[No QA] Improve Copilot feature documentation and discoverability

[MelvinBot]

Summary

• Adds search keywords (delegate, assistant, proxy, behalf of, shared access, account access, executive assistant, accountant) to all 4 Copilot and Delegate articles to improve help site search discoverability
• Adds a "Copilot vs. Vacation Delegate" comparison table to both New Expensify and Classic Copilot articles to help users understand which feature they need
• Adds common use cases (executive assistant, accountant, team lead) to the New Expensify Copilot article intro
• Adds cross-reference FAQ entries in both Delegate articles pointing users to the Copilot article for permanent access needs

Related to Expensify/Expensify#637958

Test plan

• Verify all 4 modified markdown articles render correctly on the help site
• Confirm links between Copilot and Delegate articles work correctly
• Verify the comparison tables display properly in rendered markdown

[github-actions]

HelpDot Documentation Review

Overall Assessment

This PR improves discoverability across four Copilot and Delegate articles by expanding keywords, adding comparison tables, common use cases, and cross-reference FAQ entries. The additions are substantively helpful for users who confuse Copilot and Vacation Delegate features. However, several structural and formatting issues conflict with the HelpDot governance rules.

Scores Summary

• Readability: 8/10 - The comparison tables are clear and scannable. The new FAQ entries are concise and directly answer common user questions. The use-case bullet list in the New Expensify Copilot article is a helpful addition. Minor issue: the tables use "--" (double hyphen) instead of an em dash for "Temporary -- removed when you return."
• AI Readiness: 5/10 - The new # Copilot vs. Vacation Delegate sections violate the heading hierarchy rule: articles must have exactly one # heading (the title) plus an optional # FAQ -- no other # headings are allowed (HELP_AUTHORING_GUIDELINES.md, Sections 4 and 9). Additionally, this heading is noun-based/comparison-based rather than task-based, violating Section 2. The expanded keywords are a positive contribution to search discoverability.
• Style Compliance: 6/10 - Cross-links in the new content use absolute URLs (e.g., https://help.expensify.com/articles/...) instead of relative links, which violates the cross-linking standards in HELP_AUTHORING_GUIDELINES.md Section 7 ("Use relative links only. Do not use full URLs."). Bold formatting on UI terms and button names is used correctly throughout.

Key Findings

• Heading hierarchy violation (critical): Both Copilot articles add a new # Copilot vs. Vacation Delegate top-level heading. Per governance, only one # heading (the article title) and optionally # FAQ are permitted. This section should be demoted to ## How Copilot compares to Vacation Delegate (or similar task-based phrasing) or placed within the existing # FAQ section.
• Absolute URLs instead of relative links (critical): All four new cross-links use full https://help.expensify.com/... URLs. These must be converted to relative paths (e.g., /articles/new-expensify/settings/Delegate-when-out-of-office).
• Non-task-based heading: "Copilot vs. Vacation Delegate" is a comparison label, not a task-based heading. It should start with an action verb or question word (e.g., "How to decide between Copilot and Vacation Delegate" or "How Copilot differs from Vacation Delegate").
• Positive: keyword expansion across all four files is well done and aligns with realistic search queries (delegate, assistant, proxy, behalf of, shared access, executive assistant, accountant).
• Positive: FAQ cross-references in the Delegate articles are well-written, use question-based headings, and guide users to the right feature.

Recommendations

1. Demote # Copilot vs. Vacation Delegate to ## and rephrase as a task-based heading (e.g., ## How to decide between Copilot and Vacation Delegate).
2. Replace all absolute URLs with relative links in the four new cross-references.
3. Consider placing the comparison table inside the # FAQ section if it fits the article flow, since FAQ is exempt from task-based heading rules and comparison content is often FAQ-adjacent.
4. Replace "--" with a proper em dash or rephrase for cleaner rendering in the comparison tables.

Files Reviewed

• docs/articles/expensify-classic/copilots-and-delegates/Assign-or-remove-a-Copilot.md -- Added comparison table with # heading (needs demotion to ##), expanded keywords. Uses absolute URL for cross-link.
• docs/articles/expensify-classic/copilots-and-delegates/Delegate-when-out-of-office.md -- Added FAQ entry with good question-based heading. Expanded keywords. Uses absolute URL.
• docs/articles/new-expensify/settings/Copilot-Access.md -- Added use cases, comparison table with # heading (needs demotion to ##), expanded keywords. Uses absolute URL.
• docs/articles/new-expensify/settings/Delegate-when-out-of-office.md -- Added FAQ entry with good question-based heading. Expanded keywords. Uses absolute URL.

Note: Detailed line-by-line feedback has been provided as inline comments.

[github-actions]

HelpDot Documentation Review

Overall Assessment

This PR adds cross-linking between Copilot and Vacation Delegate articles across both Expensify Classic and New Expensify, introduces comparison tables, expands keywords for better search coverage, and adds a new FAQ entry to the Delegate articles. The intent is sound -- helping users distinguish between Copilots and Vacation Delegates is a genuine user need. However, several structural and formatting issues must be resolved before merging.

