What is the authenticity of weakening Ibn Ishaq's narration of the Hadith, and have scholars agreed on its non-acceptance?

The scholar Muhammad ibn Ishaq ibn Yasar, al-Qurashi al-Muttalibi (their mawla), was born in 80 AH in Medina. He sought knowledge there from its prominent scholars, then traveled to various countries in pursuit of knowledge. He attained a high scholarly standing and was renowned for his profound knowledge of Maghazi (military expeditions) and Siyar (biographies), being considered the first to compile a work on these subjects—his famous book "Al-Maghazi," preserved through the recension of Ibn Hisham. Many scholars praised him, deeming him "Amir al-Mu'minin in Hadith" and "the most حافظ (memorizer) of people."

Despite some criticisms leveled against him regarding issues such as Qadariyya (predestination), Shi'ism, tadlis (concealing the source), lying, contradicting reliable narrators, narrating Isra'iliyyat (narrations of Jewish origin), and combining the wordings of different shaykhs, these criticisms did not entirely invalidate his hadith. The narration of a mudallis (one who practices tadlis) is accepted if he explicitly states hearing (his source), and the accusation of lying against him is not proven. His narration of Isra'iliyyat is permissible by prophetic permission.

The ruling on his hadith falls from the rank of sahih (authentic) to the rank of hasan (good), except for what is anomalous in it, which is considered munkar (denounced). What he narrates singularly is considered hasan if he explicitly states tahdith (narrating from his source). He passed away in Baghdad in 151 AH.