[PM-33519] feat: Rewire upgrade CTAs to use conditional routing

[SaintPatrck]

🎟️ Tracking

https://bitwarden.atlassian.net/browse/PM-33519

📔 Objective

Rewire all existing premium upgrade CTAs across the app to conditionally route to either the in-app PlanScreen (modal) or the external web vault URL based on isInAppUpgradeAvailableFlow.

Stacked on PM-33518 PR (upgrade available flow)

Changes

• Inject PremiumStateManager into ViewModels that have upgrade CTAs: VaultViewModel, VaultItemViewModel, VaultItemListingViewModel, VaultAddEditViewModel, AddEditSendViewModel, SearchViewModel
• Add NavigateToPlanModal event and onNavigateToPlan callback to affected screens and navigation graphs
• Conditionally route: if in-app upgrade available → navigate to PlanScreen modal; otherwise → launch web vault URL as before
• Thread onNavigateToPlan through VaultUnlockedNavigation, VaultGraphNavigation, SendGraphNavigation, and all affected screen destinations
• Full test coverage for conditional routing in all affected ViewModels and Screens

[github-actions]

🤖 Bitwarden Claude Code Review

Overall Assessment: REQUEST CHANGES

This PR rewires premium upgrade CTAs across six ViewModels (Vault, VaultItem, VaultItemListing, VaultAddEdit, AddEditSend, Search) to conditionally route to the in-app PlanScreen modal when PremiumStateManager.isInAppUpgradeAvailable() returns true, falling back to the existing web vault URL otherwise. New NavigateToPlanModal events are added per-ViewModel (except VaultViewModel, which reuses the pre-existing NavigateToUpgradePremium), and an onNavigateToPlan callback is threaded through VaultUnlockedNavigation, VaultGraphNavigation, SendGraphNavigation, and all affected screen destinations. Test coverage is added for both branches of each ViewModel's upgrade handler and for most screens' event handling.

Code Review Details

• ⚠️ : VaultItemListingScreen.onNavigateToPlan is the only screen callback with a default = {} and VaultItemListingScreenTest lacks a NavigateToPlanModal test, while the other five affected screens declare it as required and test the event (already noted in the existing unresolved thread on VaultItemListingScreen.kt:88 — no new comment posted to avoid duplication)

[claude]

⚠️ IMPORTANT: Default empty lambda on navigation callback silently swallows upgrade navigation

Details and fix

All other Screen composables in this PR define onNavigateToPlan as a required parameter (no default). This is the only one with = {}, which deviates from the codebase pattern where navigation callbacks are required parameters. If a future caller omits this, the premium upgrade button silently does nothing instead of producing a compile error.

This also masks a missing screen test: every other affected screen (SearchScreenTest, AddEditSendScreenTest, VaultAddEditScreenTest, VaultItemScreenTest) has a test for the NavigateToPlanModal event, but VaultItemListingScreenTest does not.

Suggested change

	onNavigateToPlan: () -> Unit = {},
	onNavigateToPlan: () -> Unit,

After removing the default, add a corresponding test in VaultItemListingScreenTest:

@Test
fun `NavigateToPlanModal event should invoke onNavigateToPlan`() {
    mutableEventFlow.tryEmit(VaultItemListingEvent.NavigateToPlanModal)
    assertTrue(onNavigateToPlanCalled)
}

[github-actions]

Checkmarx One – Scan Summary & Details – 70e35b09-ca1c-4727-9c93-5e0b19ce4455

Great job! No new security vulnerabilities introduced in this pull request

[codecov]

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 90.90909% with 7 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 85.59%. Comparing base (b4dd755) to head (4d26c19).

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
.../feature/itemlisting/VaultItemListingNavigation.kt	50.00%	2 Missing ⚠️
...den/ui/platform/feature/search/SearchNavigation.kt	0.00%	1 Missing ⚠️
...ools/feature/send/addedit/AddEditSendNavigation.kt	0.00%	1 Missing ⚠️
...ui/vault/feature/addedit/VaultAddEditNavigation.kt	0.00%	1 Missing ⚠️
...arden/ui/vault/feature/item/VaultItemNavigation.kt	0.00%	1 Missing ⚠️
...ault/feature/itemlisting/VaultItemListingScreen.kt	50.00%	0 Missing and 1 partial ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@                                 Coverage Diff                                 @@
##           premium-upgrade/PM-33518-upgrade-available-flow    #6796      +/-   ##
===================================================================================
- Coverage                                            85.81%   85.59%   -0.23%     
===================================================================================
  Files                                                  859      830      -29     
  Lines                                                62519    61564     -955     
  Branches                                              8602     8602              
===================================================================================
- Hits                                                 53652    52693     -959     
- Misses                                                5898     5905       +7     
+ Partials                                              2969     2966       -3     

Flag	Coverage Δ
app-data	17.34% <0.00%> (+0.32%)	⬆️
app-ui-auth-tools	20.31% <15.58%> (-0.02%)	⬇️
app-ui-platform	15.52% <20.77%> (-0.39%)	⬇️
app-ui-vault	25.91% <54.54%> (-0.46%)	⬇️
authenticator	6.66% <0.00%> (-0.01%)	⬇️
lib-core-network-bridge	4.20% <0.00%> (-0.01%)	⬇️
lib-data-ui	1.00% <0.00%> (+<0.01%)	⬆️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

[david-livefront]

I am not seeing a scenario here we actually observer this flow. Will we need to do that in a future PR?

If not, maybe just make it a function?