Add Rillet support for vendor matching

[ShridharGoel]

Explanation of Change

Adds Rillet support for workspace vendor matching. Extends PolicyUtils with isRilletVendorMatchingActive, adds Rillet to hasVendorFeature, getActiveVendorMatchingIntegration, getActiveVendorMatchingVendors, and findVendorByID following cascade order (QBO → Sage Intacct → Xero → Rillet). Wires integration-specific empty state copy (workspace.rillet.noVendorsFound) in IOURequestStepVendor, and includes Rillet in WorkspaceMoreFeaturesPage vendor matching connection detection.

Fixed Issues

$ https://github.com/Expensify/Expensify/issues/678897
PROPOSAL:

Tests

Prerequisite: A workspace with the vendorMatching beta enabled, Rillet connected and configured, and at least one vendor in Rillet.

More Features Page:

1. Go to Workspace Settings > More Features on the workspace.
2. Verify "Vendors" row is displayed and enabled.

Manual vendor pick & search on an expense:

1. Open a non-reimbursable expense in workspace chat.
2. Verify the "Vendor" row is displayed below Category.
3. Tap "Vendor". Verify the Rillet vendor list appears.
4. Search for a vendor; verify the list filters by name.
5. Select a vendor; verify the picker closes and the expense Vendor row is updated.
6. With the expense flipped to reimbursable, verify the Vendor row is hidden.

Automatic vendor matching:

1. Import or create a non-reimbursable card expense with a merchant name matching an active Rillet vendor.
2. Open the transaction thread in chat.
3. Verify Concierge automatically matches the vendor, displaying the auto-match comment in the chat and setting the Vendor field on the transaction.

Inactive-vendor error:

1. On an expense with a set Rillet vendor, simulate an inactive vendor by removing the vendor from Rillet.
2. Reopen the expense. Verify the Vendor row displays a brick-road indicator and an inactive vendor error message.
3. Tap the Vendor row and select an active vendor (or select "None"). Verify the error clears.

• Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

QA Steps

Same as tests. Must be in vendorMatching beta - feel free to tag @Beamanator and @heyjennahay to test in staging

• 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 followed proper code patterns (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 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)
• 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.
• 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

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

[codecov]

Codecov Report

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

Files with missing lines	Coverage Δ
...ages/workspace/WorkspaceMoreFeaturesPage/index.tsx	69.79% <100.00%> (ø)
...rc/pages/iou/request/step/IOURequestStepVendor.tsx	0.00% <0.00%> (ø)
src/libs/PolicyUtils.ts	80.12% <93.75%> (+0.37%)	⬆️
... and 10 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]

[Beamanator]

@codex review

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

Codex Review Summary

This comment shows the latest Codex review activity on this pull request.

Review	Status	Commit	Review trigger
📝 Code Review	⚠️ Failed 2026-09-09T19:34:40.176656Z	f171829	Manual request

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" or "@codex security review".

Codex reacts with 👀 while any review is running, comments if it has suggestions, and reacts with 👍 once all reviews finish with no findings.

[Beamanator]

ooh to test this we'll need to add your email to the vendorMatching beta @bernhardoj 🙏

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

Codex Review: Something went wrong. Try again later by commenting “@codex review”.

Provided git ref f1718295909d9426b694a6459c3a046821cec823 does not exist

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".

[Beamanator]

Lots of tests successful!

[Beamanator]

Let's move forward with this 👍 I did a decent amount of testing and it's looking great!

[Beamanator]

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

Android: HybridApp

Android: mWeb Chrome

iOS: HybridApp

iOS: mWeb Safari

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

[github-actions]

🚧 Beamanator has triggered a test Expensify/App build. You can view the workflow run here.

[github-actions]

🧪🧪 Use the links below to test this adhoc build on Android, iOS, and Web. Happy testing! 🧪🧪
Built from App PR #100542.

Android 🤖	iOS 🍎
https://ad-hoc-expensify-cash.s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/rock-artifacts/ad-hoc/rock-android-Adhoc-cc384c1-941700c-c39a35cf80c0a573b7e578d6e9a05fe527d5c2d5/index.html	https://ad-hoc-expensify-cash.s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/rock-artifacts/ad-hoc/rock-ios-device-AdHoc-cc384c1-941700c-17c615164447462d91180eca1d3d43288e6220bf/index.html

Web 🕸️
https://100542.pr-testing.expensify.com

---

👀 View the workflow run that generated this build 👀

[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.

[OSBotify]

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/Beamanator in version: 9.4.76-0 🚀

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

[MelvinBot]

Yes — help site changes are required, and I've opened a draft PR for them: #100899

Why: the help site documents vendor matching per integration, and it already has articles for QuickBooks Online and Sage Intacct. This PR adds Rillet as a fourth vendor matching source, so the same coverage was missing for Rillet.

What the docs PR adds: one new article, docs/articles/new-expensify/connections/rillet/Manage-Vendor-Matching-for-Rillet.md, covering who can use Rillet vendor matching, how vendors are matched automatically, selecting a vendor manually on an expense, where the imported vendor list lives, setting the Default company card vendor, the export order, and the Vendor no longer valid error.

Decisions worth a look during review

• noindex: true / sitemap: false — matches the Sage Intacct vendor matching article, since Rillet vendor matching is still behind the vendorMatching beta. QBO is GA and its article is indexed.
• No cross-link from Configure-Rillet.md — also matching the Sage Intacct precedent for a beta-gated article. Say the word if you'd rather link it the way Configure-Quickbooks-Online.md does.
• No fallback vendor documented — QBO falls back to Credit Card Misc / Debit Card Misc and Sage Intacct to Credit Card Misc, but Rillet has no equivalent auto-created vendor in CONST.NON_REIMBURSABLE_FALLBACK_VENDOR_NAME, so the article stops at the Default company card vendor. Worth confirming that's right.
• UI labels were taken from src/languages/en.ts and checked against the live web app: Accounting, More features, Vendors ("Match card expenses to vendors imported from your accounting software."), Default company card vendor, Find vendor, No vendors found, and Vendor no longer valid. Rillet is confirmed present in the Accounting connections list.

No changes are needed to any existing help site article — nothing under docs/articles currently describes Rillet vendor matching, and the Rillet configuration article already documents the Default company card vendor export setting correctly.

@ShridharGoel, please review the linked help site PR and confirm it reflects the current behavior. Then mark the linked help site PR Ready for review

[jponikarchuk]

The Deploy Blocker issue #100924 is repro on all PRs. It seems like it can be related to the PR #99444 Could you please double check if it's not introduced by #100542

[Beamanator]

The Deploy Blocker issue #100924 is repro on all PRs. It seems like it can be related to the PR #99444 Could you please double check if it's not introduced by #100542

Looks like this got addressed 🙏

[heyjennahay]

Testing results:

More Features Page ✅

Manual vendor pick & search on an expense - all works except the vendor list is not in alphabetical order

Automatic vendor matching - auto matching didn't work when I manually created the NR expense. But did when I modified the merchant name

Inactive-vendor error ✅

[OSBotify]

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/mountiny in version: 9.4.76-1 🚀

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

Bundle Size Analysis (Sentry):

• Android