Is your statement 'Saying that it evolved is not saying how it evolved.'?
We have planetary and solar system dynamics fairly well understood in terms of models and matching that with observational data. So I think an astrophysicist could make the how argument from an evolutionary perspective.
Your initial point was that we should not assume "Evolution" means biological evolution. Let's remember that and proceed:
In a pedantic sense, saying that "it evolved" means nothing because everything "evolved" for some suitable non-Darwinian interpretation of what "evolved" means. For example, if you're willing to not assume "Evolution" implies "biological evolution" then why not argue that woman evolved from man's rib as per the Bible and that man "evolved" from dirt?
"Evolution" without explicit context, and perhaps additional qualification (e.g. "the evolution of our solar system") means that as much as it means nothing.
We have planetary and solar system dynamics fairly well understood in terms of models and matching that with observational data. So I think an astrophysicist could make the how argument from an evolutionary perspective.