Overall, the preserved right metatarsus is a gracile and compact element with the three main metatarsals only lacking the first one, in all metatarsals the upper end is slightly eroded. Although compact, the third metatarsal is not pinched at the upper end, indicating that the metatarsus was not arctometatarsalian. Metatarsals II, III and IV are similar in length (, and respectively), although the third one is the longest. There are three pedal phalanges preserved but only one being complete. The first phalanx of metatarsal III is very eroded missing most of its lower part but preserving the upper one; it remains articulated to the metatarsal. The first phalanx of metatarsal II is complete but the second one is severely damaged, lacking most of the lower region, however, it is articulated to the first phalanx. The partial braincase is a small element, measuring just in length, it is embedded in a small portion of the sandstone layer. In general, the morphlogy is very complex and has an irregular shape. Based on comparisons with other maniraptorans, the preserved portion can be identified as the right inner side of the prootic-opisthotic bones in the braincase. When first described in 1982, Osmólska tentatively placed "Hulsanpes" within the Dromaeosauridae. Several features of the specimen were, according to Osmólska, too "primitive" for it to be a genuine bird taxon such as the lack of fusion of the metatarsals except in the lower region but this might partly be due to the young age of the individual specimen. Although its juvenile nature is reminiscent of a miniature individual of "Velociraptor", and though these traits are plesiomorphic, it might still belong to another, non-avian, maniraptoran lineage besides Dromaeosauridae. A 2004 phylogeny of Dromaeosauridae recovered "Hulsanpes" as a dromaeosaurid (due to a coding error for "Sinovenator"), but Agnolin and Novas in 2013 assigned it to Averaptora "incertae sedis" based on the fact that the extremely gracile metatarsals are similar to Avialae and metatarsal III interpreted to be pinched at the upper region. This latter statement has been proven to be incorrect though.