For example A picture of an image circle from a full frame lens that covers a 36mm sensor completely. A m43 sensor would fit nicely inside of that and use only the center portion and relieve itself from the edge quality per say. Therefore could the manufacture build a lens better or smaller, or differently due to that factor?
Well, they are indeed designed specifically for m43, so for a telephoto lens the short answer is 'yes' for differently and 'not meaningfully' for lighter and smaller.
Of course in a non equivalent situation everything is possible - but then the images produced by the two formats would not be directly comparable. For instance in the quoted example the field of view would be much smaller in the smaller format so one image could literally show apples and the other apples & oranges.
Buyers and camera manufacturers alike make some assumptions based on intended usage when choosing/designing a lens. So it behooves the photographer comparing images produced by different formats to see how they do when capturing the same image: the two systems need to be set up in the same spot, looking at the same scene, with the same field of view, the same shutter speed, DOF, etc, apples to apples. That's what's called an equivalent setup.
It turns out that, if we stay away from the extreme limits of the working envelope of either format, a
telephoto lens designed specifically for a smaller format is often not (much) smaller and lighter in that case. The explanation starts with the drawing above and gets quite involved.
Jack
PS A bit of a simplification, but an easy way to see why is to compare two of the lenses at the top of the OP:
Lens Max Aperture Weight (lbs) Length (in) Front element (in)
Olympus 300mm f/2.8 ED 2.8 7.24 11.2 5
Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II USM 2.8 5.17 9.8 5
If you add a 2X III Extender to the Canon it turns it into a 600mm f/5.6 which is equivalently comparable to the Oly 300mm f/2.8. The combined lens-extender specs for the Canon would then be
Canon 300mm f/2.8L + 2X III Extender 5.6 6.0 11.9 5
That's with an extender. If the lens were built with those specs to start with it would be smaller and lighter than that.