fix: navigate to Concierge chat after login from Concierge deep link on web

[x-dev90]

Explanation of Change

Preserve the /concierge deep-link intent when a logged-out user signs up with a new account, then consume that intent after onboarding before falling back to Home.

This keeps the existing pre-onboarding deep-link guard intact, avoids reopening stale non-Concierge deep links, and routes the user to the Concierge report when available. If the Concierge report ID is not ready yet, it navigates to ROUTES.CONCIERGE so ConciergePage can resolve the chat.

Fixed Issues

$ #95365
PROPOSAL: #95365 (comment)

Tests

Case 1: Original Flow

1. Log out of the app
2. Open /concierge directly in the browser
3. Sign up with a brand-new account
4. Complete onboarding
5. Verify the Concierge chat opens

Additional Cases

1. Log out of the app
2. Open /concierge directly in the browser
3. Sign in with an existing account
4. Verify the Concierge chat opens

---

1. Log out of the app
2. Open /concierge directly in the browser
3. Start signup but do not complete onboarding
4. In the same tab, navigate to /
5. Sign up normally from /
6. Complete onboarding
7. Verify the app lands on Home and does not open Concierge

---

1. Log out of the app
2. Open /
3. Sign up with a brand-new account
4. Complete onboarding
5. Verify the app follows the normal onboarding destination and does not open Concierge from stale state

---

1. Log out of the app
2. Open /concierge/
3. Sign up with a brand-new account
4. Complete onboarding
5. Verify the Concierge chat opens

---

1. Log out of the app
2. Open /concierge?test=1
3. Sign up with a brand-new account
4. Complete onboarding
5. Verify the Concierge chat opens

---

1. Log out of the app
2. Open /concierge#test
3. Sign up with a brand-new account
4. Complete onboarding
5. Verify the Concierge chat opens

• Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

Same as tests.

QA Steps

Same as tests.

// TODO: These must be filled out, or the issue title must include "[No QA]."

• 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

Screen_Recording_20260717_182305_Chrome.mp4

iOS: Native

iOS: mWeb Safari

Screen.Recording.2026-07-17.at.6.33.33.PM.mp4

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

Screen.Recording.2026-07-17.at.5.56.41.PM.mp4

[codecov]

Codecov Report

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

Files with missing lines	Coverage Δ
src/libs/actions/SignInRedirect.ts	73.58% <100.00%> (+0.50%)	⬆️
src/libs/navigateAfterOnboarding.ts	88.00% <100.00%> (+0.50%)	⬆️
src/libs/actions/Link.ts	54.04% <88.88%> (+1.04%)	⬆️
src/libs/PendingConciergeDeepLink.ts	90.90% <90.90%> (ø)
... and 9 files with indirect coverage changes

[melvin-bot]

@brunovjk 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: f870138760

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Codex has been enabled to automatically 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 👍.

When you sign up for Codex through ChatGPT, Codex can also answer questions or update the PR, like "@codex address that feedback".

[x-dev90]

Hi @brunovjk, I tested one additional edge case and would like to confirm the expected behavior.

Steps:

1. Log out.
2. Open /concierge.
3. Before completing signup/onboarding, open /.
4. Complete signup/onboarding.

I also tested this on main, and the app still navigates to Concierge after onboarding. So this behavior does not seem to be introduced by this PR.

My understanding is that the app currently preserves the original /concierge signup deep-link intent through onboarding, and visiting / before onboarding completes does not cancel it.

Could you please confirm how we should handle this? Should this PR keep the current main behavior and only fix the reported Concierge onboarding issue, or should we also update the behavior so opening / explicitly cancels the pending Concierge intent?

Tested on main:

Screencast.From.2026-07-18.22-40-19.mp4

[x-dev90]

Hi @brunovjk, just following up on this PR.

I addressed the AI feedback by persisting the pending Concierge deep-link intent in sessionStorage, so it can survive a tab reload during signup/onboarding and still be cleared through the existing consume/sign-out paths.

Could you please review the latest changes when you have a chance?