Scores Summary

• Readability: 5/10 - The comparison tables and new FAQ content are clear and well-written when read in isolation, but duplicated paragraphs in two files (Delegate-when-out-of-office.md classic, Copilot-Access.md) will confuse readers who see the same sentence repeated back-to-back. This significantly hurts scannability and trust.
• AI Readiness: 4/10 - Keyword expansions are a positive step for retrieval. However, the introduction of # Copilot vs. Vacation Delegate as a second top-level heading in Copilot-Access.md directly violates the one-# rule (HELP_AUTHORING_GUIDELINES.md Section 4), which will degrade heading-based retrieval and confuse any system parsing heading hierarchy. The heading also fails the task-based requirement -- it is a noun-only/topic-only label, not an action or question.
• Style Compliance: 4/10 - Multiple governance violations: full URLs used instead of relative links (2 files), a second # heading that is not # FAQ (1 file), duplicated content (2 files), and a non-task-based heading. These are not stylistic preferences but explicit rules in the governance documents.

Key Findings

Critical issues that must be fixed:

1. Duplicated content in two files. In Delegate-when-out-of-office.md (classic), the FAQ answer paragraph appears twice -- once with a full URL link and once with a relative link. The same duplication occurs in Copilot-Access.md for the final cross-link sentence. Only one version of each should remain, and it must use a relative link.

2. Prohibited second # heading. Copilot-Access.md introduces # Copilot vs. Vacation Delegate after the existing ## How to decide between a Copilot and a Vacation Delegate. Per HELP_AUTHORING_GUIDELINES.md Section 4: "Exactly one # heading (the article title). No other # headings are allowed except # FAQ." This heading must be removed entirely -- the ## heading above it already serves the purpose.

3. Full URLs instead of relative links. Assign-or-remove-a-Copilot.md and Copilot-Access.md (the non-duplicated lines) use https://help.expensify.com/... URLs. Per HELP_AUTHORING_GUIDELINES.md Section 7: "Use relative links only. Do not use full URLs." Similarly, the duplicated line in classic Delegate-when-out-of-office.md that uses a full URL must be removed (keeping only the relative-link version).

4. Non-task-based heading. # Copilot vs. Vacation Delegate is a noun-only comparison label. Per HELP_AUTHORING_GUIDELINES.md Section 2, all headings (except # FAQ) must start with an action verb or question word. The existing ## How to decide between a Copilot and a Vacation Delegate already satisfies this rule and should be the only heading for that section.

Positive aspects:

• The expanded keyword lists are well-chosen and reflect realistic search queries (e.g., "executive assistant", "accountant", "manage someone else's account").
• The comparison tables are a genuinely useful addition that will help users self-select the right feature.
• The new FAQ entry in the Delegate articles directly addresses a common user question with clear, actionable guidance.
• The New Expensify Delegate article (Delegate-when-out-of-office.md) uses a correct relative link and has no duplication -- it is the cleanest change in the PR.

Recommendations

1. Remove all duplicated lines. In Delegate-when-out-of-office.md (classic) and Copilot-Access.md, delete the duplicate paragraph/sentence. Keep only the version that uses a relative link.
2. Delete the # Copilot vs. Vacation Delegate heading in Copilot-Access.md. The ## How to decide between a Copilot and a Vacation Delegate heading directly above it is correct and sufficient.
3. Convert all full URLs to relative links. Replace https://help.expensify.com/articles/... with /articles/... in Assign-or-remove-a-Copilot.md and whichever line is kept in Copilot-Access.md.
4. Verify the comparison table renders correctly on the help site, as Markdown table rendering can vary.

Files Reviewed

• docs/articles/expensify-classic/copilots-and-delegates/Assign-or-remove-a-Copilot.md -- Keywords expanded (good), comparison table added (good), but cross-link uses a full URL instead of a relative link.
• docs/articles/expensify-classic/copilots-and-delegates/Delegate-when-out-of-office.md -- Keywords expanded (good), new FAQ added (good), but the answer paragraph is duplicated (one full URL, one relative link).
• docs/articles/new-expensify/settings/Copilot-Access.md -- Keywords expanded (good), use cases added (good), comparison table added (good), but contains a prohibited second # heading, a duplicated cross-link sentence, and a full URL link.
• docs/articles/new-expensify/settings/Delegate-when-out-of-office.md -- Clean change. Keywords expanded, new FAQ added with correct relative link. No issues found.

Note: Detailed line-by-line feedback has been provided as inline comments.

[RachCHopkins]

Dupe line here. 85 & 86 are the same.

[RachCHopkins]

Still seems to be a dupe line here.

[stephanieelliott]

@MelvinBot can you run the github-actions QA review on the updated files?

[MelvinBot]

🤖 QA review of the updated files — found 2 broken links, a duplicated line, a missing redirect, and a front-matter format issue. Details below.

