Other morphological attributes are less discriminatory but can indicate the more likely use of a tool. An example of this is the use of edge length as an indicator of functional capability. A short edge can be used for sawing wood but a longer edge is more efficient and therefore more likely to have been used in the same way as with modern saws. For cutting logs a rip saw is more efficient than a tenon saw, though it is possible to carry out the task with both tools. Thickness, as measured here, reflects the strength of the cross section of the tool in relation to the working edge.
Thickness can also limit the likely use of tools.
For example, a thin end scraper on a blade is more likely to break from a percussive action such as chopping than a thicker more robust tool. It is assumed that Palaeolithic man would have been aware of such mechanical properties of stone tools since for the production of such a complexity of tools, especially in the Upper Palaeolithic, a technological knowledge is required that demonstrates an awareness of the mechanical properties of stone, which would not only apply to the making of tools but also to their use. Shape is the only variable to take into account the overall morphology of the tool as opposed to measurements of a specific working edge. The shape measurement is taken using the working edge as the base and reflects the handle of the tool. The handling properties of tools can often indicate a probable motion, as experience of using stone tools allows for the subjective assessment of how a tool may have been held.