[No QA] Revise custom export instructions for accounting software

[stephanieelliott]

Updated instructions for creating custom exports for unsupported accounting software, including new steps for using saved searches.

Fixed Issues

https://github.com/Expensify/Expensify/issues/649490

[github-actions]

HelpDot Documentation Review

Overall Assessment:
This PR revises the custom export instructions in Indirect-Accounting-Integrations.md, replacing the old Export Formats template flow with an updated saved-search-based workflow (Spend > Reports > Filters/Display > Save > Export current view). The changes are scoped to a single H2 section and one supporting paragraph, and are a clear improvement over the prior version, aligning well with the governance standards.

Scores Summary:

• Readability: 9/10 - Steps are sequential, action-oriented, and easy to scan. The sub-bullets under step 3 clarify the purpose of Filters vs. Display without cluttering the flow.
• AI Readiness: 8/10 - The heading is now task-based ("How to create a custom export for unsupported accounting software"), a strong improvement for retrieval. It does not embed an exact feature name, and the article frontmatter (unchanged) lacks the mandatory internalScope field, though that is outside the proposed diff.
• Style Compliance: 9/10 - UI labels (Spend, Reports, Filters, Display, Save, Export current view) are bolded and in correct case. Navigation uses the approved unified phrasing "In the navigation tabs (on the left on web, on the bottom on mobile)." The cross-link is relative, uses descriptive anchor text, and is placed after an explanatory sentence rather than inside a numbered step.

Key Findings:

• Strong improvement: the section heading was converted from a vague question ("What if my accounting package isnt listed?") to a proper task-based H2.
• Correct navigation phrasing and consistent bold UI labels throughout.
• Cross-link to the CSV export article follows linking standards (relative, descriptive anchor, outside step flow).
• Minor: button verbs are mixed ("select" in steps 1-2, "Click" in step 4). Consider standardizing for consistency.
• Minor (outside diff): the H2 and steps could include an exact feature name (e.g., "saved search") for sharper retrieval; the article frontmatter is missing internalScope.

Recommendations:

• Optional: standardize the action verb across steps (use Select or Click consistently).
• Optional: consider naming the feature ("saved search") in the H2 to strengthen AI retrieval.
• No blocking issues in the proposed changes.

Files Reviewed:

• docs/articles/new-expensify/connections/Indirect-Accounting-Integrations.md - Approved with minor optional suggestions.

Note: This review covers only the changes proposed in the diff.

[OSBotify]

A preview of your ExpensifyHelp changes have been deployed to https://752201dc.helpdot.pages.dev ⚡️

Updated articles:

• articles/new-expensify/connections/Indirect-Accounting-Integrations

[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 @greg-schroeder

[melvin-bot]

@greg-schroeder 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]