I would classify a motorcycle (I have one too) as a tool for both transport (get me from A to B) and fun (riding it is fun).
That being said, holy mother of god it is stressful when there are other cars on the road, people are freaking scary in cars.
A nuclear reactor is something that would have a very low "toyness" score, i.e. you wouldn't "play" with it.
A plastic toy car would have a very high "toyness" score, as it is literally designed to play with (by kids).
I kind of fear my analogy of two different dimensions breaks down here because I'm left wondering what things would have a low "toolness" score ...
Maybe expressing it as a complex number would help, eg. toolness + i(toyness)
In polar form a low angle would indicate a high "toolness to toyness" ratio.
"Toolness" is, at least to a large extent, a synonym for "(practical) utility".
Code, for example, can be played with but can also deliver significant impact to a large group of people.
A toy car, as another example, can be played with but delivers value to only one person at once (well, depending on how you use it).
Haute couture fashion?
Well they are - in the sense that the practical value is very limited and there are better alternatives in every regard (even in the ideal scenario where you live in a place with excellent riding conditions and limited parking which benefits a bike - a scooter is going to give you easier riding since it's automatic, less maintenance, more storage capacity and will be plenty fast for commuting if you get 300/600cc ones).
My bike is a toy - it's just a dangerous one.