Skip to content

[Due for payment 2026-10-27] Deeplink - New user is not navigated to Concierge chat after deeplinking to Concierge #99940

New issue
New issue
Closed
Closed
[Due for payment 2026-10-27] Deeplink - New user is not navigated to Concierge chat after deeplinking to Concierge#99940
Assignees
pecanoromallenexpensifymukhrreh2077
Labels
Awaiting PaymentAuto-added when associated PR is deployed to productionBugSomething is broken. Auto assigns a BugZero manager.DailyKSv2ExternalAdded to denote the issue can be worked on by a contributor

Description

@applause-bot
applause-bot
bot
opened on Aug 31, 2026

If you haven’t already, check out our contributing guidelines for onboarding. To join our Slack channel, fill out this form.

Version Number: v9.4.64-2
Reproducible in staging?: Yes
Reproducible in production?: Yes
If this was caught during regression testing, add the test name, ID and link from BrowserStack: https://test-management.browserstack.com/projects/2219752/folder/13176964/test-cases/41237739
Email or phone of affected tester (no customers): htad26+werweuiy@gmail.com
Issue reported by: Applause Internal Team
Bug source: Regression TC Execution
Device used: Windows 10/Chrome
App Component: Other

Action Performed:

  1. Log out of NewDot
  2. Navigate to https://staging.new.expensify.com/concierge
  3. Sign-up with a new account

Expected Result:

The user is navigated to Concierge chat

Actual Result:

The user is navigated to the homepage and the Concierge chat does not open

Workaround:

Unknown

Platforms:

  • Android: App
  • Android: mWeb Chrome
  • iOS: App
  • iOS: mWeb Safari
  • iOS: mWeb Chrome
  • Windows: Chrome
  • MacOS: Chrome Safari

Screenshots/Videos

Bug7247469_1788195984782.bandicam_2026-08-31_20-04-44-288.mp4

View all open jobs on GitHub

Applause Internal Information
Exported by: Julia Ponikarchuk
Bug ID: 7247469

Issue OwnerCurrent Issue Owner: @eh2077

Activity

  1. gleitebr
    added this to #expensify-bugson Aug 31, 2026
  2. applause-bot
    added
    DailyKSv2
    BugSomething is broken. Auto assigns a BugZero manager.
    on Aug 31, 2026

  3. applause-bot commented on Aug 31, 2026

    @applause-bot
    applause-botBot
    on Aug 31, 2026
    Author

    While Applause doesn't embed attachments for this bug, here are the links for quick view:
    https://platform.applause.com/services/links/v1/external/8ce52a25149947e58bca9b78606f07b7cae5abd202fcd2fa02af96f7578852fa

  4. MelvinBot commented on Aug 31, 2026

    @MelvinBot
    MelvinBot
    on Aug 31, 2026
    Contributor

    Proposal

    What is the root cause of that problem?

    The /concierge deeplink is captured correctly, then deliberately thrown away because the account had not finished onboarding when the link was captured.

    openReportFromDeepLink parks the pending route behind sign-in, latching whether onboarding was already complete at capture time (src/libs/actions/Link.ts:562). For a brand-new sign-up that value is false, and when the deeplink finally replays it hits an unconditional early return (src/libs/actions/Link.ts:600-604):

    // Drop a deep link captured before onboarding finished: navigateAfterOnboarding owns the
// post-onboarding destination and overrides it anyway, so honoring it only risks the flash (#91437).
if (initialHasCompletedGuidedSetupFlow === false) {
    return;
}

    That comment's premise is wrong. navigateAfterOnboarding has no access to the deeplink — with no admins chat on a wide screen it goes straight to ROUTES.HOME (src/libs/navigateAfterOnboarding.ts:109-114). So nothing "overrides" the destination; it is simply lost, and because the guard sits after Onyx.disconnect(connection) (Link.ts:582) there is no retry.

    This is why existing accounts work: their latched value is true, so the guard is skipped and Navigation.navigate('concierge') fires (Link.ts:628).

    The guard was added by #92839 (merged 2026-06-25) to fix the post-onboarding "Not here" flash in #91437.

    Note this is not specific to Concierge — any deeplink captured before a fresh sign-up is dropped the same way. ConciergePage itself is fine; it correctly waits on onServerDataReady() and creates the DM when conciergeReportID is missing (ConciergePage.tsx:35-49). It is simply never mounted.

    What changes do you think we should make in order to solve the problem?

    Stop discarding the pending route and instead hand it to the code that owns the post-onboarding destination, which is what the comment already assumes happens.

    1. Replace the blanket return at Link.ts:600-604 with a persisted "pending post-onboarding route" (a new Onyx key), rather than dropping the route.
    2. In navigateAfterOnboarding, prefer that pending route over ROUTES.HOME/the admins room when one is set, then clear the key. Because the navigation now happens after onboarding completes rather than during it, the [Due for payment 2026-07-03] [$250] Onboarding - Not here page appears briefly after completing onboarding #91437 flash does not return.
    3. Also revisit the earlier drop at Link.ts:587-590. On web this branch fires first, because the replay gate opens on completeOnboarding's optimistic NVP merge while the onboarding modal is still focused (dismissOnboardingModalBeforeExit is a no-op on web). It currently discards the link and sets a spurious onboarding.purpose.errorBackButton message. It should persist the pending route too.

