I don't see that "types" solve this problem, as there are far more varieties of function than lazy and eager, which themselves are not always consistent. Perhaps Eiffel is a better guide for the sort of pre-condition / post-condition assumptions of a function, if you want to go down this route.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eiffel_(programming_language)#...
The program must verify the property at runtime and create a witness to the proof, which it can then pass to functions to say that it has done the necessary work.
So I guess the answer is yes and no. I would say the whole point of dependently-typed languages is that we can statically determine that somebody is maintaining correctness, be it at compile time or at run time.
If they are enforced at compile time, they are static.
If you in fact want to receive a iterable, then you should not signal that you expect a list.
The keyword yield is in fact a nice language integrated mechanism to create a iterable interface.
In languages that lacking this it resorts to using much more verbose mechanism.