[WIP] Dedupe getTransactionsForReport lookups in Search row Action column

[TMisiukiewicz]

Explanation of Change

useLiveRowCapabilities runs per Search list row. For report rows it called getTransactionsForReport(data, reportID) twice per render — once inside getActions and again inside getPrimaryAction. Each call scans every key of the search snapshot, so fast-scrolling the expenses list burned significant JS time re-deriving the same result for every visible row and produced blank rows.

Fix:

• New getTransactionsByReportID(data) in SearchUIUtils groups the snapshot's transactions by reportID in one pass (same grouping rule already used by processTransactionEntry inside classifyAndPreprocess).
• SearchResultsProvider computes it once per snapshot and exposes currentSearchTransactionsByReportID on the existing SearchResultsContext (React Compiler memoizes it on data identity, so it recomputes only when the snapshot changes).
• The hook looks up its own report's transactions and passes them to getActions (via the already-existing but previously unused precomputedTransactionsForReport param) and to getPrimaryAction (new optional param with the same name).

No behavior change:

• All three useLiveRowCapabilities call sites (ExpenseReportListItem, TransactionListItem, TransactionGroupListItem) already source their snapshotData from the same useSearchResultsContext(), so the map is derived from identical data.
• getTransactionsForReport is kept as the fallback when no precomputed array is supplied, so every other caller and the empty-map case behave exactly as before.
• Transaction rows are unaffected: getActions uses [transaction] for transaction entries and getPrimaryAction skips the lookup entirely.

Test-only churn: MockSearchContextProvider and six tests/ui/*ListItemHeaderTest.tsx files construct SearchResultsContextValue by hand, so they each needed the new field; useLiveRowCapabilitiesTest needed useSearchResultsContext added to its @components/Search/SearchContext mock.

This PR stands alone off main.

Fixed Issues

$
PROPOSAL:

Tests

• Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

N/A

QA Steps

Same as tests

• 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

[codecov]

Codecov Report

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

Files with missing lines	Coverage Δ
src/components/Search/SearchContextDefinitions.ts	53.57% <100.00%> (+1.71%)	⬆️
...arch/SearchList/ListItem/useLiveRowCapabilities.ts	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
src/components/Search/SearchResultsProvider.tsx	78.57% <100.00%> (+1.64%)	⬆️
src/libs/SearchUIUtils.ts	65.27% <78.57%> (+0.12%)	⬆️
... and 11 files with indirect coverage changes

[github-actions]

🚧 mountiny 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 #97877.

Android 🤖	iOS 🍎
https://ad-hoc-expensify-cash.s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/rock-artifacts/ad-hoc/rock-android-Adhoc-af8eacc9718-0ad880f-7cd8bb6a4aec8f560a777c565e7619a937eaee5b/index.html	https://ad-hoc-expensify-cash.s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/rock-artifacts/ad-hoc/rock-ios-device-AdHoc-af8eacc-0ad880f-7ededec42ec5bb4fd143d754431ae0aaa539bb5d/index.html

Web 🕸️
https://97877.pr-testing.expensify.com

---

👀 View the workflow run that generated this build 👀