[No QA] Docs updates for E/A#99164 Create a rule prompt on expense edits

[MelvinBot]

Explanation of Change

Help site follow-up to #99164, which added an in-expense prompt offering to turn an expense edit into a Merchant Rule. Nothing on the help site described that entry point, so admins who saw the prompt had no article explaining what it does or why it sometimes doesn't appear.

Changes to docs/articles/new-expensify/workspaces/Workspace-Merchant-Rules.md:

• Added ## How to create a Merchant Rule from an expense you just edited, covering which field edits trigger the prompt, where it appears on each platform, that the Add rule page opens pre-filled with the merchant and the edited fields (everything else left at Don’t change), that you return to the expense after saving, and how to dismiss the prompt.
• Added an FAQ entry, ## Why don't I see the Create a rule prompt after editing an expense?, listing every gate from src/hooks/useMerchantRuleSuggestion.ts: Rules write access, Control plan with Rules enabled, a workspace expense, an expense that already has a merchant, one of the six triggering fields, and an expense detail view rather than a multi-expense report. It also explains that the offer is consumed once dismissed, acted on, or navigated away from.
• Corrected two existing UI labels that did not match the product: the match option is Exactly matches, not "Matches exactly", and the button is Save rule, not "Save Rule". Both were confirmed against the live Rules page on a Control workspace.
• Updated keywords and internalScope to cover the new entry point.

The set of triggering fields comes from CONST.MERCHANT_RULE_SUGGESTION_FIELDS and the prompt copy from src/languages/en.ts.

One item needs your confirmation: the prompt itself is gated behind the rulesRevamp beta, so it could not be exercised on a test account. The behavior documented here is derived from the source and from the test plan in #99164, not from a live capture. The surrounding Rules page labels were verified live.

No screenshot was added. The article carries a <!-- SCREENSHOT: --> suggestion for one showing the prompt above the composer, for whoever can capture it with the beta on.

Fixed Issues

$ #96354
PROPOSAL:

Tests

// TODO: The human co-author must fill out the tests you ran before marking this PR as "ready for review"
// Please describe what tests you performed that validates your changed worked.

• Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

Not applicable. This PR only changes a Markdown help article and ships no app code.

QA Steps

// TODO: The human co-author must fill out the QA tests you ran before marking this PR as "ready for review".
// Please describe what QA needs to do to validate your changes and what areas do they need to test for regressions.

• 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

Android: Native

Android: mWeb Chrome

iOS: Native

iOS: mWeb Safari

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

---

@Krishna2323, please review the files changed and confirm they reflect the current behavior. Then post a new comment saying @MelvinBot mark this PR as ready for review.

[MelvinBot]

I created this PR from an upstream branch since I don't have push access to your fork.

To take ownership of this branch and be able to push updates, run:

git remote add upstream https://github.com/Expensify/App.git
git fetch upstream melvin-docs-merchantRuleFromExpense
git checkout -b melvin-docs-merchantRuleFromExpense upstream/melvin-docs-merchantRuleFromExpense
git push -u origin melvin-docs-merchantRuleFromExpense

Then you can close this PR and open a new one from your fork.

[OSBotify]

A preview of your ExpensifyHelp changes have been deployed to https://4866c65c.helpdot.pages.dev ⚡️

Updated articles:

• articles/new-expensify/workspaces/Workspace-Merchant-Rules