Travel Pay / add content to review page & unsupported claim type page

[liztownd]

Note: Delete the description statements, complete each step. None are optional, but can be justified as to why they cannot be completed as written. Provide known gaps to testing that may raise the risk of merging to production.

Are you removing, renaming or moving a folder in this PR?

• No, I'm not changing any folders (skip to TeamSites and delete the rest of this section)
• Yes, I'm removing, renaming or moving a folder

⚠️ TeamSites ⚠️

Examples of a TeamSite: https://va.gov/health and https://benefits.va.gov/benefits/. This scenario is also referred to as the "injected" header and footer. You can reach out in the #sitewide-public-websites Slack channel for questions.

Did you change site-wide styles, platform utilities or other infrastructure?

• No
• Yes, and I used the proxy-rewrite steps to test the injected header scenario

Summary

• (Summarize the changes that have been made to the platform)

  • Adding content/functionality to Review Page and Unsupported Claim Type (Can't File) Page
  • Update related tests

• (Which team do you work for, does your team own the maintenance of this component?)
  Travel Pay

• (If using a flipper, what is the end date of the flipper being required/success criteria being targeted)

• Currently behind flipper, phased rollout begins Feb 1

Related issue(s)

• Link to ticket created in va.gov-team repo
  #10026 (Review Page)
  #10023 (Unsupported Type Page)

• Link to epic if not included in ticket
  #92353 (Mock SMOC flow views)
  #83829 (SMOC on VA.gov)

Testing done

• Describe what the old behavior was prior to the change

• Pages were shells, added content to 2 pages + functionality, updated Unit tests and cypress test

• Describe the steps required to verify your changes are working as expected
  Visit my-health/travel-pay/file-new-claim/{any made up ID} and move through the flow (answering no to one question to verify the Unsupported Claim Type page has content, then go back to the question and answer yes). On the review page you must select "agree" to the travel agreement before hitting the "File claim" button.

• Describe the tests completed and the results
  Unit tests for each page updated.

Screenshots

Note: This field is mandatory for UI changes (non-component work should NOT have screenshots).

	Before	After
Mobile - Unsupported
Desktop - Unsupported
Mobile - Review
Desktop - Review
Mobile - Agreement	N/A
Desktop - Agreement	N/A

What areas of the site does it impact?

Travel Pay

(Describe what parts of the site are impacted if code touched other areas)

Acceptance criteria

Quality Assurance & Testing

• I fixed|updated|added unit tests and integration tests for each feature (if applicable).
• No sensitive information (i.e. PII/credentials/internal URLs/etc.) is captured in logging, hardcoded, or specs
• Linting warnings have been addressed
• Documentation has been updated (link to documentation *if necessary)
• Screenshot of the developed feature is added
• Accessibility testing has been performed

Error Handling

• Browser console contains no warnings or errors.
• Events are being sent to the appropriate logging solution
• Feature/bug has a monitor built into Datadog or Grafana (if applicable)

Authentication

• Did you login to a local build and verify all authenticated routes work as expected with a test user

Requested Feedback

(OPTIONAL) What should the reviewers know in addition to the above. Is there anything specific you wish the reviewer to assist with. Do you have any concerns with this PR, why?