Add ability to mark type hints as compulsory on specific functions

[epenet]

Proposed change

Add ability to mark common functions as compulsory in the pylint "enforce type hints" plugin

See sample run with "available" property marked as compulsory:
https://github.com/home-assistant/core/actions/runs/13649240836/job/38153933609?pr=139734

************* Module homeassistant.components.syncthing.sensor
Warning: homeassistant/components/syncthing/sensor.py:114:4: W7432: Return type should be bool in available (hass-return-type)
Warning: homeassistant/components/syncthing/sensor.py:114:4: W7432: Return type should be bool in available (hass-return-type)
************* Module homeassistant.components.supervisord.sensor
Warning: homeassistant/components/supervisord/sensor.py:74:4: W7432: Return type should be bool in available (hass-return-type)
Warning: homeassistant/components/supervisord/sensor.py:74:4: W7432: Return type should be bool in available (hass-return-type)
************* Module homeassistant.components.osramlightify.light
Warning: homeassistant/components/osramlightify/light.py:282:4: W7432: Return type should be bool in available (hass-return-type)
Warning: homeassistant/components/osramlightify/light.py:282:4: W7432: Return type should be bool in available (hass-return-type)
************* Module homeassistant.components.xiaomi_miio.light
Warning: homeassistant/components/xiaomi_miio/light.py:274:4: W7432: Return type should be bool in available (hass-return-type)
Warning: homeassistant/components/xiaomi_miio/light.py:274:4: W7432: Return type should be bool in available (hass-return-type)
Warning: homeassistant/components/xiaomi_miio/light.py:1030:4: W7432: Return type should be bool in available (hass-return-type)
Warning: homeassistant/components/xiaomi_miio/light.py:1030:4: W7432: Return type should be bool in available (hass-return-type)

Type of change

• Dependency upgrade
• Bugfix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
• New integration (thank you!)
• New feature (which adds functionality to an existing integration)
• Deprecation (breaking change to happen in the future)
• Breaking change (fix/feature causing existing functionality to break)
• Code quality improvements to existing code or addition of tests

Additional information

• This PR fixes or closes issue: fixes #
• This PR is related to issue:
• Link to documentation pull request:
• Link to developer documentation pull request:
• Link to frontend pull request:

Checklist

• The code change is tested and works locally.
• Local tests pass. Your PR cannot be merged unless tests pass
• There is no commented out code in this PR.
• I have followed the development checklist
• I have followed the perfect PR recommendations
• The code has been formatted using Ruff (ruff format homeassistant tests)
• Tests have been added to verify that the new code works.

If user exposed functionality or configuration variables are added/changed:

• Documentation added/updated for www.home-assistant.io

If the code communicates with devices, web services, or third-party tools:

• The manifest file has all fields filled out correctly.
  Updated and included derived files by running: python3 -m script.hassfest.
• New or updated dependencies have been added to requirements_all.txt.
  Updated by running python3 -m script.gen_requirements_all.
• For the updated dependencies - a link to the changelog, or at minimum a diff between library versions is added to the PR description.

To help with the load of incoming pull requests:

• I have reviewed two other open pull requests in this repository.

[MartinHjelmare]

Why do we want to add this? We don't require type annotations anywhere in packages or modules that aren't strictly typed.

[epenet]

Why do we want to add this? We don't require type annotations anywhere in packages or modules that aren't strictly typed.

This PR is not about forcing type hints everywhere.
It is only about enforcing when the type is known and/or obvious.

See also comment in #124316 (comment) where @frenck added a thumbs-up

[MartinHjelmare]

I don't think we can change our current practice and add partial enforcement of type annotation without further discussion. Please open an architecture discussion if you want to proceed.