[No QA] Fix import/no-cycle - part 2

[LukasMod]

Explanation of Change

Break four independent import cycles by extracting leaf modules and context hooks. No logic changes, already guarded with tests, ts and lint.

Breaks four circular imports. They are independent of each other, and each one is its own small cluster of 2
to 7 mutually dependent modules that dissolves completely when a single import moves.

Oxlint's import/no-cycle reports these; ESLint's copy of the same rule reports 0 because its resolver never
resolves our @libs/... style aliases, so it never builds a module graph. This is prep work for the Oxlint
migration, where the rule becomes a blocking check.

Cycle	Fix
components/Text.tsx <-> libs/EmojiUtils.tsx	containsCustomEmoji and containsOnlyCustomEmoji move to a new leaf libs/CustomEmojiUtils.ts. EmojiUtils re-exports them, so its other consumers are untouched.
libs/GPSDraftDetailsUtils.ts <-> libs/actions/GPSDraftDetails.ts	addressFromGpsPoint, coordinatesToString and calculateTrimmedEndPoint move to a new leaf libs/GPSPointUtils.ts. GPSDraftDetailsUtils re-exports them.
MultifactorAuthentication config <-> Context (7 files)	ChangePIN.tsx imports useMultifactorAuthenticationState from the module that defines it instead of the Context barrel, matching what AuthenticationMethodDescription.tsx already does.
accounting utils <-> AccountingContext (6 files)	The two createContext calls and their hooks move to AccountingContext/contexts.ts. The three integration flow components read the hook from there. index.tsx re-exports it, so the pages are untouched.

No function body changes, no Onyx write moves, no new side effects: the three new modules are pure functions
and two createContext calls. createContext is still called exactly once per context.

One test edit: BaseConnectToQuickbooksOnlineFlow.test.tsx mocks the accounting context, so its jest.mock
path follows the component's import. Numbers counted already with PR1: #99670

	Before	After
import/no-cycle findings	478	458
Files reported on	130	113

Fixed Issues

$ #99650
PROPOSAL:

Tests

• Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

1. Open app
2. Send emoji
3. Verify emoji is visible

Offline tests

QA Steps

• Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

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 verified there are no new alerts related to the canBeMissing param for useOnyx
• 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 shown in the product is localized by adding it to src/languages/* files and using the translation method
    • If any non-english text was added/modified, I used JaimeGPT to get English > Spanish translation. I then posted it in #expensify-open-source and it was approved by an internal Expensify engineer. Link to Slack message:
  • I verified all numbers, amounts, dates and phone numbers shown in the product are using the localization methods
  • 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)
  • I verified proper file naming conventions were followed for any new files or renamed files. All non-platform specific files are named after what they export and are not named "index.js". All platform-specific files are named for the platform the code supports as outlined in the README.
  • I verified the JSDocs style guidelines (in STYLE.md) were followed
• 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)
• I verified all code is DRY (the PR doesn't include any logic written more than once, with the exception of tests)
• I verified any variables that can be defined as constants (ie. in CONST.ts or at the top of the file that uses the constant) are defined as such
• I verified that if a function's arguments changed that all usages have also been updated correctly
• 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.
• If a new page is added, I verified it's using the ScrollView component to make it scrollable when more elements are added to the page.
• 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: mWeb Safari

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

Screen.Recording.2026-08-31.at.13.52.26.mov

[codecov]

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/components/ConnectToCertiniaFlow/index.tsx	2.70% <ø> (ø)
src/components/ConnectToNetSuiteFlow/index.tsx	0.00% <ø> (ø)
...ksOnlineFlow/BaseConnectToQuickbooksOnlineFlow.tsx	97.43% <ø> (ø)
...actorAuthentication/config/scenarios/ChangePIN.tsx	45.45% <ø> (ø)
src/components/Text.tsx	100.00% <ø> (ø)
src/libs/CustomEmojiUtils.ts	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
src/libs/EmojiUtils.tsx	85.39% <ø> (-0.36%)	⬇️
src/libs/GPSDraftDetailsUtils.ts	59.40% <ø> (-0.60%)	⬇️
src/libs/actions/GPSDraftDetails.ts	2.27% <ø> (ø)
...s/workspace/accounting/AccountingContext/index.tsx	0.00% <ø> (-6.67%)	⬇️
... and 2 more
... and 11 files with indirect coverage changes

