Thank you for submitting this PR!
A maintainer will be here shortly to review it.
We are super grateful, but we are also overloaded! Help us by making sure that:

• The context for this PR is clear, with relevant discussion, decisions
  and stakeholders linked/mentioned.

• Your contribution itself is clear (code comments, self-review for the
  rest) and in its best form. Follow the code contribution
  guidelines
  if they apply.

Getting other community members to do a review would be great help too on complex PRs (you can ask in the chats/forums). If you are unsure about something, just leave us a comment.
Next steps:

• A maintainer will triage and assign priority to this PR, commenting on
  any missing things and potentially assigning a reviewer for high
  priority items.

• The PR gets reviews, discussed and approvals as needed.

• The PR is merged by maintainers when it has been approved and comments addressed.

We currently aim to provide initial feedback/triaging within two business days. Please keep an eye on any labelling actions, as these will indicate priorities and status of your contribution.
We are very grateful for your contribution!

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 60.77%. Comparing base (0f1ebac) to head (b59760b).
⚠️ Report is 6 commits behind head on main.

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #1053      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   60.75%   60.77%   +0.01%     
==========================================
  Files         268      268              
  Lines       33593    33600       +7     
==========================================
+ Hits        20411    20420       +9     
+ Misses      11510    11506       -4     
- Partials     1672     1674       +2     

... and 4 files with indirect coverage changes

This code seems reasonable, but I am not sure we want to add ProbeLab specific comments to our codebase.

This code seems reasonable, but I am not sure we want to add ProbeLab specific comments to our codebase.

This was suggested by @lidel (not the specific phrasing, just the marks). The rationale was that we wanted to avoid our analysis code to break going forward into the future.