fix: land new account on initially opened room

[KJ21-ENG]

Explanation of Change

This PR fixes issue #85242: when a signed-out user opens a report URL like /r/<reportID>, signs in/signs up with a new account, and completes onboarding, the app should land on the initially opened report. Current main lands on Home instead.

The accepted proposal identified the first destructive step in RootStackRouter: when OnboardingGuard returns a REDIRECT to onboarding, handleNavigationGuards resets the whole root stack using the adapted onboarding state. That adapted state has Home as the base route, so the report route that was revealed after dismissing SignIn is replaced by [Home, OnboardingModalNavigator].

While validating the fix locally, frontend logging showed two additional Home navigations that could still overwrite the restored report after the router preserved it:

1. SignInModal dismisses the SignIn RHP and then navigates to Home.
2. The Track-Expenses-With-Concierge RHP onboarding variant also navigates to Home.

So the final fix is intentionally narrow:

• For onboarding modal REDIRECTs, preserve the current fullscreen report route under OnboardingModalNavigator instead of replacing it with Home.
• Drop dismissible modal routes, such as SignIn RHP, before choosing the fullscreen base. This avoids the prior Web - Onboarding - Two Expensify logos appear on the modal #86258 regression where SignIn RHP and OnboardingModal were both kept and rendered two Expensify logos.
• Fall back to the original adapted redirect state when no fullscreen route survives. This keeps the Home baseline needed for non-report routes like /concierge.
• Keep Home navigation for normal/non-report flows, but skip it when the currently revealed fullscreen route is already a report. This avoids the prior Deeplink - Finish onboarding flow, app not respond when tap back button of Concierge chat #90303 regression caused by removing Home navigation globally.
• Scope the redirect idempotency guard to onboarding/modal redirects only. This keeps the loop protection for duplicate onboarding modal redirects while allowing completed-user redirects to Home to reset nested TabNavigator state when the current tab is not Home.
• Add a focused unit test for the router REDIRECT behavior, historical regression cases, and the completed-user Home redirect from a nested report state.

Fixed Issues

$ #85242
PROPOSAL: #85242 (comment)

Tests

Manual recordings have been added below.

Original issue #85242:

1. Log out of NewDot.
2. Open https://staging.new.expensify.com/r/7075912447943023.
3. Click Sign in.
4. Sign up with a new account.
5. Select any onboarding option and complete the flow.
6. Verify that the loading is complete and the app is responsive.
7. Verify that the app lands on the initially opened report, not Home.
8. Verify that no errors appear in the JS console.

Regression #86258:

1. Log out of NewDot.
2. Open https://staging.new.expensify.com/r/7075912447943023.
3. Sign up with a new account.
4. Proceed to the onboarding modal.
5. Verify that only one Expensify logo/onboarding modal is visible.
6. Verify that no SignIn RHP is stacked under the onboarding modal.
7. Verify that no errors appear in the JS console.

Regression #90303:

1. Log out of NewDot.
2. Force close the native app.
3. Open https://staging.new.expensify.com/concierge from an external app such as Notes or the browser.
4. Sign up with a new account and complete onboarding.
5. Tap the back button from the Concierge chat.
6. Verify that the app returns to Home and does not freeze.
7. Verify that no errors appear in the JS console.

Automated checks run:

1. npx prettier --check src/components/SidePanel/RHPVariantTest/index.ts src/libs/Navigation/AppNavigator/createRootStackNavigator/GetStateForActionHandlers.ts src/libs/Navigation/AppNavigator/createRootStackNavigator/RootStackRouter.ts src/pages/signin/SignInModal.tsx tests/unit/Navigation/guards/handleNavigationGuardRedirect.test.ts
2. npx eslint --cache --cache-location=node_modules/.cache/eslint --cache-strategy content --quiet --concurrency=auto --no-warn-ignored src/components/SidePanel/RHPVariantTest/index.ts src/libs/Navigation/AppNavigator/createRootStackNavigator/GetStateForActionHandlers.ts src/libs/Navigation/AppNavigator/createRootStackNavigator/RootStackRouter.ts src/pages/signin/SignInModal.tsx tests/unit/Navigation/guards/handleNavigationGuardRedirect.test.ts
3. npm run react-compiler-compliance-check check src/components/SidePanel/RHPVariantTest/index.ts src/libs/Navigation/AppNavigator/createRootStackNavigator/GetStateForActionHandlers.ts src/libs/Navigation/AppNavigator/createRootStackNavigator/RootStackRouter.ts src/pages/signin/SignInModal.tsx tests/unit/Navigation/guards/handleNavigationGuardRedirect.test.ts
4. npm test -- tests/unit/Navigation/guards/handleNavigationGuardRedirect.test.ts --runInBand
5. git diff --check upstream/main..HEAD

npm run typecheck-tsgo was also attempted. It failed in unrelated local/native files:

• src/components/QRShare/QRShareWithDownload/index.native.tsx
• src/pages/settings/Profile/Avatar/AvatarCapture/index.native.tsx

Offline tests

Not applicable. This change affects sign-in/onboarding navigation and requires online authentication/onboarding APIs.

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 shown in the product is localized by adding it to src/languages/* files and using the translation method
  • 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

ezyZip.15.mp4

Android: mWeb Chrome

ezyZip.14.mp4

iOS: Native

N/A

iOS: mWeb Safari

ezyZip.16.mp4

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

ezyZip.17.mp4

[codecov]

Codecov Report

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

Files with missing lines	Coverage Δ
...ateRootStackNavigator/GetStateForActionHandlers.ts	26.54% <ø> (ø)
...igator/createRootStackNavigator/RootStackRouter.ts	85.22% <100.00%> (+12.76%)	⬆️
src/libs/navigateAfterOnboarding.ts	87.50% <100.00%> (ø)
src/components/SidePanel/RHPVariantTest/index.ts	36.36% <50.00%> (+36.36%)	⬆️
src/pages/signin/SignInModal.tsx	0.00% <0.00%> (ø)
... and 447 files with indirect coverage changes

[melvin-bot]

@bernhardoj 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]

[melvin-bot]

@marcochavezf 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: 1201f47709

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to 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 👍.

Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".

[KJ21-ENG]

@FitseTLT kind ping here. Thanks!

[JmillsExpensify]

I don't quite get how this particular state happens, though the sign-in on the RHP seems fine to me.

[KJ21-ENG]

@JmillsExpensify Yes, agreed that SignIn on the RHP itself is fine. The issue is the transient navigation state created by opening /r/<reportID> while logged out on large screen.

From the frontend debug logs, right when SignInModal dismisses and OnboardingGuard redirects, the root stack was:

[
"TabNavigator/ReportsSplitNavigator/Report",
"RightModalNavigator"
]

So the report route is already the fullscreen base and SignIn is the RHP on top. The bug was that the onboarding REDIRECT reset replaced that base with Home. This PR preserves that existing fullscreen report base under OnboardingModalNavigator, while dropping dismissible modal routes like the SignIn RHP so we do not reintroduce the two-logo regression.

@FitseTLT Do you agree with this as well?

[FitseTLT]

@JmillsExpensify This case is when you sign in while on a public room.

[JmillsExpensify]

Ah, thanks. LGTM then.

[FitseTLT]

Can u merge main @KJ21-ENG

[KJ21-ENG]

@FitseTLT merged latest upstream/main into this PR branch and pushed it.

[KJ21-ENG]

@FitseTLT Kind ping here. Thanks!