"Our tools are extensions of our purposes, and so we find it natural to make metaphorical attributions of intentionality to them; but I take it no philosophical ice is cut by such examples"

John Searle is suggesting that although we might associate intentionality to our tools, such as a hammer or a saw, this does not have any philosophical effects. He is saying that although we might think about our tools as having a purpose, this is just an allegory as well as does not really suggest that the tools have any kind of intentionality. He is emphasizing that attributing intentionality to devices is a natural thing to do, but it does not have any kind of thoughtful implications.

Simply put, Searle is stating that although we might think about our devices as having an objective, this is simply a metaphor and does not really indicate that the devices have any intentionality. He is emphasizing that connecting intentionality to devices is an all-natural thing to do, however it does not have any philosophical effects. He is recommending that although we may attribute intentionality to our tools, such as a hammer or a saw, this does not have any philosophical implications. He is highlighting that although we may consider our devices as having an objective, this is just a metaphor as well as does not actually suggest that the tools have any intentionality.