Docs updates for E/A#100455 Publish Sage Intacct vendor matching article

[MelvinBot]

Explanation of Change

Help site follow-up to Remove vendor gate intacct, which removed the vendorMatching beta gate from the Sage Intacct code paths and made Sage Intacct vendor matching generally available.

The Sage Intacct help article already existed, but it was hidden from the live help site with noindex: true and sitemap: false while the feature was beta-gated. The QuickBooks Online article carries no such flags after the equivalent QBO cleanup in [No QA] Remove the QBO vendor matching beta gate, and the Xero article stays in docs/articles/Unlisted/ because Xero vendor matching is still pre-GA. This PR brings Sage Intacct in line with the QBO pattern.

docs/articles/new-expensify/connections/sage-intacct/Manage-Vendor-Matching-for-Sage-Intacct.md

• Removed noindex: true and sitemap: false so the article publishes and is indexed. This is the substantive change — the feature is GA, so the article should no longer be hidden.
• Corrected the export option label from Credit Card Charges to Credit cards in the body, the keywords list, and internalScope. The Sage Intacct Export company card expenses as picker renders workspace.sageIntacct.nonReimbursableExpenses.values.creditCardCharge, which is Credit cards in src/languages/en.ts:5423. "Credit Card Charges" is the Sage Intacct record name, not the Expensify label.
• Added a ## Where to find your imported Sage Intacct vendors section. This is the surface the linked PR unhides: the Vendors row on More features and the Vendors page in the Workspace menu. It also states that switching the export to Vendor bills removes them again, which matches the export mode gate that GA did not widen.
• Replaced a broken image reference with a non-rendered <!-- SCREENSHOT: --> placeholder. The article pointed at assets/images/2_Awesome_Co_Control_Intacct_-_Accounting.png, which does not exist in docs/assets/images/, so publishing the article as-is would have shipped a broken image.
• Added one sentence stating that no access request is needed, replacing the implicit beta framing.

docs/articles/new-expensify/connections/sage-intacct/Configure-Sage-Intacct.md

• Added a cross-link to the vendor matching article from the Export company card expenses as section, mirroring the two links the QBO configuration article already carries.
• Corrected the option labels in that section to Credit cards and Vendor bills, and capitalized Default vendor to match the UI.

Label verification

Every UI label in the changed text was verified rather than assumed:

• Accounting, More features, and the Sage Intacct connection row were read back from the live NewDot web UI.
• The More features sections render as Integrate, Organize, Manage, Spend, Earn. The Vendors row sits in the Organize section, per src/pages/workspace/WorkspaceMoreFeaturesPage/index.tsx:505-592, so the article says Organize, not Integrate.
• The Vendors switch is intentionally locked, so the article says it can't be turned off there. That matches the disabled prop and its comment at src/pages/workspace/WorkspaceMoreFeaturesPage/index.tsx:581.
• Export company card expenses as, Credit cards, Vendor bills, Default vendor, Vendors, and Vendor were verified against src/languages/en.ts, the source of the rendered strings.

A Sage Intacct-connected Workspace could not be created in the test environment, so the Intacct-specific labels were verified from the translation source and the rendering components rather than by driving a connected Workspace. Please confirm them against a real Sage Intacct Workspace when you review.

Deliberately out of scope

• Configure-Sage-Intacct.md has pre-existing heading and capitalization violations of docs/HELP_AUTHORING_GUIDELINES.md (# Step 1: Select Entity, ## Billable Expenses, and **Expense Reports** / **Vendor Bills** in the out-of-pocket section). Only the section this PR touches was corrected; restructuring that article belongs in its own PR.
• The Xero article stays in docs/articles/Unlisted/, and no Rillet or DualEntry article was added, because those integrations are still gated by CONST.BETAS.VENDOR_MATCHING.
• A real screenshot still needs to be captured for the <!-- SCREENSHOT: --> placeholder.

Fixed Issues

$ #100455
PROPOSAL:

Tests

// TODO: The human co-author must fill out the tests you ran before marking this PR as "ready for review"
// Please describe what tests you performed that validates your changed worked.

For reference, these checks were run on the branch:

1. npm run spell-changed — 2 files checked, 0 issues.
2. Re-checked the article against docs/HELP_AUTHORING_GUIDELINES.md: exactly one # title plus the exempt # FAQ, only ## section headings, every section heading starts with a question word or an action verb, at least one "How to" heading, and the screenshot placeholder uses the required non-rendered comment format.
3. Confirmed the article no longer carries noindex or sitemap, and that the new cross-link uses the same relative link shape as the QBO configuration article.

• Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

Not applicable. This PR changes help site markdown only and ships no app code.

QA Steps

// TODO: The human co-author must fill out the QA tests you ran before marking this PR as "ready for review".
// Please describe what QA needs to do to validate your changes and what areas do they need to test for regressions.

Help site content only — consider adding "[No QA]" to the title if QA has nothing to verify here.

• 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

Not applicable — help site markdown only, no app UI changes.

---

@KioCoan, please review the files changed and confirm they reflect the current behavior. Then post a new comment saying @MelvinBot mark this PR as ready for review.