It’s not that we celebrate violence. Rather, those who used violence often got higher in the social hierarchy than those who didn’t. And they could afford to have a ceremonial weapons, being that high

Is it that there aren’t many decorative tools, or is it just that people overlook them because the weapons are ‘cooler’?

Ancient Egyptians made beautiful cosmetic palettes, the Greeks and Romans made beautiful pottery - examples of highly decorative tools are everywhere, including in museums, but they don’t get highlighted as often because most people would rather see ornately carved swords and shields.

Tools depreciate over time, I could see it being less worthwhile to commission or decorate a hand tool or hoe that may get destroyed quickly.

If they did and it survived, it was probably passed down to family/apprentices/others and used until it was destroyed, rather than being something someone buried with them, like a rich person being buried with a cool sword.

The real question: why did we stop the tradition of designer weapons?

“Sir, I neutralized the threat with my sequin and diamond studded sniper rifle.”

From what I understand there are two factors here. First, “heroic” societies (societies that put a premium on violence and the ability to wield it), while comparatively less common than non-heroic societies, tended to celebrate leaders and bury them with their weapons or decorative replicas of them, while other societies did not. Second, there seems to be a bias in a lot of historians and archaeologists to focus on heroic societies rather than the more common agrarian and hunter-gatherer societies that existed contemporaneously with them.

Don’t forget all the Greek vases!