RAW tag is for pedantic analysis of the rules, and that's not really what I am looking for. I just want a reasonable interpretation of the rules, eventually with suggestions on how to make them work.

This question needs neither rules-as-written or homebrew. Homebrew is for new, local, made-up rules. Answering a rules question with a mix of text, logic, and experience needs no tag as it's business as usual here. I'm not sure where all the handwringing about homebrew came from but it's not relevant here. Homebrew does not mean "making a discretionary ruling."

@mxyzplk: Actually I think it has come from unmentioned use of 3rd-party content, and both myself and JPicasso assumed it was homebrew

Content that's not relevant to the question. Creature. No hands. Solid note. How big's the note. Whether her race or class or pony greatsword or whatever is first party, third party, or homebrew is completely irrelevant.

As I added to my answer, a 3rd party source IS homebrew.

That is factually incorrect. Please review Meta on homebrew, e.g. rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5845/…

I would never call pathfinder 3PP as homebrew, specially considering how many pathfinder authors actually freelance for 3PP content.

I think there is a small but important difference when you know a question refers to homebrew vs 3rd-party content. If OP has a homebrew problem then suggestions that extend the homebrew are suitable fixes. With a 3rd-party add-on, if it is known it can be critiqued in full (because published), and if not well known or not relevant, then answers are likely to be in form of rulings and not fixes/extensions to rules.

Mostly this just changes the tone of an answer, but I think it would have been useful here to know up-front. It would have saved a few minutes for everyone involved

I agree it would be helpful to cite the third party source on the off chance there's a raw answer within it.

Regardless of the source of the race, the spell is official (APG), and the issue could happen with an Awakened Pony Animal Companion that took one level of bard (and is no longer an animal companion, obviously).

the source is now cited. I still don't thinks it is necessary for the question and increases the risk of people answering outside of it, but since they are already doing it... whatever.

Thanks for adding the link. The "fingerless rules" section is relevant IMO, it just clarifies how the spell casting is allowed, and is well scoped. We know what the 3pp has said, and we know that it doesn't contain a direct or indirect answer. As the spell's choice of "size of a hand" is not linked to any other trait or explained, then I'm comfortable standing by my answer as is. I think the other answers also have clear trains of logic in them, just emphasising different parts of the rules

i think your answer is the correct one, I just let some time before accepting it.

I think the link is super helpful, as e.g. the line of reasoning in another answer about hooves and slots and GM discretion can use it to quite successfully argue from analogy that "size of your hoof" is reasonably correct given the explicit analogue of hoof to hand in the ponyfinder rules.

Also ha sick burn from Philipp, as solid note has no somatic component so all that was super off topic in the first place

Anne I took the liberty of editing your addendum to that effect