fix: Python formatting

[primenko-v]

Link to Issue or Description of Change

Problem:
Commit e5af12c2 was pushed directly to main without passing the pre-commit check. This created formatting issues in 5 files, causing any subsequent PR that touches .py files to fail CI.

Solution:
Run isort and pyink on the affected files to restore formatting compliance.

Testing Plan

Unit Tests:

• N/A: I have added or updated unit tests for my change.
• All unit tests pass locally.

Manual End-to-End (E2E) Tests:

uv run pre-commit run --all-files

All hooks pass after this fix.

Checklist

• I have read the CONTRIBUTING.md document.
• I have performed a self-review of my own code.
• N/A: I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas.
• N/A: I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works.
• New and existing unit tests pass locally with my changes.
• N/A: I have manually tested my changes end-to-end.
• N/A: Any dependent changes have been merged and published in downstream modules.

[adk-bot]

Response from ADK Triaging Agent

Hello @primenko-v, thank you for creating this PR!

We noticed a few areas where this PR could be updated to align better with our Contribution Guidelines:

1. Describe the Bug or Feature: The PR title and description currently focus on "Fix formatting." However, the code changes also introduce functional modifications to the UserSimulatorProvider configuration in evaluation_generator.py and add new unit tests. Could you update the PR description to also describe this feature/change, or split this PR into two separate, focused PRs (one for the formatting fix and one for the user simulator configuration changes) as per the "Small, focused PRs" guideline?
2. Testing Plan & E2E Evidence: For the functional changes involving user_simulator_config, could you please provide a more detailed testing plan or console outputs demonstrating how this feature was manually tested end-to-end to ensure integrated flows work as intended?

Providing this context will greatly help reviewers understand and review your changes more efficiently. Thank you for your contribution!

[primenko-v]

Response from ADK Triaging Agent

Hello @primenko-v, thank you for creating this PR!

We noticed a few areas where this PR could be updated to align better with our Contribution Guidelines:

1. **Describe the Bug or Feature:** The PR title and description currently focus on "Fix formatting." However, the code changes also introduce functional modifications to the `UserSimulatorProvider` configuration in `evaluation_generator.py` and add new unit tests. Could you update the PR description to also describe this feature/change, or split this PR into two separate, focused PRs (one for the formatting fix and one for the user simulator configuration changes) as per the **"Small, focused PRs"** guideline?

2. **Testing Plan & E2E Evidence:** For the functional changes involving `user_simulator_config`, could you please provide a more detailed testing plan or console outputs demonstrating how this feature was manually tested end-to-end to ensure integrated flows work as intended?

Providing this context will greatly help reviewers understand and review your changes more efficiently. Thank you for your contribution!

You are absolutely right! (haha). I accidentally created a new fix-formatting branch from my feature branch instead of main. Fixed it now.

[primenko-v]

I think it would be nice to prevent issues like this in the future, so I created #5963.