Make ComponentTool a proper dataclass

[sjrl]

Related Issues

• fixes #issue-number

Proposed Changes:

Just an experiment. By adding the decorator we make ComponentTool a proper dataclass. I think this is mostly for best practice since I can't immediately tell the benefit from doing this. I checked and all instances of ComponentTool are dataclasses because we do run super().__init__() in ComponentTool's __init__ method.

How did you test it?

Want to see if this change breaks any tests

Notes for the reviewer

Checklist

• I have read the contributors guidelines and the code of conduct
• I have updated the related issue with new insights and changes
• I added unit tests and updated the docstrings
• I've used one of the conventional commit types for my PR title: fix:, feat:, build:, chore:, ci:, docs:, style:, refactor:, perf:, test: and added ! in case the PR includes breaking changes.
• I documented my code
• I ran pre-commit hooks and fixed any issue

[coveralls]

Pull Request Test Coverage Report for Build 15486035323

Warning: This coverage report may be inaccurate.

This pull request's base commit is no longer the HEAD commit of its target branch. This means it includes changes from outside the original pull request, including, potentially, unrelated coverage changes.

• For more information on this, see Tracking coverage changes with pull request builds.
• To avoid this issue with future PRs, see these Recommended CI Configurations.
• For a quick fix, rebase this PR at GitHub. Your next report should be accurate.

Details

• 0 of 0 changed or added relevant lines in 0 files are covered.
• 6 unchanged lines in 1 file lost coverage.
• Overall coverage increased (+0.001%) to 90.42%

---

Files with Coverage Reduction	New Missed Lines	%
tools/component_tool.py	6	92.55%

Totals
Change from base Build 15484500747:	0.001%
Covered Lines:	11487
Relevant Lines:	12704

---

💛 - Coveralls

[sjrl]

Closing as I don't think this is really needed