    Because SCREENS.CONCIERGE is in MODAL_ROUTES_TO_DISMISS (GetStateForActionHandlers.ts:56), the replay must happen after onboarding tears down its modal, not during it — otherwise RootStackRouter strips the route out of the stack again.

    What alternative solutions did you explore? (Optional)

    Investigation details, alternatives ruled out, and test evidence

    Ordered path for a new sign-up (verified against d178dd2):

    1. Signed out at /concierge → DeepLinkHandler reads Linking.getInitialURL() with hasAuthToken() === false and calls openReportFromDeepLink(..., isAuthenticated=false).
    2. route = 'concierge'; reportID is empty (not an /r/ link) and concierge is not in PUBLIC_SCREENS_ROUTES, so it survives the early bail-outs and parks in waitForUserSignIn() (Link.ts:525). A JS closure, not the URL or navigation state, is the sole carrier.
    3. Sign-up completes → NVP_ONBOARDING arrives as {hasCompletedGuidedSetupFlow: false} → latched at Link.ts:562, and the replay gate at Link.ts:648 stays shut for the whole onboarding flow.
    4. Onboarding finishes → optimistic merge flips the NVP to true → gate opens → handleDeeplinkNavigation() disconnects, then returns at :587 (web) or :602. Link destroyed, no retry.
    5. navigateAfterOnboarding → Navigation.navigate(ROUTES.HOME). Home rendered.

    Ruled out with evidence: a CONCIERGE_REPORT_ID load race (ConciergePage handles the missing ID and retries via its focus effect); NavigationRoot.initialState (bails at !account on a signed-out cold start and has [] deps, so it never recomputes after sign-in); LAST_VISITED_PATH (only consumed when already authenticated on first render); AuthScreensInitHandler and setUpPoliciesAndNavigate (both no-op — the former only handles /r/<reportID> links, the latter requires an exitTo param).

    Remaining uncertainty (does not change the root cause): whether the backend ever returns an empty nvp_onboarding before {hasCompletedGuidedSetupFlow: false}. If it does, hasCompletedGuidedSetupFlowSelector({}) returns true, the navigate does fire, and the loss shifts to the OnboardingGuard redirect + RootStackRouter stack rebuild instead. Both paths end on Home, and the fix above covers both.

    Test evidence: a web tester run could not exercise this flow. The already-authenticated CI session has no way to perform a cold URL load or reload (both are disallowed for that session, since a reload can drop client auth into an unclearable magic-code wall), and clicking through the LHN would only exercise client-side routing, not a deeplink. The analysis above rests on code reading, not a live repro.

    Step Status Observation
    Session reaches Home before driving task pass Home/Inbox/Spend/Workspaces tabs and Concierge composer visible after dismissing the welcome screen
    Navigate browser directly to /concierge URL fail No permitted agent-device verb performs a cold URL navigation for this session
    Reload while on /concierge and observe landing screen fail Reload disallowed — risks dropping client auth
    Evidence (1)

    App at Home after completing prestart setup

    App at Home after completing prestart setup

    Possibly related (different flow, same theme of a post-sign-in destination being lost): #96346 and #95445, both about public rooms not opening after an anonymous user signs in. Neither passes through the initialHasCompletedGuidedSetupFlow guard, so I do not think they share this root cause.

    Next Steps for Contributor+ team:
    To accept: @MelvinBot implement this proposal to create a draft PR.
    To refine: @MelvinBot <your feedback>
    To reject: Explain why you are rejecting Melvin's proposal.

    view run

  5. MelvinBot
    added
    ExternalAdded to denote the issue can be worked on by a contributor
    on Aug 31, 2026
  6. melvin-bot
    assigned
    eh2077
    on Aug 31, 2026

  7. melvin-bot commented on Aug 31, 2026

    @melvin-bot
    melvin-botBot
    on Aug 31, 2026 – with Melvin Bot

    Triggered auto assignment to Contributor-plus team member for initial proposal review - @eh2077 (External)

  8. melvin-bot commented on Aug 31, 2026

    @melvin-bot
    melvin-botBot
    on Aug 31, 2026 – with Melvin Bot

    Unable to auto-create job on Upwork. The BZ team member should create it manually for this issue.

  9. melvin-bot commented on Sep 3, 2026

    @melvin-bot
    melvin-botBot
    on Sep 3, 2026 – with Melvin Bot

    @eh2077 Whoops! This issue is 2 days overdue. Let's get this updated quick!

  10. melvin-bot
    added
    Overdue
    on Sep 3, 2026

  11. melvin-bot commented on Sep 4, 2026

    @melvin-bot
    melvin-botBot
    on Sep 4, 2026 – with Melvin Bot

    @eh2077 Whoops! This issue is 2 days overdue. Let's get this updated quick!

