Using this as a reference, these sound OK, with the exception of "have to" but only because repeating "have" twice like that sounds a bit jarring.
I ought to have finished the homework by the end of the week.
I have to have finished the homework by the end of the week.
I shall have finished the homework by the end of the week.
I have heard this before, it sounds a bit awkward but makes sense.
I had better (typically "I'd better") have finished the homework by the end of the week.
I have also heard this before, it sounds quite awkward but still makes a bit of sense.
I have got to (typically "I've got to") have finished the homework by the end of the week.
This ...
I must have finished the homework by the end of the week.
I must not have finished the homework by the end of the week.
sounds like you are just discovering you have or have not done the homework, rather than using "must" to communicate a requirement or obligation.
However, usually all these sentences are arranged like this, which sounds much more natural to me.
I ought to have the homework finished by the end of the week
And all the modals "work", including the ones not mentioned above, if you keep the sentence like that:
I can(n't)/could(n't)/must(n't)/might (not)/may (not) have the homework finished by the end of the week.
(Even though "I must not have the homework finished by the end of the week" - meaning I am required to not have my homework finished by the end of the week - is a peculiar situation to be in - that would be the right way to say it.)
You are wrong to think that a native English speaker would probably understand She will be loved as She has a strong desire to be loved or She wants to be loved.
The German equivalent of the English She will be loved is Sie wird geliebt werden, not Sie will geliebt werden.
In most cases the German verb wollen (ich will, er will, wir wollen, etc) would be translated into English as want (I want, he wants, we want).
However, it is possible to interpret will in certain questions as shading more towards want or desire than towards a future action. For example:
Will you stay for dinner?
The will in negative constructions such as She won't tell me would normally be interpreted as a refusal rather than as a predicted (non-)action.
Furthermore, will can also refer to the present (habitual) in constructions such as:
She will keep phoning me in the middle of the night.
And will can be used to express probability or certainty in constructions such as:
That'll be the postman! (on hearing a knock on the door)
A good pedagogical grammar book such as Swan's Practical English Usage will help you understand the various uses of the English modal will.
Best Answer
There is no such way of casting any of the modal verbs can/could, may/might, must, shall/should, will/would in future form with will.
This is because the modal verbs are all defective: they have only two forms, past and present (must has only one), so they lack the infinitive form which follows auxiliary will.
There are two ways around this.
The simple present of most verbs can be used with future reference, so one thing you can do is simply use can with some indication of futurity.
The other thing you can do is employ the infinitive of a "periphrastic" construction as the complement of will. With can, for instance, the periphrastic construction is BE able to; with will it's BE going to.
Other periphrastics which come in handy for this are:
There are more, because all the modals have a wide variety of meanings, and many of these meanings have one or more periphrastics.
Note that the modal verbs have no participles either, so they can't be cast in the perfect construction or employed as gerunds or adjectives. Again, the way around this is to employ the appropriate periphrastic:
Modal verbs are intransitive and can't be cast in the passive, and they're stative and therefore can't be cast in the progressive, so you don't have to worry about those forms.