Feat: [BYOC] - Make Transaction start date editable after card assignment

[ikevin127]

Explanation of Change

This PR implements the ability to edit the transaction start date for bulk-assigned company cards directly from the Card Details page. Previously, the transaction start date was set only during the initial card assignment flow and displayed as a read-only field on the Card Details page.

Users will now have the flexibility to modify this date after assignment by clicking the interactive transaction start date row, which navigates to a new edit page matching the existing assign card flow UI.

🗒️ The implementation follows established patterns in the codebase:

• a new UpdateCardTransactionStartDate API command handles the backend update, while the updateCardTransactionStartDate action function manages optimistic updates for a seamless offline experience.
• the UI mirrors the existing TransactionStartDateStep component, offering "From the beginning" (90 days back) or "Custom date" options with a DatePicker
• error handling includes rollback on failure with a red brick road indicator, and the OfflineWithFeedback wrapper ensures pending states are properly communicated to users

Fixed Issues

$ #77936
PROPOSAL:

Tests

Preconditions:

• Have a workspace with Company Cards enabled
• Have at least one company card assigned to a member

I. Test: Edit Transaction Start Date

1. Navigate to Settings > Workspaces > [Your Workspace] > Company Cards.
2. Select a card feed and click on an assigned card to open the Card Details page.
3. Verify the Transaction start date row now shows a right arrow icon (indicating it's interactive).
4. Click on the Transaction start date row.
5. Verify you are navigated to the Transaction start date RHP page.
6. Verify the page shows:

• Header with back button titled "Transaction start date"
• Description text explaining the start date feature
• Two options: "From the beginning" and "Custom date" (default)
• A "Save" button at the bottom

II. Test: "Custom date" Option (selected by default)

1. Click on the Transaction start date row again.
2. Verify that "Custom date" is selected by default.
3. Verify a DatePicker input appears below the "Custom date" option.
4. Select a custom date (e.g., December 1, 2024).
5. Click Save.
6. Verify you are navigated back to the Card Details page.
7. Verify the Transaction start date displays the selected date.

III. Test: Select "From the beginning" Option

1. On the Transaction start date RHP page, select "From the beginning".
2. Verify the DatePicker input is not shown.
3. Click Save.
4. Verify you are navigated back to the Card Details page.
5. Verify the Transaction start date is updated to a date 90 days ago.

• Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

I. Test: Optimistic Update

1. Navigate to an assigned card's Card Details page.
2. Go offline.
3. Click on Transaction start date.
4. Select a new date option and click Save.
5. Verify:

• You are navigated back to the Card Details page immediately
• The Transaction start date row with the new date are displayed optimistically (grayed-out - pending)

II. Test: Offline Error Handling

1. With network still disconnected, verify the pending state persists.
2. Reconnect to the network.
3. Verify the pending indicator disappears once the server confirms the update.

III. Test: Failure Rollback

1. Go to Settings > Troubleshoot > enable Simulate failing network requests.
2. Navigate to an assigned card's Card Details page.
3. Click on Transaction start date, select a new date option and click Save.
4. Verify:

• The previous date is restored
• A red brick road indicator appears on the Transaction start date row
• Tapping the dismiss button clears the error

QA Steps

Same as Tests.

• 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

web.mov

ios-hybrid.mov

[melvin-bot]

@jayeshmangwani 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]

[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/SCREENS.ts	100.00% <ø> (ø)
src/libs/API/types.ts	100.00% <ø> (ø)
...gation/linkingConfig/RELATIONS/WORKSPACE_TO_RHP.ts	100.00% <ø> (ø)
src/libs/Navigation/linkingConfig/config.ts	75.00% <ø> (ø)
src/ROUTES.ts	12.90% <0.00%> (-0.02%)	⬇️
...gation/AppNavigator/ModalStackNavigators/index.tsx	8.25% <0.00%> (-0.02%)	⬇️
src/libs/actions/CompanyCards.ts	0.00% <0.00%> (ø)
...e/companyCards/WorkspaceCompanyCardDetailsPage.tsx	0.00% <0.00%> (ø)
...rkspaceCompanyCardEditTransactionStartDatePage.tsx	0.00% <0.00%> (ø)
... and 10 files with indirect coverage changes