My question heads towards an intuition of universal properties. Take for example a group $G$ and a subset $M$. Then $F_M$, the free group on $M$ together with a map of sets $i:M\to U(F_M)$ where $U$ denotes the forgetful functor, is defined by the universal property that any map of sets $M\to U(H)$ factors through $U(F_M)$ for a group $H$. A concrete model for the free group is given by the free abelian group with basis $M$. Although I understand that universal properties fix objects up to isomorphism I am not sure about the following two things:
1) The explicit construction of $F_M$ clearly reveals it to be the smallest subgroup of $G$ containing $M$ in the sense that it is the group generated by $M$. How could this fact be concluded from the universal property?
2) More generally: Universal objects are often charaterized as being the smallest or most general objects regarding a certain property. I understand this in examples like the free group, the completion of a topological space, the tensor algebra, etc. However, I wonder if being the smallest or most general can be expressed (or even defined) in a precise categorical sense?
Concerning the last question: I know that any universal object is initial/terminal in a suitable factor category, however, I can not make sense of this...
These "smallest" intuitions are primarily coming from left adjoints of functors between posets. If $f:A\to B$ is a poset map, then if $g$ is left adjoint to $f$ we must have $g(b)=\mathrm{inf} \{a:b\leq g(a)\}$, by the definition of adjunctions. An instructive example is the case that $A$ is the poset of subgroups of a given group $G$, while $B$ is the poset of subsets, and $f$ sends a subgroup to its underlying set. Then $f$ has as a left adjoint the map $g$ which sends a subset $S$ to the subgroup generated by $S$. So this is completely concrete and proves a version of the intuitive picture you describe.
The rest of your question seems to conflate the subgroup generated by $S$ with the free group and the free abelian group generated by $S$, which are usually three wildly different objects. The free group is not the "smallest" group containing $S$ in the sense of the previous paragraph. Rather, it's the group with the least relations containing $S$. This kind of description of left adjoints is always correct in the context of algebraic structures, as long as the right adjoint forgets some structure. But it's not correct in general: for instance the discrete topological space on a set has the most open sets possible, so it's hard to view it analogously (although this can be done.)
In short, the way to express that the value of a left adjoint is the most general object with some property is by using the definition of adjunctions.