In cantilever beams, when the required straight development length of longitudinal reinforcement is fully satisfied, providing a hook at the free end is generally not considered mandatory. However, the available development length provisions have predominantly been derived based on monotonic loading conditions and have been less frequently validated under cyclic and reversed loading effects. When cantilever beams are subjected to reversed cyclic loading, slip may initiate at the free end despite compliance with straight development length requirements. Such slip, accompanied by degradation of dowel action and propagation of cracking, may lead to a reduction in shear capacity and a shift toward a brittle shear failure mode. In the present study, this issue was experimentally investigated. For this purpose, four cantilever beam specimens were tested under displacement-controlled cyclic loading, including two specimens with standard end hooks at the free end of the longitudinal reinforcement and two specimens without hooks. In the design of the test specimens, the provisions for development length and shear strength were satisfied in accordance with the Iranian National Building Regulations, Part 9 (2019 edition), as well as the corresponding requirements of ACI 318-19. Based on the experimental results obtained from the tested specimens, beams without end hooks developed anchorage-related and shear cracking near the free end after several loading cycles, leading to reductions in both ductility and ultimate lateral resistance. In contrast, no shear failure mode was observed in the specimens reinforced with hooked longitudinal bars. These specimens exhibited approximately 35–40% higher lateral strength and about 37% greater ductility compared with the specimens without hooks. Furthermore, the cumulative energy dissipation in the final loading cycles was nearly doubled, and the equivalent viscous damping ratio increased from approximately 8% to more than 13%.