Abu Ahmad ibn 'Adi al-Jarjani: He has Sahih (authentic) hadiths. The trustworthy narrators narrated from him. I do not see any problem with his narrations.
Abu Hatim al-Razi: His hadith is written but not used as evidence.
Abu Hatim ibn Hibban al-Busti: He made many mistakes and errors. It is not permissible to use his narration as evidence if he is alone in it. As for what he agreed with the trustworthy narrators in the narrations, it is considered acceptable.
Abu Dawud al-Sijistani: Saduq (Truthful)
Abu Zur'ah al-Razi: Saduq (Truthful)
Ahmad ibn Hanbal: There is nothing wrong with him. His hadith is the hadith of the truthful people. And once: Saduq (Truthful), and once: He was asked about him, so he said: 'Ubaydah is more beloved to me and his hadith is more authentic than al-Bakka'i, and once: He makes mistakes
Ahmad ibn Shu'ayb al-Nasa'i: Weak, and once: He is not strong.
Ibn Hajar al-'Asqalani: Saduq (Truthful) and reliable in Maghazi (battles of the Prophet) in his narration from other than Ibn Ishaq Layth. Once: Ibn Hibban exaggerated and said: 'It is not permissible to use his narration as evidence if he is alone in it.'
Salih ibn Muhammad al-Jawzajani: He is weak in himself, but he is one of the most trustworthy people in the book of Maghazi.
Abdullah ibn Idris al-Kufi: No one is more trustworthy in Ibn Ishaq than Ziyad al-Bakka'i, because he dictated to him twice.
Ali ibn al-Madini: He weakened him, and once: I wrote a lot from him and then left it.
Muhammad ibn Sa'd, the scribe of al-Waqidi: He was considered weak by them, but they narrated from him.
Wakee' ibn al-Jarrah: He is too noble to lie, and once: With his honor, he does not lie.
Yahya ibn Ma'in: From the route of Abbas al-Dawri: He is nothing. And he was considered acceptable in Maghazi. And once: Ziyad al-Bakka'i in Ibn Ishaq is trustworthy. And once: From the route of Muhammad ibn 'Uthman: Weak. And in the narration of Ibn Mahriz, he said: There is weakness in his hadith.