@stephanieelliott looks like this was merged without a test passing. Please add a note explaining why this was done and remove the Emergency label if this is not an emergency.

HelpDot Documentation Review

Overall Assessment

This PR adds documentation for the partial approval workflow when reports contain held expenses. It introduces one new instructional section and one new FAQ entry to the existing Approve-Expenses.md article. The changes are well-scoped, clearly written, and largely compliant with HelpDot governance standards.

Scores Summary

• Readability: 9/10 - The new content is clear, concise, and scannable. Bullet points effectively distinguish the two approval options. The FAQ answer is direct and actionable. Minor improvement possible in phrasing (see recommendations).
• AI Readiness: 9/10 - Both new headings are task-based and include feature-specific language. The section heading starts with "How to" and the FAQ heading starts with "What," both compliant with heading rules. No metadata update needed since the existing YAML frontmatter already covers approval workflows.
• Style Compliance: 8/10 - Button names are correctly bolded. Dynamic button text is represented with bracket notation, which is a reasonable convention. One minor issue: the phrase "clicking Approve" uses a gerund rather than the imperative voice ("Click Approve") typically expected in HelpDot documentation, though here it appears in explanatory prose rather than a numbered step, which makes it acceptable.

Key Findings

• Both new headings comply with the task-based heading requirement (Section 2 of HELP_AUTHORING_GUIDELINES.md).
• Button labels (Approve only [non-held amount], Approve [full amount], Approve) are properly bolded per HELPSITE_NAMING_CONVENTIONS.md.
• The content stays within the single-workflow scope of the existing article (expense approval) and does not introduce unrelated workflows.
• No cross-links are introduced, which is appropriate since the section is self-contained.
• The FAQ entry directly answers a user question without vague language.

Recommendations

1. Consider whether "confirmation modal" is user-facing terminology. If the UI does not label it as a "modal," a more user-friendly phrase such as "a confirmation dialog" or simply "a prompt with two options" may be clearer for the target audience.
2. In the sentence "clicking Approve ... displays a confirmation modal," consider rephrasing to imperative voice for consistency: e.g., "When you click Approve ... a confirmation prompt appears with two options."
3. The bracket notation in Approve only [non-held amount] and Approve [full amount] is a good way to represent dynamic button text. Consider adding a brief note (e.g., parenthetical) clarifying that the amounts shown are calculated based on the report, so users understand the button text is dynamic.

Files Reviewed

• docs/articles/new-expensify/reports-and-expenses/Approve-Expenses.md - Two additions: new "How to approve a report that contains held expenses" section and new FAQ entry "What happens to held expenses when I partially approve a report?" Both are well-structured and governance-compliant with minor phrasing suggestions noted above.

Note: This review covers only the proposed changes in the diff, not pre-existing content in the file.