mWeb Chrome

iOS: Native

iOS.mov

iOS: mWeb Safari

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

Web.mov

[JakubKorytko]

@codex review

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: 6d83b5c2e4

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".

[codecov]

Codecov Report

✅ Changes either increased or maintained existing code coverage, great job!

Files with missing lines	Coverage Δ
src/libs/telemetry/submitFollowUpAction.ts	38.92% <ø> (+1.34%)	⬆️
src/pages/iou/request/IOURequestStartPage.tsx	83.78% <ø> (ø)
...es/iou/request/step/IOURequestStepConfirmation.tsx	63.71% <83.33%> (+0.36%)	⬆️
... and 20 files with indirect coverage changes

[JakubKorytko]

@codex review

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: bb88cb5a79

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".

[JakubKorytko]

@codex review

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: bb88cb5a79

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".

[JakubKorytko]

@codex review, dont repeat yourself

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: bb88cb5a79

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".

[JakubKorytko]

@codex review

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

Codex Review: Didn't find any major issues. Hooray!

Reviewed commit: 7b7fee9a37

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".

[melvin-bot]

@mananjadhav 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: 1949ec76a4

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".

[JakubKorytko]

@codex review

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

Codex Review: Didn't find any major issues. Nice work!

Reviewed commit: 1949ec76a4

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".

[mananjadhav]

Overall the changes look good. But quick question, I am wondering if we want to mirror this behavior when the user clicks the back button in a new manual expense flow. Should we be calling cancelTracking here?

App/src/pages/iou/request/IOURequestStartPage.tsx

Lines 192 to 199 in 0b40ac9

	const navigateBack = () => {
	// Restore the pre-inserted fullscreen tab while the RHP is still on top so the clean
	// REMOVE_FULLSCREEN_UNDER_RHP branch is used. Otherwise closeRHPFlow pops the RHP first and the
	// confirmation's unmount cleanup restores the original tab a frame later, briefly flashing the
	// pre-inserted Search/Spend tab. This is a no-op when nothing was pre-inserted.
	Navigation.removePreInsertedFullscreenIfNeeded();
	Navigation.closeRHPFlow();
	};

[JakubKorytko]

Overall the changes look good. But quick question, I am wondering if we want to mirror this behavior when the user clicks the back button in a new manual expense flow. Should we be calling cancelTracking here?

App/src/pages/iou/request/IOURequestStartPage.tsx

Lines 192 to 199 in 0b40ac9

	const navigateBack = () => {
	// Restore the pre-inserted fullscreen tab while the RHP is still on top so the clean
	// REMOVE_FULLSCREEN_UNDER_RHP branch is used. Otherwise closeRHPFlow pops the RHP first and the
	// confirmation's unmount cleanup restores the original tab a frame later, briefly flashing the
	// pre-inserted Search/Spend tab. This is a no-op when nothing was pre-inserted.
	Navigation.removePreInsertedFullscreenIfNeeded();
	Navigation.closeRHPFlow();
	};

Good catch! In the new manual expense beta the confirmation is embedded with its header hidden, so this back button is the only escape hatch. The unmount cleanup alone isn't sufficient here because it guards against cancelling when getPendingSubmitFollowUpAction() is set - but an explicit user back-press should always cancel unconditionally (same as the confirmation's own navigateBack). Added cancelTracking() there now.

[mananjadhav]

@JakubKorytko Can you fix the failing tests and Typescript errors?

[mananjadhav]

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

mweb-chrome-cancel-telemetry.mov

iOS: HybridApp

ios-cancel-telemetry.mov

iOS: mWeb Safari

mweb-safari-cancel-telemetry.mov

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

web-cancel-telemetry.mov

[mananjadhav]

I've got an issue with Android build, so skipping that as anywya it's platform indepdent.

@mountiny Can we rerun the tests?

[github-actions]

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

[OSBotify]

✋ This PR was not deployed to staging yet because QA is ongoing. It will be automatically deployed to staging after the next production release.

[github-actions]

🧪🧪 Use the links below to test this adhoc build on Android, iOS, and Web. Happy testing! 🧪🧪
Built from App PR #94451.

Android 🤖	iOS 🍎
https://ad-hoc-expensify-cash.s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/rock-artifacts/ad-hoc/rock-android-Adhoc-bbea7d73edf-07ec740-016533322a4b4b0da5523d17b45ec8dec6a027dc/index.html	https://ad-hoc-expensify-cash.s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/rock-artifacts/ad-hoc/rock-ios-device-AdHoc-bbea7d7-07ec740-153d306562ca2d5cd1773d0ab69573c2453266b9/index.html

Web 🕸️
https://94451.pr-testing.expensify.com

---

👀 View the workflow run that generated this build 👀

[OSBotify]

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/mountiny in version: 9.4.26-0 🚀

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

[MelvinBot]

🤖 No help site changes required.

I reviewed the changes in this PR and they are entirely internal telemetry instrumentation — no user-facing behavior, UI, copy, settings, or feature changes.

Why no docs changes are needed

The diff only affects Sentry/telemetry span lifecycle:

• src/libs/telemetry/submitFollowUpAction.ts — exports the existing cancelTracking helper.
• src/pages/iou/request/IOURequestStartPage.tsx and src/pages/iou/request/step/IOURequestStepConfirmation.tsx — call cancelTracking() when the user abandons the expense flow (back button / unmount), so lingering spans don't pollute performance metrics.
• tests/unit/spanCancelOnDiscardTest.ts — unit tests for the above.

The user-facing flows (creating an expense, discarding it, submitting, paying) behave exactly as before. Nothing in App/docs/articles documents internal Sentry span durations, so there is no article that needs updating and no draft PR to open.

@JakubKorytko, please review the linked help site PR and confirm it reflects the current behavior. Then mark the linked help site PR Ready for review

(Note: since this change is telemetry-only and has no user-facing impact, no help site PR was created — there is nothing to review. Let me know if you believe a specific article is affected and I'll take another look.)

[OSBotify]

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/grgia in version: 9.4.27-2 🚀

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

Bundle Size Analysis (Sentry):

• Android