  12. melvin-bot commented on Sep 4, 2026

    @melvin-bot
    melvin-botBot
    on Sep 4, 2026 – with Melvin Bot

    @eh2077 Whoops! This issue is 2 days overdue. Let's get this updated quick!

  13. eh2077 commented on Sep 4, 2026

    @eh2077
    eh2077
    on Sep 4, 2026
    Contributor

    checking

  14. melvin-bot
    removed
    Overdue
    on Sep 4, 2026

  15. 87 remaining items

  16. melvin-bot
    removed
    Overdue
    on Oct 26, 2026

  17. eh2077 commented on Oct 29, 2026

    @eh2077
    eh2077
    on Oct 29, 2026
    Contributor

    Contributor+ Checklist:

    • [Contributor] The offending PR and associated issue have been commented on, pointing out the bug it caused and why, so the author and reviewers can learn from the mistake.

      Link to the comment on the PR: NA. I believe this is a new feature because deeplink only works for existing users.
      Link to the comment on the Issue: NA

    • [Contributor] If the regression was CRITICAL (e.g. interrupts a core flow) A discussion in #expensify-open-source has been started about whether any other steps should be taken (e.g. updating the PR review checklist) in order to catch this type of bug sooner.

      Link to discussion: No need.

    • [Contributor] If it was decided to create a regression test for the bug, please propose the regression test steps using the template below to ensure the same bug will not reach production again.

    Regression Test Proposal

    Precondition:

    • Sign in with a new user

    Test:

    1. Sign out so you land on the sign-in page.
    2. In the browser address bar, append /concierge to the app URL and load it.
    3. Enter an unused email address, click Continue, then click Join.
    4. Choose "Submit expenses to my employer" and finish onboarding.
    5. Verify the Concierge chat opens when onboarding finishes, with no Concierge loading panel sliding in first.

    Do we agree 👍 or 👎

  18. eh2077 commented on Oct 29, 2026

    @eh2077
    eh2077
    on Oct 29, 2026
    Contributor

    @mallenexpensify I also think payment should be $250 because

  19. mallenexpensify commented on Oct 30, 2026

    @mallenexpensify
    mallenexpensify
    on Oct 30, 2026
    Contributor

    Causing PR (high confidence): #101558.

    @eh2077 what about the above,

  20. eh2077 commented on Oct 30, 2026

    @eh2077
    eh2077
    on Oct 30, 2026
    Contributor

    good catch, I think it's a regression from the first PR and was fixed by the second PR.

  21. mukhrr commented on Oct 30, 2026

    @mukhrr
    mukhrr
    on Oct 30, 2026
    Contributor

    well keeping in mind original price was $250, I think it still would be fair to keep it based on this

    since one of two regression issues was pre-existing/not-regression bug and we fixed it in 2nd PR

  22. mallenexpensify commented on Oct 30, 2026

    @mallenexpensify
    mallenexpensify
    on Oct 30, 2026
    Contributor

    @mukhrr is the below correct

    Assuming so, that seems like a classic example of applying the 50% regression cut. Am I missing something? If you want to propose a price increase, ie. to request the full amount of the job, please post one @eh2077 (Standard price was $250 when this issue was created)

  23. mukhrr commented on Oct 31, 2026

    @mukhrr
    mukhrr
    on Oct 31, 2026
    Contributor

    well correct! I myself am bit confused here. After checking more thoroughly, I think it makes sense to pay $175 here if #102956 is gonna be paid separately. @eh2077 what do you think? cc @mallenexpensify

  24. melvin-bot
    added
    DailyKSv2
    and removed
    DailyKSv2
    on Nov 1, 2026

  25. mallenexpensify commented on Nov 2, 2026

    @mallenexpensify
    mallenexpensify
    on Nov 2, 2026
    Contributor

    Claude posting on behalf of Matt:

    $125 each to @mukhrr (Contributor) and @eh2077 (C+), ie. 50% of the $250 job price. One regression: #102954 from #101558, which caused the revert. #102956 and #104391 existed on production, so they do not count.

    Evidence

    Claude posting on behalf of Matt. PAYRUBRICTEST v1

  26. mallenexpensify commented on Nov 2, 2026

    @mallenexpensify
    mallenexpensify
    on Nov 2, 2026
    Contributor

    Payment Summary

    Contributor: @mukhrr due $125 via NewDot
    Contributor+: @eh2077 due $125 via NewDot

    Paid $175 on other

  27. mallenexpensify
    closed this as completedon Nov 2, 2026
  28. github-project-automation
    moved this to Done in #expensify-bugson Nov 2, 2026

  29. flaviadefaria commented on Nov 9, 2026

    @flaviadefaria
    flaviadefaria
    on Nov 9, 2026
    Contributor

    Approved: @mukhrr due $125 via NewDot

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

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

Labels

Awaiting PaymentAuto-added when associated PR is deployed to productionBugSomething is broken. Auto assigns a BugZero manager.DailyKSv2ExternalAdded to denote the issue can be worked on by a contributor

Type

No type

Projects

Milestone

No milestone

Relationships

None yet

Development

No branches or pull requests

Issue actions