This is why I stopped using all chat clients.
If people start with "Hi, I have a problem" and don't state what the problem is I just respond with "drop me the details and I'll have a quick think" and get back to my work. Even if they respond immediately to that it might take me ten or fifteen minutes to get look at their message again - that is their time wasted, not mine.
Some problems require a more urgent response so I'll accept a walk-up or a shout for those, and some problems are best illustrated by showing them than describing them, I just have to trust people to know what they are and what is less urgent. And of course a message will come in at a time when I am eminently interruptible, in which case people get an immediate response anyway.
I find it works except for people who insist on not following the process, but they soon learn I'm far more helpful if they don't irritate me!
If people start with "Hi, I have a problem" and don't state what the problem is I close the chat window.
My work IM's status clearly states "if you have a question, ask it, don't ask if you can ask", time wasters simply get ignored.
> Some problems require a more urgent response so I'll accept a walk-up or a shout for those
Absolutely.
In the past I've found that leads to people reporting "I asked him several times over a few hours and got no response" which, if the person being complained to does not know the situation, could look bad for me.
If I feel like being more terse, I just give a one-word response: "Details?".
As I noted, my conditions are clearly spelled out as my IM status text, if they can't bother following simple instructions I can't bother with them.