Improve MQTT type hints part 1

[jbouwh]

Proposed change

Improve type annotation part for MQTT modules:

• alarm_control_panel
• binary_sensor
• button

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:

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
• The code has been formatted using Black (black --fast 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.
• Untested files have been added to .coveragerc.

To help with the load of incoming pull requests:

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

[home-assistant]

Hey there @emontnemery, mind taking a look at this pull request as it has been labeled with an integration (mqtt) you are listed as a code owner for? Thanks!

[jbouwh]

@epenet may be you like to have a look at these PR's. A second one is ready too: #80529

[epenet]

General comments for __init__.py
For the platforms, it's harder to review because mixin.py is not typed.
Maybe that should be a preliminary PR?

[jbouwh]

This PR is a follow up on: #80913

[epenet]

LGTM, if tests pass