🔴 Blockers

1. Broken link — classic Act-as-a-Copilot.md points to a page that doesn't exist
Act-as-a-Copilot.md:13 links to /articles/expensify-classic/copilots-and-delegates/Manage-Copilot-Access, but no Manage-Copilot-Access.md exists in the classic folder — the classic "manage" article is Assign-or-remove-a-Copilot.md (only its title was changed to "Manage Copilot access", not the filename). This 404s.
→ Change the target to /articles/expensify-classic/copilots-and-delegates/Assign-or-remove-a-Copilot.

2. Broken link — new Delegate-when-out-of-office.md points to the deleted page
Delegate-when-out-of-office.md:59 links to /articles/new-expensify/settings/Copilot-Access, but Copilot-Access.md is deleted in this PR (replaced by Manage-Copilot-Access.md). This 404s.
→ Change the target to /articles/new-expensify/settings/Manage-Copilot-Access.

3. Duplicated answer line — classic Delegate-when-out-of-office.md
Delegate-when-out-of-office.md:56-57 repeats the same answer paragraph twice — once with an absolute https://help.expensify.com/... URL and once with a relative /articles/... URL. The reader sees the sentence twice.
→ Keep one line. Help-site convention is the relative path (/articles/expensify-classic/copilots-and-delegates/Assign-or-remove-a-Copilot); delete the other.

4. Missing redirect for the deleted Copilot-Access page
new-expensify/settings/Copilot-Access.md is deleted, but there's no redirect, so the live URL .../new-expensify/settings/Copilot-Access will 404. Worse, redirects.csv:837 already redirects an older URL to Copilot-Access, so that chain now lands on a dead page.
→ Add a redirect .../new-expensify/settings/Copilot-Access → .../new-expensify/settings/Manage-Copilot-Access, and update line 837's destination to Manage-Copilot-Access.

🟡 Should fix

5. Malformed front matter — blank line after the opening ---
The four new/rewritten files open with a blank line between --- and title: (e.g. Act-as-a-Copilot.md:1-3). Every other help article puts title: immediately on line 2. Remove the blank line in all four to match convention and avoid front-matter parsing risk:

• expensify-classic/.../Act-as-a-Copilot.md
• expensify-classic/.../Assign-or-remove-a-Copilot.md
• new-expensify/settings/Act-as-a-Copilot.md
• new-expensify/settings/Manage-Copilot-Access.md

🔵 Lower-confidence — navigation steps to verify against the live UI

The navigation paths to the Copilot settings differ across the articles and I couldn't verify which is current from the docs alone — worth a manual check:

• Classic Act-as-a-Copilot.md: profile icon → Copilot access section
• Classic Assign-or-remove-a-Copilot.md: Settings > Account > Profile > Copilot: Delegated Access
• New Expensify articles: Account > Copilot
• The deleted Copilot-Access.md had used Account > Security

Please confirm the real in-product location so all four articles describe the same path.

---

I'm the author of this PR, so reply with @MelvinBot fix these and I'll push the corrections (links, dedupe, redirect, and front matter) to the branch.

[melvin-bot]

Concierge reviewer checklist:

• I have verified the accuracy of the article
  • The article is within a hub that makes sense, and the navigation is correct
  • All processes, screenshots, and examples align with current product behavior.
  • All links within the doc have been verified for correct destination and functionality.
• I have verified the readability of the article
  • The article's language is clear, concise, and free of jargon.
  • The grammar, spelling, and punctuation are correct.
  • The article contains at least one image, or that an image is not necessary
• I have verified the formatting of the article
  • The article has consistent formatting (headings, bullet points, etc.) with other HelpDot articles and that aligns with the HelpDot formatting standards.
  • The article has proper text spacing and breaks for readability.
• I have verified the article has the appropriate tone and style
  • The article's tone is professional, friendly, and suitable for the target audience.
  • The article's tone, terminology, and voice are consistent throughout.
• I have verified the overall quality of the article
  • The article is not missing any information, nor does it contain redundant information.
  • The article fully addresses user needs.
• I have verified that all requested improvements have been addressed

For more detailed instructions on completing this checklist, see How do I review a HelpDot PR as a Concierge Team member?

cc @kadiealexander

[melvin-bot]

@Gonals @kadiealexander One of you needs to 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]

NOTE: It looks like docs/redirects.csv was modified in this PR. Please see this SO for special instructions on how to review changes to that file.

[OSBotify]

A preview of your ExpensifyHelp changes have been deployed to https://940e6997.helpdot.pages.dev ⚡️

Updated articles:

• articles/expensify-classic/copilots-and-delegates/Act-as-a-Copilot
• articles/expensify-classic/copilots-and-delegates/Delegate-when-out-of-office
• articles/expensify-classic/copilots-and-delegates/Manage-Copilot-access
• articles/new-expensify/settings/Act-as-a-Copilot
• articles/new-expensify/settings/Delegate-when-out-of-office
• articles/new-expensify/settings/Manage-Copilot-Access