As electronics and software become more integrated into automobiles, Functional Safety (FuSa) per ISO 26262 becomes important. It assesses the risk level of automotive chips, reflected by the Automotive Safety Integrity Level (ASIL). Fault injection simulation verifies the FuSa of a design by injecting faults and classifying them based on whether safety mechanisms detect them. Discrepancies in classification results from FuSa EDA tools can lead to varying ASIL assignments and misrepresent associated risk. Thus, we evaluate two FuSa EDA tools, Cadence® XFS and Synopsys® VC Z01X, for RTL designs. We find that the fault space covered by the tools is not complete. Hence, we propose a novel verification methodology combining both tools to achieve maximum fault space coverage. We apply this approach to the AutoSoC benchmark suite and achieve a more accurate Diagnostic Coverage (DC) of 97.79%, over the baseline verification methodology of 98.36%, at the cost of injecting 1.31 times more faults. Our work ensures that the correct ASIL level is assigned through accurate DC estimation.