[alexermolovich]

Thanks for contributing to RTB!

Summary

Related issue

Checklist

Only the first item below is checked automatically — the rest are a self-check for you before requesting review, nothing currently verifies them for you.

• I checked that no other open PR already addresses this Issue, and commented on the Issue to claim it
• PR title follows Conventional Commits (type: description) — checked automatically, see the "Check PR title" status
• Tests pass locally (pytest)
• Added/updated tests for this change, if applicable
• New/changed code is type-hinted with modern syntax (X | Y, list[X], not Union/Optional/List)
• Docstrings updated (reST style: :param:, :returns:; type hints in the signature cover types now, :type:/:rtype: are rarely needed)
• PR is as small/focused as practical — if it tackles several unrelated things, consider splitting it so each can be reviewed and accepted independently
• I understand that the Codacy check is advisory (it reports assert in tests as "high" security), only All tests passed and the PR title check are required — see CONTRIBUTING
• If this change alters numerical results or public behaviour, I have said so in the summary above, even if it is a bug fix
• If an AI assistant wrote or helped with this change, I have said so in the summary above, and I have read the diff myself
• No test files, data files, or notebooks specific to your own project — PyPI has strict package size limits, and RTB is already split into a toolbox and a data package. Notebooks, if of general interest, should have output cleared before committing.

[codacy-production]

Up to standards ✅

🟢 Issues 0 issues

Results:
0 new issues

View in Codacy

🟢 Metrics 0 complexity · 0 duplication

Metric	Results
Complexity	0
Duplication	0

View in Codacy

_{NEW Get contextual insights on your PRs based on Codacy's metrics, along with PR and Jira context, without leaving GitHub. Enable AI reviewer
TIP This summary will be updated as you push new changes.}