Remove unsafe type assertions from search, selection, payments, and Plaid

[KJ21-ENG]

Explanation of Change

Removes thirteen unsafe type assertions from four cleanup targets while preserving their existing contracts. Search filter values are narrowed before card, feed, and tax-rate lookup; section flattening retains each section item type without a cast-only flatIndex; payment methods are discriminated by their bank fields; and Plaid institution metadata is narrowed by its platform-specific identifier. The Search filter regression test covers both scalar and comma-joined card IDs.

Fixed Issues

$ #94739
PROPOSAL: #94739 (comment)

Count change

Current baseline source:

• config/eslint/eslint.seatbelt.tsv at base 36b1102184013c05064c481e5e09954137394aae.

Before:

• src/components/Search/SearchPageHeader/SearchFilterBar.tsx: 3 violations
• src/components/SelectionList/hooks/useFlattenedSections.ts: 3 violations
• src/hooks/useBulkPayOptions.ts: 3 violations
• src/pages/settings/Wallet/PersonalCards/steps/PlaidConnectionStep.tsx: 4 violations

After:

• src/components/Search/SearchPageHeader/SearchFilterBar.tsx: 0 violations
• src/components/SelectionList/hooks/useFlattenedSections.ts: 0 violations
• src/hooks/useBulkPayOptions.ts: 0 violations
• src/pages/settings/Wallet/PersonalCards/steps/PlaidConnectionStep.tsx: 0 violations

Net reduction:

• 13 fewer unsafe type assertion violations.

TSV evidence:

• The verifier restored config/eslint/eslint.seatbelt.tsv byte-for-byte after confirming zero cleanup findings across all four targets and both approved support paths.

Tests

1. Focused formatter and ESLint passed across all six changed paths.
2. Focused Jest passed tests/unit/Search/SearchFilterBarTest.tsx, covering one scalar card ID and multiple comma-joined card IDs.
3. The verifier-owned focused typecheck produced no authorized-path diagnostic; its only diagnostic was in unrelated src/components/AddressSearch/index.tsx, so exact-head Fork CI remained mandatory.
4. git diff --check, changed-path proof, and generated-TSV restoration passed.
5. Independent scope, type-safety, and regression reviews were clean on the final diff.
6. Exact-head Fork CI run 32122086149 passed typecheck, lint, format, React Compiler, and Jest at signed commit 1c43df2cf0023a0cab0119225bd9447c52260d7d.

No manual application testing was performed; the evidence above is automated verification and independent review.

Offline tests

N/A: this type-safety cleanup does not change network or offline behavior, and no manual offline testing was performed.

QA Steps

N/A: no product behavior is intended to change. Search card-label behavior is covered by the focused regression test, and the complete exact head passed Fork CI.

PR Author Checklist

N/A rationale: no UI, copy, CSS, assets, networking, deeplink, Storybook story, messaging flow, or new feature is introduced. No manual platform, high-traffic-account, offline, console, screenshot/video, staging, or production testing was performed. The affected Search, SelectionList, payment-option, and Plaid contracts were examined during planning and independent review, and exact-head CI covered the full repository checks. Every item below was considered against that scope.

• 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

N/A: no UI or visual behavior changed, and no screenshots or videos were produced.

Changed files (6)

• src/components/Search/SearchPageHeader/SearchFilterBar.tsx
• src/components/SelectionList/SelectionListWithSections/types.ts (reserved support path)
• src/components/SelectionList/hooks/useFlattenedSections.ts
• src/hooks/useBulkPayOptions.ts
• src/pages/settings/Wallet/PersonalCards/steps/PlaidConnectionStep.tsx
• tests/unit/Search/SearchFilterBarTest.tsx (reserved support path)

[codecov]

Codecov Report

❌ Looks like you've decreased code coverage for some files. Please write tests to increase, or at least maintain, the existing level of code coverage. See our documentation here for how to interpret this table.

Files with missing lines	Coverage Δ
...onents/SelectionList/hooks/useFlattenedSections.ts	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
...onents/Search/SearchPageHeader/SearchFilterBar.tsx	25.71% <33.33%> (+22.85%)	⬆️
src/hooks/useBulkPayOptions.ts	60.81% <20.00%> (-1.69%)	⬇️
...Wallet/PersonalCards/steps/PlaidConnectionStep.tsx	0.00% <0.00%> (ø)
... and 36 files with indirect coverage changes