[LukasMod]

@codex review

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

Codex Review: Didn't find any major issues. 🚀

Reviewed commit: 89e2748a5b

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]

@eh2077 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]

[thelullabyy]

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 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
  • 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
  • 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 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

Screen.Recording.2026-09-04.at.02.33.39.mov

[github-actions]

🚧 roryabraham 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 #99768.

Android 🤖	iOS 🍎
https://ad-hoc-expensify-cash.s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/rock-artifacts/ad-hoc/rock-android-Adhoc-f4c1144-1cbcddc-4101f5507cd00b9cc3750fab1c24274c2bde492e/index.html	https://ad-hoc-expensify-cash.s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/rock-artifacts/ad-hoc/rock-ios-device-AdHoc-f4c1144-1cbcddc-79cdd9cef04c590b28cac88dad0ec668dc798a39/index.html

Web 🕸️
https://99768.pr-testing.expensify.com

---

👀 View the workflow run that generated this build 👀

[OSBotify]

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/roryabraham in version: 9.4.73-0 🚀

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

[MelvinBot]

🤖 No help site changes are required for this PR. I did not create a docs PR.

This PR only moves code between modules to break four import/no-cycle clusters. Nothing a help site article describes has changed.

Why I concluded no docs update is needed

I reviewed all 13 changed files. Every change is one of three kinds:

1. Import path updates (6 files) — the same symbol, imported from the module that defines it instead of a barrel:

• ConnectToCertiniaFlow, ConnectToNetSuiteFlow, BaseConnectToQuickbooksOnlineFlow → useAccountingState now comes from AccountingContext/contexts
• ChangePIN.tsx → useMultifactorAuthenticationState now comes from Context/MultifactorAuthenticationStateContext
• Text.tsx → containsOnlyCustomEmoji now comes from CustomEmojiUtils
• actions/GPSDraftDetails.ts → three GPS helpers now come from GPSPointUtils

2. Functions moved verbatim into new leaf modules (3 new files) — CustomEmojiUtils.ts, GPSPointUtils.ts, and AccountingContext/contexts.ts. I compared each moved function body against the version it replaced. They are byte-identical apart from indentation. The original modules re-export them, so existing consumers are unaffected.

3. One test mock path update — BaseConnectToQuickbooksOnlineFlow.test.tsx follows the component's new import.

Checks that came back empty:

• No src/languages/* files touched, so no user-facing copy changed.
• No new or renamed feature, tab, setting, or button. Nothing to re-verify against the live UI, and nothing whose exact capitalization a help article could now be stating incorrectly.
• No changed function bodies, no Onyx write relocations, no new side effects. createContext is still called exactly once per context.
• The PR is labeled [No QA], and both the Tests and QA Steps sections are only "Verify that no errors appear in the JS console" — consistent with a no-behavior-change refactor.

The areas this PR touches (accounting connections such as QuickBooks Online, NetSuite and Certinia; multi-factor authentication; GPS distance requests; custom emoji rendering) do have help site articles under docs/articles. Those articles document what a customer sees and does. Since this PR changes none of that, the articles remain accurate as written. Refactors like this become relevant to docs/articles only when they change behavior or copy, and this one does neither.

Since no help site changes are needed, there is no docs PR to link, review, or mark Ready for review. If you would still like a docs PR opened for something specific in this area, reply with @MelvinBot and the article or change you have in mind and I will draft it.

---

view run · view recording

[OSBotify]

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/mountiny in version: 9.4.73-3 🚀

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

Bundle Size Analysis (Sentry):

• Android