Skip to content

[No QA] Docs: Add view: operator to search operators help article#86778

Merged
lschurr merged 3 commits intomainfrom
claude-addViewOperatorToSearchDocs
Apr 13, 2026
Merged

[No QA] Docs: Add view: operator to search operators help article#86778
lschurr merged 3 commits intomainfrom
claude-addViewOperatorToSearchDocs

Conversation

@MelvinBot
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Summary

Changes

  • Updated the "Available filters for grouping and currency conversion" section to include view: in the heading, description, and code example
  • Added a new "How to choose a chart view for grouped results" subsection listing all supported view: values
  • Added a note clarifying that view: only applies when group-by: is used
  • Updated article keywords to include view, chart

Test plan

  • Verify the updated article renders correctly on the help site
  • Confirm all four view: values (table, bar, pie, line) match the product UI
  • Verify the note about view: requiring group-by: is accurate

The view: operator (table, bar, pie, line) was missing from the search
operators documentation. This operator controls chart visualization when
used with group-by: and was fixed in PR #85506 to properly persist in
saved search labels.

Co-authored-by: Maruf Sharifi <marufsharifi@users.noreply.github.com>
@github-actions
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

HelpDot Documentation Review

Overall Assessment

This PR adds documentation for the new view: search operator, which allows users to choose chart visualizations (table, bar, pie, line) when using group-by:. The changes are focused, well-scoped, and integrate cleanly into the existing article structure. The new content is clear, actionable, and follows established patterns in the file.

Scores Summary

  • Readability: 9/10 - The new section is concise and scannable. The bulleted list of supported views with brief descriptions is easy to parse. The dependency note at the bottom is a helpful callout. The updated code example effectively demonstrates the new operator in context.
  • AI Readiness: 8/10 - The new ## heading ("How to choose a chart view for grouped results") is task-based and starts with "How to", which aligns well with retrieval optimization rules. Keywords were updated to include "view" and "chart", improving discoverability. One minor gap: the YAML frontmatter still lacks internalScope, which is required per HELP_AUTHORING_GUIDELINES.md Section 3. This is a pre-existing omission not introduced by this PR, so it is not penalized heavily, but addressing it in this PR would be a good opportunity.
  • Style Compliance: 9/10 - Operator names are consistently formatted in backticks. The new heading follows task-based conventions. UI terminology is used precisely. The only minor note is that the parent # heading was updated from "Available filters for grouping and currency conversion" to "Available filters for grouping, chart views, and currency conversion" -- this heading is noun-based rather than task-based, but that is a pre-existing pattern in the file, not introduced by this diff.

Key Findings

  • The new ## How to choose a chart view for grouped results heading is well-formed: task-based, searchable, and feature-specific. This is the strongest part of the change.
  • The dependency note ("The view: operator only applies when group-by: is also used") is a valuable addition that prevents user confusion.
  • The keyword additions ("view", "chart") are appropriate and improve search coverage.
  • The updated code example (group-by:category view:bar group-currency:USD) effectively demonstrates all three operators working together.
  • Pre-existing file issues (multiple # headings beyond the title and FAQ, missing internalScope in YAML) are not introduced by this PR but are worth noting for future cleanup.

Recommendations

  1. (Optional, low priority) Consider adding internalScope to the YAML frontmatter while editing this file, e.g.: internalScope: Audience is all Expensify users. Covers search operator syntax and filters, does not cover saved search management or Search page UI navigation.
  2. The changes are clean and ready to merge as-is. No blocking issues were found in the proposed diff.

Files Reviewed

  • docs/articles/new-expensify/reports-and-expenses/Using-search-operators.md -- New view: operator section added, keywords updated, parent heading and code example updated. All changes are well-structured and governance-compliant.

Comment thread docs/articles/new-expensify/reports-and-expenses/Using-search-operators.md Outdated
Comment thread docs/articles/new-expensify/reports-and-expenses/Using-search-operators.md Outdated
@github-actions github-actions bot changed the title Docs: Add view: operator to search operators help article [No QA] Docs: Add view: operator to search operators help article Mar 31, 2026
@OSBotify
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

OSBotify commented Mar 31, 2026

A preview of your ExpensifyHelp changes have been deployed to https://0da79596.helpdot.pages.dev ⚡️

Updated articles:

stephanieelliott and others added 2 commits April 3, 2026 11:07
Co-authored-by: github-actions[bot] <41898282+github-actions[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
@stephanieelliott stephanieelliott requested a review from a team April 8, 2026 06:09
@melvin-bot
Copy link
Copy Markdown

melvin-bot bot commented Apr 8, 2026

Concierge reviewer checklist:

  • I have verified the accuracy of the article
    • The article is within a hub that makes sense, and the navigation is correct
    • All processes, screenshots, and examples align with current product behavior.
    • All links within the doc have been verified for correct destination and functionality.
  • I have verified the readability of the article
    • The article's language is clear, concise, and free of jargon.
    • The grammar, spelling, and punctuation are correct.
    • The article contains at least one image, or that an image is not necessary
  • I have verified the formatting of the article
    • The article has consistent formatting (headings, bullet points, etc.) with other HelpDot articles and that aligns with the HelpDot formatting standards.
    • The article has proper text spacing and breaks for readability.
  • I have verified the article has the appropriate tone and style
    • The article's tone is professional, friendly, and suitable for the target audience.
    • The article's tone, terminology, and voice are consistent throughout.
  • I have verified the overall quality of the article
    • The article is not missing any information, nor does it contain redundant information.
    • The article fully addresses user needs.
  • I have verified that all requested improvements have been addressed

For more detailed instructions on completing this checklist, see How do I review a HelpDot PR as a Concierge Team member?

cc @lschurr

@melvin-bot melvin-bot bot requested review from lschurr and removed request for a team April 8, 2026 06:09
@melvin-bot
Copy link
Copy Markdown

melvin-bot bot commented Apr 8, 2026

@lschurr 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]

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@lschurr lschurr left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM

@lschurr lschurr merged commit 7f49000 into main Apr 13, 2026
16 checks passed
@lschurr lschurr deleted the claude-addViewOperatorToSearchDocs branch April 13, 2026 15:11
@OSBotify
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/lschurr in version: 9.3.59-0 🚀

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

Bundle Size Analysis (Sentry):

@OSBotify
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/AndrewGable in version: 9.3.59-4 🚀

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

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.

4 participants