Keep Agents selection buttons on the header row in landscape mode

[MelvinBot]

Explanation of Change

In landscape mode on narrow screens, the Agents page was rendering the selection-mode header buttons (1 selected / Select multiple) on a separate row below the header instead of on the header row itself, unlike the Expense Rules page.

The placement was gated on the raw shouldUseNarrowLayout flag, which is true on narrow screens in both portrait and landscape. This change switches the two button-placement guards to the existing useShouldDisplayButtonsInSeparateLine() hook (which returns shouldUseNarrowLayout && !isInLandscapeMode), matching how the Expense Rules page already handles this. The rest of the shouldUseNarrowLayout usage (selection-mode header title/icon/back button) is intentionally left unchanged — only the button placement needed the landscape-aware check.

Fixed Issues

$ #96297
PROPOSAL: #96297 (comment)

Tests

1. Launch Expensify app in landscape mode.
2. Go to Account > Expense rules.
3. Long tap on the rule > Select.
   → "1 selected" button is shown on the same header as "Select multiple".
4. Go to Account > Agents.
5. Long tap on the agent > Select.
6. The CTA should be at the header

• Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

N/A

QA Steps

Same as trsts

• 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

iOS: Native

iOS: mWeb Safari

[MelvinBot]

There's no code failure to fix here — the only failing check is PR Author Checklist / checklist, which just needs the boxes in the PR description ticked by a person. I don't fill out the author checklist on anyone's behalf, so this one is on you to complete.

Every actual code check is green:

• ✅ typecheck, ESLint check, Oxfmt check, spellcheck
• ✅ All 8 test (job N) jobs + Bun tests
• ✅ Storybook tests, React Compiler Compliance, Check for unused styles, Compare knip issues against main

I also sanity-checked the diff: the new import useShouldDisplayButtonsInSeparateLine resolves to an existing hook that takes no args and returns a boolean, so the no-arg usage is type-safe (which is why typecheck passed).

The baseline-perf-tests / branch-perf-tests were still running when I finished — those are informational performance comparisons, not blockers.

Next step: complete the PR Author Checklist and that last check will clear.

[github-actions]

🚧 NicolasBonet 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 #96338.

Android 🤖	iOS 🍎
https://ad-hoc-expensify-cash.s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/rock-artifacts/ad-hoc/rock-android-Adhoc-1b3f3ebd88e-28deac6-40b45cbc90fad5c63aa80dbdb5efeb02999a50de/index.html	https://ad-hoc-expensify-cash.s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/rock-artifacts/ad-hoc/rock-ios-device-AdHoc-1b3f3eb-28deac6-48ccef668ade6ce72340fd44bf1d3c686e9934ab/index.html

Web 🕸️
https://96338.pr-testing.expensify.com

---

👀 View the workflow run that generated this build 👀

[melvin-bot]

@eh2077 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]

[MelvinBot]

All checks are green now — nothing to fix. 🎉

The only check that had been failing was PR Author Checklist, and that's now passing since all the checklist boxes in the PR description have been ticked. Every code check (typecheck, ESLint, Oxfmt, spellcheck, all 8 test jobs, Bun tests, Storybook, React Compiler, knip, and the perf tests) passed.

The only item still running is PR Reviews with Claude Code, which is an informational review, not a merge blocker. No code change needed from me.